By Wayne Horne
This last week, the Joliet City Council’s Public Service Committee entertained a presentation from a company being hired to independently review contracts pertaining to Joliet’s new water pipeline. The contract cost will be $650,000 to watch over all the contracts awarded to build the pipeline and its related facilities. In addition to the $650,000 contract, they also have a contract in the amount of $139,000 to do a new rate study that will let residents know what they will pay for water when the pipeline is completed. It will also include rate increases that are projected between now and the pipeline’s completion. Follow that?
Sometimes a bit of clarity is needed to understand the transparency. Apparently, Burns & McDonnell will oversee the contractors hired to actually build the water project, a watchdog so to speak, with a $650,000 price tag. According to Patrick Clifford, regional global practice manager with the engineering firm, this project is a big deal to participate in. He called it “iconic.” I wasn’t quite sure what he intended with that description, so I looked up the definition of iconic. According to the Webster dictionary, iconic has become part of the language of advertising and publicity. In all probability, it will mean added prestige for the company’s credentials. Hope that keeps the costs down when future contractors are hired for the Joliet water project.
Another aspect of the project that was a topic this week was the future cost of consumer water rates. When the project cost was estimated by consultants hired to calculate the price tag, they left out the cost of the aging water mains to be replaced. When the temporary water commission was vetting a sustainable water source for Joliet in 2018, it was documented that the non-revenue water loss was almost 30 percent. That was a known factor that had to be addressed because in order for Joliet to qualify for a Lake Michigan water allocation the loss needed to be 10 percent or less by 2030. Who bears the responsibility for such an oversight on the cost estimate? That estimate turned out to be about 30 percent off. It’s going to cost Joliet taxpayers $139,000 to find out what the projected water bill cost will be by the year 2030, less than 8 years from now. Instead of a cost estimate of $88 per month, the added cost of the water main replacements probably puts the water bill well over $100 per month. Of course, that assumes the projected price of the known project costs today aren’t affected by inflation and cost overruns for currently unknown costs. What do you think the possibility that future costs will not be going up?
There are some other considerations to contemplate for the future of our drinking water. For instance, about 83% of the Chicago metropolitan area get their drinking water from Lake Michigan. While the water supply may be adequate, will the infrastructure delivering the water be able to provide the future stress of increased users without major repairs or new construction? Will the current agreement with the City of Chicago stay in place for the next 100 years?
We all look forward to a quality and sustainable source of drinking water by 2030. Don’t we?
One last thing…the City of Chicago has recently announced that a new “product,” called Chicagwa, an H20 brand promising to bring thirst-quenching freshness to all and it’s straight from Lake Michigan. For now, it will be packaged in cans for promotional purposes. Perhaps it will find its way to the local grocery stores as a way to boost Chicago’s future revenues to help balance the pension debt. One obstacle might be the ease of counterfeit Chicagwa water since most people in the area get Lake Michigan water from their home tap.
Happy Mother’s Day this Sunday!
Stay tuned…
Comments welcome at www.wayneswords@thetimesweekly.com
