5.5 ERMUSR 04-12-2011 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

/~j ~A~//I:~~ /I//I/V%1 Position Statement The Cost of Clean Water Background Despite the tremendous investment by local government, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency estimates that there still is a $500 billion "needs gap" to meet water and wastewater infrastructure needs and to comply with current environmental mandates. This is borne out by a recent report by the U.S. Conference of Mayors, which states that cities are spending more dollars on water and wastewater each year, but the need for investment for sewer and water facilities far outweigh local government's ability to keep up with an aging infrastructure. MMUA members, who have made very heavy investments in sewer and water facilities over the years, are experiencing first-hand the need for much greater investment, particularly regarding the construction, operation and maintenance of water and wastewater treatment facilities. One of the greatest sources of these coat increases comes from the expanding number of regulations and the growing list of contaminants that must be dealt with under state and federal law. There is an economic component to the discussion of this issue ae well. Expanded investment in water and wastewater facilities is not only important for public health, but has become an essential ingredient for economic development. The heavy cost increases for water and wastewater facility investment, if not addressed, are sure to adversely impact the economic viability of our Minnesota cities as well. At present, there seems to be a lack of appreciation by both state and federal legislators of the tremendous burden that this situation has imposed on local communities, which must bear moat of the burden from the increased costa of new water and wastewater treatment facilities. We believe that public policy makers on all levels should be in a position to review and understand the increase costs brought about by this increased regulation. Legislative Activity HF 182 (1Zep. Mike Beard, R-Shakopee) and SF 196 (Sen. John Pederson, R-St. Cloud), would place atwo- year moratorium on new water testing rules from the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency and would require several state agencies to conduct studies identifying and analyzing the coat impact of rnlemaking related to various types of water use. The bill also would require agencies to report the results of these studies to the environment committee of both houses by January 15, 2012. MMUA Position MMUA strongly favors a study, such as that called for in HF 1S2/SF 196, which would chart historic costs of conatruction,operation and maintenance for water and wastewater treatment facilities. We envision a study that would also establish a standard for comparing costa based on plant output. MMUA also supports a requirement that a specific agency in state government be charged with keeping track of these coats on a go forward basis and reporting the results of these studies at the beginning of each biennial session. It is not the intent of MMUA or its members to argue for or against the inclusion of particular substances in the list of contaminants established by State or Federal authorities that must be removed from drinking water or from wastewater. It is, rather, our intent that elected and appointed policy makers be provided information that will help focus attention on the dramatically increasing costa of clean water, which will, hopefully produce policy decisions that will address what has become a quiet crisis in local government services. 2017 State Position Statements / 9