Council ignores reimbursement plea for lead pipe program | Opinion

A decade ago, the lead water pipe crisis in Flint, Michigan made everyone aware of the health dangers posed by lead water pipes. In response, Cincinnati City Council established the Lead Service Line Replacement Program in 2017 and authorized the Greater Cincinnati Water Works to require customers to replace lead water pipes on their private property.

In 2018, Water Works sent certified letters to selected homeowners in 45 neighborhoods informing them of their obligation to replace lead water pipes on their property or face future enforcement. In those certified letters, Water Works explained it was offering a Cost Sharing Program under which the agency would pay 40% of the lead water pipe replacement (up to $1,500), and the homeowner would pay the remaining 60% of the costs. However, of the thousands of households that received these notices, only 2,400 households participated in the lead pipe program.

Realizing the ill-advised Cost Sharing Program would never meet the lead pipe replacement expectations of the EPA, City Council voted at the end of 2021 to scrap the lead pipe program and provide free lead pipe replacement for the 36,000 Water Works customers who had not yet been notified by the agency or who chose to ignore Water Works' enforcement threats. Under Ordinance No. 509, the entire cost of replacing a private homeowner's lead water pipes would now be borne exclusively by Water Works. To cover the cost of that project, City Council approved a 3.75% water rate hike in 2022 followed by four annual hikes of 5.55% each from 2023 through 2026. Therefore, all water users, including the 2,400 responsible households that already paid up to $5,750 to replace their lead water pipes, will pay for free lead water pipe replacement for the other 36,000 households in Greater Cincinnati who still need lead water pipe replacement.

Inexplicably, Ordinance No. 509 did not include any funding to reimburse the 2,400 Cincinnati households that had done the right thing by replacing their lead pipes. Nor was there any provision granting those homeowners a credit on future water bills to offset the costs they assumed to replace the pipes. Rather, the 2,400 homeowners, after paying 60% or more of the costs of replacing their own pipes, will pay water rates effectively increased 28% over the foreseeable future to cover the cost of replacing the lead water pipes of the other 36,000 households. Clearly, to require these 2,400 homeowners to pay the cost of their own pipe replacement and then to share the cost of replacing pipes for everyone else is patently unfair.

When several neighborhood councils and impacted households wrote letters imploring City Council to reimburse the out-of-pocket lead pipe replacement costs of the 2,400 households or at least provide them credits against future water bills, the united response from the mayor and City Council was to ignore the situation. Although one council member provided a token response advising nothing could be done, no other responses have been forthcoming from any of the members of council or the mayor.

After four representatives of the households presented public comments before council's meeting on June 26 asking for relief, more stonewalling. Follow-up emails to council and the mayor produced no offers to help or even interest in exploring the matter. The fact that not even one member of council would step forward in an election year to assist 2,400 household strongly suggests that council members have been advised by someone at the top to stay mum on this issue in the hopes that it goes away.

Memo to the nine members of council: This issue is not going away. If you will not respond to the 2,400 constituent households that are being penalized for doing the environmentally responsible thing, we will respond on Nov. 7 when you are up for reelection. Count on it.

Scott Gilligan is a retired attorney who lives in Hyde Park.

This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Council ignores reimbursement plea for lead pipe program | Opinion