City Council should consider more permanent fix to water main
breaks
For as long as city officials continue the quick-fix philosophy
on an aging water main system downtown, they will be throwing away
tax dollars every time another section breaks.
City Council should consider more permanent fix to water main breaks
For as long as city officials continue the quick-fix philosophy on an aging water main system downtown, they will be throwing away tax dollars every time another section breaks.
The most recent series of water main breaks along San Benito Street occurred last week, the first one on Wednesday morning and two more not too far away – related to the initial malfunction – just days later. It’s hard not to notice the inconveniences. The biggest one at the intersection of Hawkins Street at one point looked more like a dinosaur-bone excavation than a minor repair.
The city not only forks over $15,000 to $25,000 every time a main breaks, according to City Manager Clint Quilter, but there also are an array of other negative consequences to local residents and businesses.
There is inherent, innumerable damage to the local economy. This week’s main breaks may not be in the worst possible location in significantly affecting the general public. But don’t tell that to the businesses on the near-half-mile stretch along downtown’s commercial thoroughfare that had been largely closed off from traffic for a week as of Pinnacle press time.
And imagine the impact, and how many locals would be demanding a more serious examination of the problem, if the next main break occurs on San Benito pretty much anywhere from Fourth – where the line ends – to Seventh streets in the area with the highest concentration of businesses in the district. With the way things are going, it certainly wouldn’t be a surprise if that stretch is hit next by the problem.
Quilter told council members this week that although the more than half-century-old system ultimately needs to be replaced, it would carry a $3 million to $4 million cost, and that now probably would not be the best time for the expense due to the city’s finances and the negative impact on businesses when the roads would be closed off for the work.
At the least, though, council members should commission a closer, more detailed report on the issue. They should start the planning process now. They should get an itemized list of likely expenses with estimates. They should receive a more thorough analysis of the negative impacts, and potential disasters, that come along with continuing to follow the quick-fix philosophy on a dilemma that demands immediate attention. They should weigh all of the factors and make an informed decision, rather than merely listen to an anecdotal report from the city manager.
They should ask whether using funds from the RDA – which is preparing to spend $5 million to build a new downtown fire station – is a possibility.
They should get all the information and consider whether now might actually be the right time to fix this problem before it does, indeed, become a disaster.
