Bude resident seeks answers on water billing, leaks

A frequent and vocal critic of the Town of Bude’s monthly water billing system appeared before the Board of Aldermen again on Tuesday, Oct. 4 to renew his call for a myriad of concerns to be addressed by municipal leaders.

“This has been going on for the last six or seven months that I have been coming here, and I have asked to get an answer on my billing concerns and that hasn’t come yet,” said Thomas J. Griffith.

“I guess the reason I haven’t gotten an answer is that it’s not important to you. Still, I know that if any of y’all went to (the local grocery store), you looked at your receipt when you got home and they had overcharged you, you’d be going back to get the amount you were overcharged.”

Griffith, who pastors a local church with a Bude community water connection, has repeatedly contended the water bill his worship facility gets monthly is far too much based on actual usage.

He went on to say that the church does not have a water leak on its side of the meter, and his concerns began when the municipality went to digital water metering for billing purposes.

“If you’re being overcharged on your water bill, you can do one of two things — you’ve told me that you don’t do refunds ... so give me a credit on the water bill and I’ll be satisfied,” Griffith continued.

A handful of other residents have joined Griffith in voicing their displeasure regarding their water bills during much of the past year.

Mayor Linda Green and aldermen have listened to those repeated concerns, but have not publicly responded to individual customer billing complaints.

Griffith presented Green with a letter formally asking when town officials would respond to the issues he raised including his appeal for a statement credit, and said he needed an answer soon.

Green told Griffith he would be getting a reply, but it would not be during last week’s meeting.

He responded that he hoped to get an answer by at least Thursday, Oct. 20.

Griffith then used the remainder of his time on another water-related concern in discussing a perpetual leak on Ellen Lane located not far from the home he has lived in for the past 36 years.

“I reported (the pipe) leaking about a year ago and again to the people in the (town hall) office,” he said.

“Then, about two months ago, my neighbor said the leak had gotten worse. When it comes to the grass, it stays wet there making it impossible to cut.

“I came back (to town hall) and told the assistant clerk again about the water leak and nobody has come over there to look at it. This is a town water line, and is not my responsibility to repair.”

Griffith said he felt the town should a least step up to work on the leak to eliminate the wasting of municipal water.
Town of Bude maintenance staffer Jeremy Flowers said there are several spots leaking in Griffith’s area, but where the lines are located is on private property and the town does not have a legally executed easement to enter the area.

Griffith countered that he had always heard that until the water came through an individual’s meter, it was the provider’s responsibility — in this case, the Town of Bude — for repairs.

Town attorney Mary Kathryn Williamson asked for clarification as to the location of the line, questioning if it was in the municipal road right-of-way or going through peoples’ private property.

After much discussion, Williamson said she recalled that the town had sought permission to cross private property to replace a section of water pipe, but the property owner failed to grant that easement.

“And because there was not an easement, the line was not replaced because the town was not given access,” she continued.

Williamson then asked Griffith how long the supply pipe feeding his residence had been in place, and he responded it had been there since he has lived there.

Williamson questioned Flowers as to how much pipe would be involved to run a replacement line in the right-of-way, to which he responded “ahout half of a football field.”

“That’s what needs to happen,” Williamson said in getting the pipe off private property.

Griffith said another concern is that several households are tied into the same leaking pipe, but stuck to his guns in saying the town should just locate the leaks and fix them.

“That’s all you’ve got to do,” he said. “You can’t say that because someone didn’t sign an easement that you’re not going to work on the line.”

Town leaders countered that accessing the infrastructure — especially on private property with no permission — was a sticky matter that could result in trespassing concerns or wind up sending the municipality to court.

“I remember that we had tried to replace the line, but couldn’t because of the easement issue,” Williamson added.

“We will look at the situation to see if there is a solution.”