By: Cara Latham
WASHINGTON Township officials are reconsidering the dissolution of the Municipal Utilities Authority.
An alternative to dissolution could be an interlocal agreement between the Township Council and the MUA.
The Township Council voted 3-2 in March in favor of dissolving the MUA, which controls the township’s sewage disposal, pipes and pump stations for an estimated 5,000 customers. Former council members Ronda Hyams and Larry Schneider dissented. Council members in favor of the move said it potentially could save the township an estimated $183,000 annually.
This was followed by the authority voting to dissolve itself on July 18, a move designed to make it easier for the township to secure needed state Local Finance Board approval to fully dissolve the MUA.
Things were going to plan township officials had even put together an application for an LFB hearing for either September or October until the Township Council’s Aug. 9 meeting. There, former MUA member Nancy Tindall urged the board to reconsider dissolution because the MUA has more flexibility and may be of use to the township in the future. It has the ability to issue debt and is not affected by spending caps, as the Township Council is, she said.
"I think there’s some very interesting things that we were able to do because we were the authority, and I think this is the crux to my opposition to the dissolution," she said. "There are times and who knows what they might be in the future when having the flexibility of this authority can really help you work through problem solving."
She pointed to two previous examples. The first was that the MUA was able to finance the sewer extension to the Northeast Business Park when the township could not. That was necessary, she said, because one of the biggest roadblocks in getting tenants for the park was that they only saw farmland and no other development. The first tenant of the park had threatened to move to Hamilton, she added.
"As a result, that tenant came back, and it was the beginning of what I think is becoming a very successful development in out town," she said.
The MUA also helped to make up the difference in an open space parcel purchase the township needed help with, she added.
"I would hope that you would reconsider dissolving it," she said. "How it gets organized and how it gets managed is not what I’m here to talk about."
It’s just the dissolution that township officials are taking a second look at, and they say regardless of which route the township takes, they will combine the staff, get rid of the lease and cut overhead costs.
"The question is whether or not it makes sense to take down the debt issuing authority," Township Administrator Mary Caffrey said.
There are just some things coming up as the township heads down the path to redevelopment, including affordable housing needs, where a debt issuing entity may be valuable, she added.
With an interlocal agreement, the staff and space would still be merged, and savings would still be achieved, but there would probably be a separate MUA board, Ms. Caffrey said.
"It’s still being discussed," she said. "The administration is awaiting council’s input on how to proceed."
Council President Dave Boyne explained Monday that the MUA, a separate legal entity, has the ability to issue bonds and then collect the revenue over time to pay for those bonds. He said several members of the administration had approached him about reconsidering the dissolution, and that the council is giving the matter a second thought.
However, "I don’t think this is a step that’s overly likely because we have gone so far down the path (toward dissolution)," he said. "No one’s given me a convincing argument to go down the path" of an interlocal agreement.
"The question is whether or not anybody can come up with any other reason why not to," he added. "The ability to issue debt is not necessarily worth spending $150,000 more than you have to."
He said he believed the interlocal agreement would save $40,000, while dissolving it would save $183,000.
The council is just giving the matter a second look because "we want to make sure we’re doing the right thing," he said.
Regardless of whether Township Council ultimately decides to continue with dissolution or go with an interlocal agreement, the council will take another vote because there are two new members, Ms. Caffrey said.

