Board discusses water service lease, delays rate-setting until permissive referendum window closes

Village trustees spent the bulk of their meeting debating whether to proceed with a lease-based agreement that would let the village bill 83 town water accounts while avoiding a lengthier mandatory referendum process.

An attorney for the village explained that converting the transfer of customer accounts to a lease avoided the statutory requirement for a mandatory referendum and instead leaves the town subject to a permissive 30-day petition window. “So we could essentially resolve to approve and execute this agreement tonight. However, it would effectively only be executed on the village’s behalf until the town’s 30-day referendum period ends,” the attorney said, explaining that the agreement would become final by operation of law if the town does not receive a petition.

Trustees, billing staff and the supervisor debated the operational implications. Chris, who handles reads and billing, said the new meters are imported into the system but that accounts need a rate assigned to be active and readable. He warned that activating accounts and running bills before the referendum expires could require significant rework if residents successfully petition for a referendum and the agreement is reversed.

Board members weighed options including: (1) proceeding with a signature and delaying operational changes until after the referendum window; (2) running the village billing cycle and holding mailings until the 30 days pass; or (3) the town performing manual reads and billing for this cycle. Several trustees favored approving the agreement now but postponing rate-entry and mass mailing until after the June 21 effective date to avoid unnecessary labor if the town’s voters file a petition.

Trustee Mark urged caution about doing arrears of work in advance: “If a petition does come up and you’ve done that work already, it’s going to be a sizable expense on the village for nothing,” he said. The board agreed to sign the agreement but to limit pre‑implementation actions until after the permissive referendum period concludes.

Next steps: the board directed staff to develop a short operational plan for billing that would minimize duplicated effort if the referendum petition is filed, and to notify affected customers in the days leading up to the first July meter/billing cycle. No final rate change was adopted during the meeting; trustees said rate-setting and any resolution on rates would occur at the next meeting after the referendum window closes.