To the editor,
While I respect Mr. Hummel’s opinion (“A sewer usage fee should be implemented in Beacon Falls,” Citizen’s News, Sept. 20) on how the cost for the Beacon Falls sewage system and treatment plant is currently apportioned and/or could be apportioned differently; he is, however, incorrect on how implementing a sewer usage fee would result in additional funds for “treatment plant upgrades” or “new connections to existing homes.”
If a sewer usage fee were implemented, the exact same costs that are budgeted for the maintenance and operation of the sewage system and treatment plant, would just be reapportioned to those that have sewer connections and removed from those without sewer connections.
And yes, Mr. Hummel’s taxes would go down, those with sewer connections would have their taxes go up, but the costs to operate and maintain the sewage system and treatment plant remain unchanged.
Therefore, implementing a sewer usage fee would not add one single dollar to put towards connecting new residences or treatment plant upgrades.
Sewer usage fees would simply reapportion the costs differently among Beacon Falls taxpayers.
That point can be argued, but without any financial benefit, for upgrades or infrastructure improvements.
James E. Hagan, Jr.