Should Well Water be Allowed in New Lenox?
New Lenox is exploring whether non-residents who use well water should be able to keep their wells when annexed into the village.
New Lenox is exploring whether non-residents who use well water should be able to keep their wells when annexed into the village.
This issue came up during a December board meeting at which a group care home petitioning for annexation asked to keep a well solely for irrigation purposes and lawn-watering. After the property's builder said the well wasn't a big issue, the board decided to take up the issue at a later date.
The sewer and water committee, which includes trustees Nancy Dye and Dave Smith, discussed well water Monday night and will continue to explore options. Smith opposes well water in the village, but trustee Ray Tuminello said in a separate interview that it should be allowed, given certain stipulations.
As the village grows, more township residents could hypothetically petition for annexation. Whether they'll get to keep their well water is an entirely different discussion.
What Village Code Says
Currently, residents of New Lenox are tapped into the village's system, which gets water from Lake Michigan. Residents living in the unincorporated areas most likely have their own well water. If they were annexed into the village, however, they would need to tap into the system and pay the village for this service.
Engineer Will Nash looked through village code and found two ordinances related to the matter. In 1971, an ordinance was passed saying that residents who had a well were allowed to keep it. In 2004, an ordinance was approved to allow for wells to be drilled in the village only for purposes for watering a public athletic field or replenishing a pond, which came about when the Bluestone Bay subdivision was built.
But there's a gap in time there, and trustee Smith said he believes the 1971 ordinance was done away with when the village switched to Lake Michigan water. Nash said he would keep checking village ordinances and ask the village attorney to interpret the code as written.
“None of the intent, ever, has been to let people have their own well," Smith said.
Dollars and Sense
If people were allowed to have wells, the village would lose some new potential revenue through taxes. But Tuminello said these people would be using well water strictly for things such as watering their lawn and washing their car. For other uses, such as drinking water and showers, these new residents would be tapped into the village system and thus providing new revenue, in addition to property taxes.
With water rates expected to rise, that extra cost could worry some people looking to come into the village. They don't need to petition to be annexed, of course, but what if they want to?
"I think people who have existing wells within the village boundaries should be able to continue using them," reader Robert Nork said. "It would be a huge and unplanned expense for them to tap into village water."
But Smith is more skeptical, thinking people with wells might use that water for more than just outdoor purposes, thus keeping more revenue from the village. That revenue goes toward maintaining the water system, and the more water sold results in a lower cost per gallon to the consumer.
"We sell water," Smith said. "I think it would be a bad business decision (to allow wells)."
Editor's note: The section above was clarified following the meeting. See Trustee Smith's comment below for more details.
Contamination Concern
A far bigger concern related to this issue is whether someone tapped into the village system and a well could contaminate the village's water.
Tuminello said he would support an ordinance allowing residents to keep their wells as long as they were only for irrigation purposes and the village conducted an inspection process.
"If it's their well on their land, I don't see why they couldn't use their own water," Tuminello said.
Smith worries about contamination regardless of what the village stipulates or inspects.
"Once you start tapping wells, you’re going to have someone hook them up to their home," he said. "And if someone contaminates the system, they’re going to sue the village of New Lenox."
Smith believes some people would be inclined to hook well water up to their homes and switch the connection when the village comes to inspect it. He also said it could set "a very dangerous precedent" to allow wells and lead people currently in the village boundaries to drill.
Tuminello disagreed with that assertion, saying that very few people would have the lot size required for a well and likely wouldn't invest thousands of dollars to get a well and save a fraction of that monthly.
The Village Board will continue to discuss the issue at future meetings. The board meets the second and fourth Monday of each month at Village Hall.
Nikki Sanders
7:02 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Please consider: Chicago is already attempting to take over Will County through redistricting and foisting congressmen upon us who have no common interest with the citizens of New Lenox. I will NEVER consider annexation to a village that forces me to become dependent on Chicago fo WATER.
RobW
7:23 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Good for you. Thirty plus years ago a family of five had a $23 water bill for three months. Now, with Chicago water, two retired people are paying $65 PER MONTH! This doesn't include the new increased water rates coming to New Lenox either. Soon people won't be able to afford to live here let alone water their lawns.
bruce bialek
7:48 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
i'm tired of all the politics in this world why should new lenox be any different. the first they say is we could get more money from residents if they are not allowed to have wells. the reason i don't want to tap in and have city water is because i don't want to pay for that service and that should be my choice. we are unincorpirated and we can't even vote for the mayor. i see friends who live in new lenox and have to pay for there water and they think they pay way to much plus you have to pay for a minium of 6000 gallons weather you use it or not. and most of the time they don't use that much but have to pay for it anyway so where does that extra money go i'm sure in there pockets. i want to keep my well and not get city water. new lenox use to be a good place to live but now if this happens i might as well move.
David Smith
3:44 pm on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Bruce, I have never or will never force annex anyone who does not want to be in the Village. On your comment about miniums, I have tried to remove that on several occasions but was voted down by other members.
Linda Tuller
10:21 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Mr. Smith sounds like a money hunger greedy politican..with no thoughts to the people of New Lenox. He forgets he's a servant of the people of New Lenox..not their boss.
What kind of a village do we have that dictates if I can or can't use a well in my own yard.
Marie
10:45 am on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Listening to Smith's unfounded, baseless comments is a perfect example of why we desperately need term limits.
JM of NL
12:20 pm on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
When did selling water to it's own residents become a "business" in New Lenox. Like everything else, it should be a service provided. It's not our business when we have no control of the rates.
The puzzling thing is Dave is the biggest advocate of New Lenox residents and how their money is spent. I assume saving them money should also fall under that.
Making residents use piped in water all the way from Lake Michigan to water their tress when there is a perfectly good water source sitting underneath their land, for the sake of making money, is absurd. And the contamination issue can be addressed if it's really that much of a risk. Which I don't think it is.
David Vancina
5:40 pm on Tuesday, January 10, 2012
I have to agree with others... Trustee Smith's comments seem to imply that the government has a right to certain revenue. That's a very ominous attitude.
If a property has an existing well, why in the world should we require them to shut it down? Meaning no disrespect to Trustee Smith, it sounds a little power-hungry to me.
David Smith
3:38 pm on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
I have to apologize to everyone who read this article for not explaining myself very well during the meeting where these comments came from. The money I am trying to save is yours, the taxpayer. The Village has spent millions of dollars building a water distribution system and we also spend millions of dollars per year maintaining this system. These costs are paid for by water bills. These costs are the same the Village sells tens or millions of gallons. Very simply, the more water we sell the less the cost per gallon. As your elected representative, I have always tried to make decisions based on how it affects the Village not my next election. Elected officials need to look at how policies they pass will affect everyone they represent both now and in the future. Think about where most of our countries’ budget problems would be if others followed this simple idea. If we allow everyone to drill or maintain a well in the Village the amount of water will decrease and the cost will increase. Several other reasons I am against wells in the system did not make the article and I will be happy to discuss them with anyone interested. My phone number is listed and as most people know, I am not afraid to talk. In my humble opinion, the Village should keep its monopoly on water for these and other reasons.
Michael Sewall
4:20 pm on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Thank you for commenting, Trustee Smith. I updated a portion of the article to reflect your comment and directed readers down here for the rest of what you said. I appreciate any time someone uses Patch as a forum to educate and interact with readers!
David Vancina
10:28 pm on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Thanks for your note, Dave. I don't think anyone's arguing that the Village should allow new wells to be drilled. The question concerns annexation of property with an existing well.
If the annexation is being requested by the property owner, then it seems acceptable (though perhaps not necessary) to require the owner to tap on to village sewer and/or water. If the annexation were involuntary, that would be another matter entirely.
Maybe you could outline your other objections to wells in the system? (I'm sure Michael would publish.) I and perhaps others would be interested to understand the issue better.
Robert Nork
10:10 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
Trustee Smith - I have looked all over the Village website and could not find any phone or e-mail contact information for any of the Village trustees. I also looked up David Smiths in New Lenox and found 3 of them, so it is not that easy to contact any of our Village Trustee's as you seem to indicate.
David Smith
3:07 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
I understand the comments on private property rights and respect them. This issue addresses properties that annex to the Village. In my opinion, the matter of keeping a well is the same, keeping the septic tank, garbage pick up, leaf burning and zoning. If you care to annex, and the choice to annex is the property owners, all items can change. Focusing only on water, having several systems in town can cause many problems not just contamination. What do you do during a sprinkler ban? Those with wells can water but those without cannot? How do you enforce this? Hire more employees to affirm that those watering have wells? The Village has requested the sealing of wells and septic tanks on all the annexations I can remember, this is not a new issue. And on that point, who should the Village allow to keep wells? Everyone? Businesses? Non-profits? Picking a choosing who keeps wells or other existing conditions on their property during annexation could open the door to favoritism and even corruption. That is why I have always tried to keep things as simple as possible. Whether or not this or other properties keep their wells in only one issue, I would just propose the Village does the same for everyone. So far, the Village has asked for annexing properties to seal them. Please remember that I am only one vote out of seven on the Board. It takes a majority to change most policies, and a super majority to spend or approve annexations.
David Smith
3:07 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
My email address is Davesmithnl@comcast.net. And I am the Smith on Bentley Rd.
Ed
7:24 pm on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
As long as it doesn't negatively affect their neighbors, remains on their own property, and they aren't contaminating the water supply, I see nothing wrong with keeping their own wells going. We do not need a monopoly on water, or any other service or product that a government entity "sells" for that matter. If the concern is to make the service cheaper for other residents, surely forcing it upon others is not the only way to do it.
Marie
7:31 pm on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
Trustee Smith has been in the government for too long and has lost the concept of private property. If a resident has a well, he owns it, not the government.
If the village wants to save money, it should not spend so much, i.e. a new police station, the huge village hall, the north end waste treatment facility.
Simply spreading the cost because the village overspends is NOT saving taxpayers' money. It's encouraging a government body to continue to spend what it doesn't have and then giving them leverage to use it as yet another tax source.
David Vancina
10:47 pm on Wednesday, January 11, 2012
As Trustee Smith has already pointed out, the infrastructure is a sunk, fixed cost. If someone *asks* to be annexed, it doesn't seem unreasonable to ask the property owner to get on board and share those costs. If the petitioner doesn't like the terms no one's forcing him to annex in. At that point it's just a business decision.
As I mentioned earlier, a case of forced annexation would be a different matter entirely. But that's not the case here and the Trustee has said he opposes forced annexation, so I (for whatever my opinion's worth) don't see anything overtly wrong with his position.
Robert Nork
10:12 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
David - you make a good point, but there is one area that nobody has mentioned in this article or in any of the comments. I live in the Village of New Lenox already. I do not need to be annexed, but I have well and septic. What are the Village's plans for us? That is what scares me.
David Vancina
3:08 pm on Thursday, January 12, 2012
I don't know how many like you there are, Robert, but I suspect the number is pretty small. I presume your systems were grandfathered in when your property became part of the Village.
If your septic field is up to code and not bothering anyone, I can't imagine why you should come under any scrutiny.
JM of NL
12:20 am on Thursday, January 12, 2012
So why are residents allowed to put special water meters in their homes for irrigation? Basically a discounted rate because the water is not going into the sewage system. Shouldn't everyone be forced to contribute to the cost of the sewage treatment facility? Whether they use the service or not.
Honestly, other than voting in elections and getting discounted concert tickets, I really don't see the big attraction to annexing.
Carrie M.
6:45 pm on Saturday, January 28, 2012
I hate the thought of being dependent on Chicago for water. I would only consider annexation if my well was grandfathered in. Watering my lawn would be my right and the water ban could be enforced by checking the data base before issueing a ticket. Dave, you've been good for New Lenox, but hooking up to Chicago did not save taxpayers money... at least not us old-timers who like well water.
Nadine G
2:41 am on Sunday, January 29, 2012
I bought a home in 1997 that was already tapped into the village water. The water I have is terrible. I would rather have well water. If we have Lake Michigan Water, we should not be getting any kind of nasty buildup of any kind .Lake Michigan Water is supposed to be SOFT not this nasty stuff that I have. I have yet to see anyone in years flushing the hydrant in front of my home. I have been home all of the time since 2004 and no one from the village has come out to flush it. I think if this was done on a regular basis, my water just might be better. When you shower, your towel smells moldy when you are done drying off and the smell will not come out in the wash, even if you wash it 5 times in a row. Yes, I live in the old section of town right on the border of village and unicorporated. The water even smells just when we run it. Our toothbrushes have to be taken apart all of the time as the water will leave all this black stuff on them.They are so bad you want to use a new one everyday.
laura
7:21 pm on Thursday, March 7, 2013
Leave us alone, i am out of work and my husband is having bypass surgery we really cannot afford to put more money in government pocket. And who wants to be forced to drink that nasty New Lenox water, so would I not only have a new water bill, now i would have to spend thousands on bottled water. And money to filter the Nasty lake michigan water that smells and tastes like bleach so that i can take a safe bath.
Quit with trying to force citizens into what government wants, you new politians need to move back where you came from instead of tring to make this nice area into a mini chicago.