Council Questions Water Plan

The City Council last night questioned a new water rate plan with at least one member saying it would not soak the universities sufficiently.

A city proposal to change the structure of Cambridge's water and sewage rates does not put enough of the burden on the people who use these services most, a City Councillor said at last night's meeting.

According to city officials, the proposal, which would take effect January I, would encourage conservation and even out the rate burden. Water use has already been declining over the past 20 years, according to City Manager Robert W. Healy, but he said it is still too high.

Under the proposal, institutions would be charged $0.94 per cubic foot of water, while single families would be taxed at $0.81. Commercial users would pay $0.85 per cubic foot and industrial users $0.89.

Healy called the plan "a modest approach" to changing the cost for smaller water users.

Several City Councillors questioned the plan's effectiveness.

Councillor William H. Walsh argued that the rates were not scaled steeply enough and institutions such as universities would still come out ahead. At his suggestion, the council agreed to discuss the issue again in two weeks, requesting the City Manager to get a legal opinion of the plan by that time.

Healy and other city officials argued that if Cambridge made the institutional rate too high, universities would find ways to conserve water. This in turn would reduce the amount of water the city sold but would not lower operating expenses, they said.

The officials added that such a decrease in water consumption could actually cause an increase in the total fees for smaller users, including families.

Councillor Francis H. Duehay '55 said the plan ought to include provisions for a progress report six months or a year after its start. But Healy said it would take closer to two years to test the plan's effectiveness.

And Councillor Alice K. Wolf also asked whether the plan might force the city to buy extra water from the state during a shortage--a prospect Healy dismissed as unlikely.

Walsh said after the meeting that the plan's treatment of institutions reflects the hold institutions have on the city. "Again, it's fear of the power of the universities," said Walsh, adding that they could threaten the city with lawsuits. "That's why I asked for a legal opinion."

Walsh said that although the measure is supposed to encourage conservation, it would actually raise the rates without lowering consumption.

"The two biggest users are Harvard and MIT, yet the rate increase does not reflect them," Walsh said, adding that the proposal would merely perpetuate the present system. Instead, he said the rates per cubic foot should be highest for the institutions using the most water.

Councillors also raised questions about the quality of Cambridge's water supply, which continues to contain more than the maximum allowable level of sodium set by the state. Council members said they were concerned about the state's salt storage near Cambridge's reservoirs and the salt used on Route 128.

They asked State Sen. Michael J. Barrett '70 (D-Cambridge) to look into the matter.

Barrett also told the Council he wanted to include Cambridge in a pending state zoning measure that would protect areas around some reservoirs.

Mayor Alfred E. Vellucci asked the city manager to give him a breakdown of the chemicals used in processing tap water--aluminum sulfate, a fluoride compound, chlorine for disinfection, sodium hydroxide for corrosion control and calcium hyperchloride to balance pH levels.

Vellucci said he feared some of the chemicals might from dangerous compounds when mixed in the form of ice with alcohol.

Healy said that although the question had not been studied, the alcohol would probably be the most dangerous element. He did, however, agree to look into the matter.