Regional water authority proposed but not adopted

WITH THE FLOW: Aerators at the Providence Water Supply Board’s Philip J. Holton water treatment plant in Scituate. / COURTESY PROVIDENCE WATER SUPPLY BOARD
WITH THE FLOW: Aerators at the Providence Water Supply Board’s Philip J. Holton water treatment plant in Scituate. / COURTESY PROVIDENCE WATER SUPPLY BOARD

A proposal in the General Assembly is designed to combat long-running water-shortage issues across the south of the state, but unanswered questions and entrenched interests make consideration of the bill, much less enactment, less than a sure thing in the last month of the legislative session.
House Bill 6099 was introduced in May by Rep. Christopher Blazejewski, D-Providence, who said he sponsored the legislation at the request of the city of Providence, the mayor’s office and the Providence Water Supply Board. It creates a new, quasi-public agency – the Ocean State Regional Water Authority – with the power “to acquire, lease, manage, sell, contract, develop, operate and maintain all properties, water and water supply systems.”
Water Supply Board Chairman Brett Smiley said the main purpose of the proposed regional water authority is to create a more efficient system of water distribution statewide.
“We have cheap, good, abundant fresh water in Rhode Island. The dilemma is that it’s not where it needs to be,” said Smiley. “Northern Rhode Island is water rich. Southern Rhode Island is water poor. … We’d have to build a couple of pipes to connect the systems.”
The Providence Water Supply Board, which sits in the middle of the state, is owned and operated by the city of Providence. The utility serves 600,000 people in four cities directly – Providence, North Providence, Johnston and Cranston – as well as wholesale customers, including the communities of Lincoln, East Providence and Warwick and the Bristol County and Kent County water authorities.
Smiley said the initial thinking is that the city of Providence would lease, not sell, the water supply infrastructure to the regional authority. Then the regional water authority would negotiate with localities that need to purchase the water.
While Smiley said consolidating the state’s more than 20 water systems makes sense in terms of efficiency, others question the basic details of the proposed regional water authority.
“I think the first question is a legal one, as to who has the authority to lease or sell Providence water,” said Rep. John Lombardi, D-Providence. Smiley said he believes the city of Providence has the authority.
“In the past, some members of the [R.I.] Public Utilities Commission have taken the position that the ratepayers own the system,” said Smiley. “Even if the ratepayers have contributed over time, the initial investment 120 years ago was clearly the investment of the city of Providence,” said Smiley.
The proposed regional authority would finally give many municipal water customers some say in the governance of the utility, said Smiley.
While Providence Water supplies 60 percent of the state’s drinking water, cities that buy the water, for instance North Providence and Cranston, don’t have representation on the board, said Smiley.
The proposed Ocean State Regional Water Authority would have a nine-member board, with three members appointed by the governor, three by the Providence mayor, one each by the mayors of Cranston and North Providence and one from the communities that buy the water wholesale, such as Kent County.
Other concerns need to be examined, said Lombardi.
“People are still concerned about the economy. Are there going to be increased costs to the ratepayers?” said Lombardi.
“What are they going to do with the existing staff? Will people lose jobs with the consolidation?” he said.
With long-time efforts to improve infrastructure and education and to make the city and the state more attractive to business, the sale or leasing of the Providence water board should be carefully considered, said Lombardi.
The proposed bill has been referred to the House Committee on Municipal Government for consideration, but there is no way to determine if it will, or will not, come up for a vote in this session of the General Assembly.
“It’s a big bill, and we recognize it may require additional time,” said Smiley, who has a plan in place if the bill doesn’t get a vote this session – bring it up again next session. •

No posts to display