Evesham residents will have to wait until at least the fall for a final decision regarding the potential dissolution of the Evesham Municipal Utilities Authority.
At its June 28 meeting, town council tabled the second reading and public hearing on two ordinances that would allow the township to dissolve the MUA and reorganize the entity as a municipal department, as well as allow the township to refinance MUA debt as municipal debt.
The MUA operates as a public entity with its own controlling board separate from the municipality, with water and wastewater operations funded by ratepayers at properties throughout town.
Upon recommendation of township manager Tom Czerniecki, the two ordinances were tabled until council’s Sept. 27 meeting.
Czerniecki first proposed dissolution of the MUA to council last October after the review of a question on a New Jersey best municipal practices inventory in which the state asks municipalities to annually assess the health of any utilities previously established by the municipality.
Czerniecki said after examining the issue, it was his belief that dissolving and absorbing the MUA under the municipality would create numerous benefits for residents.
Czerniecki has used multiple public meetings since that time to outline those benefits, such as $4.3 million in savings to come from reissuing MUA debt as municipal debt and additional savings that would come from combining operations that overlap between the municipality and the MUA.
According to Czerniecki, dissolution would also free up about $9 million in ratepayer funds held by the MUA, which the MUA is legally mandated to hold in restricted reserves and savings.
Czerniecki has also repeatedly said a municipal water department would be able to increase the number of water and wastewater projects carried out in town while maintaining a steady debt level and without eliminating any jobs.
The township passed one hurdle in the dissolution process in April when it was granted approval for the dissolution by the Local Finance Board under the state Department of Community Affairs, which acts as the state’s ruling body in examining the fiscal health of municipalities that wish to dissolve utilities.
However, council’s final decision on whether to dissolve the MUA is far from certain.
At a meeting in February, council voted in a rare 3–2 split during the first introduction of the ordinances that would dissolve the MUA and refinance MUA debt as municipal debt.
Mayor Randy Brown, Deputy Mayor Ken D’Andrea and Councilman Bob DiEnna voted yes to the ordinances, but Councilwoman Debbie Hackman and Councilman Steve Zeuli voted no.
While the ordinance approving the dissolution of the MUA can get final approval with a similar 3–2 vote, final approval of the ordinance to reissue the MUA’s debt would require a supermajority of at least four votes.
Since that February meeting, the second reading and public hearing of the ordinances have been tabled multiple times, including the most recent instance at the June 28 meeting.
At that meeting, resident Ken Mills said he believed council needed to move on the issue “one way or the other,” and he wanted to see where D’Andrea and DiEnna stood regarding certain safeguards that each man said they wanted to see put in place before the dissolution would occur.
In regard to Mills’ comments, Czerniecki said he wanted point out for the record that Brown and D’Andrea were not present at the meeting, and that the dissolution of the MUA and any public debate surrounding the issue was not something council would handle at a 4 p.m. meeting.
“Particularly we wouldn’t do it on a week coming into Independence Day holiday weekend,” Czerniecki said.
As the Sept. 27 meeting where the MUA related ordinances are now scheduled is also scheduled for 4 p.m., come September the ordinances may be tabled again to a later date with a meeting at council’s other regularly scheduled meeting time of 6:30 p.m.
