THE BATTLE HAS BEEN WON

BUT THE WAR IS NOT OVER

The privatization of the Borough of Sussex's water and sewer authority was soundly defeated.  Kathy Little a long time resident of Sussex won a seat on the council, but Al Decker lost by only 21 votes.  Both Kathy and Al were against the sale, while Krynicky and Hollowach were for the sale.  Hollowach was elected even though the vast majority of voters opposed the sale.  That does not make sense, but that is politics.

Hollowach was to lose his house in July, but the foreclosure was rescheduled for November 12th, so the question remains is will he be a resident in Sussex after the 12th.  If so where did the money come from.

This is not over as a bill S-2412 "Water Infrastructure Protection Act" sponsored by Sarlo(D), and Kryillos (R) would make it easier to steal a municipal assets such as water.  Its name is like something out of Orwell's 1984.

So the battle will continue.

What is maddening is the fact that hardly any people got off of their asses to assist in their own protection.

Sussex Borough says no to utility sale

Posted: Nov 05, 2014 12:03 AM ESTWednesday, November 5, 2014 12:03 AM ESTUpdated: Nov 05, 2014 12:03 AM EST class="wnDate">Wednesday, November 5, 2014 12:03 AM EST

By GREG WATRY

gwatry@njherald.com

SUSSEX BOROUGH — Borough residents voted to keep the borough's water/sewer utility and not sell to Aqua New Jersey for $11.38 million Tuesday.

The referendum resulted in 270 votes against the sale, while 148 voted in favor.

“I feel like Sussex Borough has some hope,” said Councilwoman Linda Masson, who was adamantly against the sale. “I just hope that some of the council members who were for this sale can now try to do something constructive and work as a team for the benefit of the borough.”

“I'm not going to do anything to derail it or anything negative,” said Councilman Salvatore Lagattuta, a supporter of the sale. “The people spoke, democracy works and we move forward from there.”

While the sale fell through, the majority of voters supported establishing a trust account for the excess proceeds from the now-defunct sale. The trust referendum garnered support from 225 voters, while 194 voted against it.

A hotly contested issue, the sale of the water/sewer utility has been debated and discussed at many council meetings, and two public meetings – one held in September and another in October – were devoted solely to presenting both sides of the issue.

The issue has divided the council, with the majority of members being in favor of the sale of the utility. Council members Marina Krynicky, Bruce LaBar, Lagattuta and Georgeanna Stoll have consistently expressed a desire to shed the system, citing the borough's lack of experience running the utility as one of the main reasons for selling. Additionally, they have touted the sale as being able to clear the borough's water/sewer debt of roughly $8 million.

Lagattuta projected that over the next five years, water/sewer rates would rise by $403 per EDU (equivalent dwelling unit) if the sale were not to go through.

Aqua New Jersey's President Nicholas Asselta guaranteed that rates would remain static for five years if the borough were to sell to the company.

On the flip side, Masson and Annette Stendor have adamantly opposed the sale.

Masson has said that there are options other than selling the utility, the most promising of which was potential water and waste disposal grants available from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. In a public meeting held Oct. 28, she expressed surprise that the borough hadn't been looking into the grant program previously.

Amid the bickering, Mayor Jonathan Rose recused himself from any discussion regarding the sale of the utility due to having a conflict of interest with one of Aqua's attorneys.

“That is a tough thing for a guy who likes to be involved,” Rose said when reached by phone Tuesday.

Jong Sook Nee, who acted as the borough's special counsel relating to the sale, said that a no vote from the public is binding.

Asselta previously said Aqua New Jersey will not return to the borough if the sale was voted down.

WHAT WAS NOT MENTIONED IN THE ARTICLE

There are $4,480,000 in government grants that would have had to be paid back should that sale have gone through. This would have been in part, in full and possibly in full with interest. This would have had to have been determined by the government based on the sale price, the value of the utility, etc..