Heres's the PD story:

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2012/01/westlakes_pursuit_of_new_water.html

and my thoughts:

A.) Cleveland Water has to be one of the worst-run Cleveland-based regional entities. Bad billing, inconsistent, poor management

B.) Westlake residents are faced with ever-increasing rates to cover (A.), while still having to pay again to make water system infrastructure improvements in their city which Cleveland refuses to cover.In essence, they pay twice.

C.) Cleveland does not deny either fact (A.) or (B.)but using as one of their arguments that Westlake should stay in Cleveland Water to be fair to Cleveland and the other communities who will have to pay even higher rates to cover both (A.) and the decreased user base caused by Westlake's leaving.

D.) You are on Westlake Council, elected to serve Westlake residents (as I am in my city.) You can either vote to continue (B.) and support the region, even thoughit will cost your constiuents more, or to stop the cycle to go to over to Avon water.

"Regionalism" says Westlake taxpayers should pay higher water rates and taxes to maintain the system because they can "afford it" and to be "fair."  As is other existing and potential regional arrangements, this one is stacked against Westlake and in favor of the urban area Celveland- they have no input on mamgement or rates. It is, after all, Celveland's Water system. Westlake is merely the water customer, lucky enough in this case to have another water option.

I think I have summarized the situation --am I missing a point?

I am afraid that like most regionalism discussions, this one will not be decided by voters, but by a judge.

Posted Jan 25, 2012

Well summarized, Alex. ... To add background to the discussion, Westlake approached Avon Lake Municipal Utilities, a neighboring regional water supplier, about the possibility of providing water to the City. Westlake desires to create its own water department so that they may maintain their own system and quickly respond to issues. Knowing Avon Lake Municipal Utilities has been providing water to other jurisdictions since the 1970's, Westlake asked ALMU if it would be interested in providing them bulk water. Should Westlake's engineering, legal, and financial analyses indicate that it is in Westlake's interest to switch, Avon Lake Municipal Utilities stands ready for Westlake's 32,000 residents to join the 185,000+ people already served by ALMU in Lorain, Medina, Cuyahoga, Ashland, Huron, Erie, and Wayne Counites.

Posted Jan 26, 2012

Two days ago, the PD ran the attached column in the forum section. Brent Larkin is never one to mince words, and he really calls out Westlake Mayor Dennis Clough. He gets a bit personal at times, but the importance of the piece, I thought, becomes clear about half way in: 

If Westlake tries to leave the system, Cleveland says it would seek $39 million from Westlake for the value of improvements made to the Westlake water system. A consultant hired by Cleveland estimated it would cost Westlake at least $47 million more in capital costs to build its own water infrastructure.

So, is Clough willing to take an $86 million gamble that will result in prolonged and costly litigation -- with the potential to drain the city's bank account, drive it deeply into debt and wreck its credit rating?  

Larkin writes that Westlake has about $50 million in the bank. Is this what residents want to spend it on?