Lewes Board of Public Works election set May 13

The Lewes Board of Public Works election is set for 8 a.m. to 6 p.m., Saturday, May 13, at its offices located at 107 Franklin Ave. The seats held by D. Preston Lee and A. Thomas Owen are up for grabs. Lee has chosen to run again, but Owen has not. Joining Lee in the race for two seats are former BPW President Wendell Alfred and BPW Mitigation Committee member Barbara Curtis.

Absentee ballots are available through noon, Friday, May 12, and must be returned by 6 p.m., Saturday, May 13. More information about the BPW election can be found at lewesbpwde.gov/information/election-news.

The Cape Gazette asked each candidate to submit their responses to the following questions. Candidate responses are listed in alphabetical order.

Bios

D. Preston Lee

Lee has served on the board for the Lewes Board of Public Works for 12 years. Pres is the secretary, and has served as president and vice president in the past. Lee is a lifelong resident of Delaware and has been a Lewes resident for 20 years. 

He holds a degree in civil engineering from the University of Delaware and is registered as a professional engineer in Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, New Jersey and Pennsylvania.

Wendell Alfred 

Alfred previously served on the Lewes Board of Public works for 18 years, his final seven as president. 

During his previous service, the board authorized construction of the Howard H. Seymour Water Reclamation Plant and a new potable water treatment facility near Cape Henlopen High School. 

Hailing from Covington, Va., Alfred lost his seat on the board in 2018. He used the time to continue volunteering with Beebe Healthcare and the AARP. 

Alfred’s background is primarily in insurance, but he served as a police officer for five years followed by a stint as an investigator for Virginia’s alcoholic beverage control board.

Barbara Curtis

A member of the mitigation committee, Curtis has recently taken a great interest in the future of the BPW. She said she believes now is the time to bring an environmental science perspective to BPW decision-making.

Curtis has been heavily involved in recent BPW workshops discussing long-range plans for wastewater treatment. 

Curtis holds a master’s degree in environmental science and engineering from Drexel University and has 40 years in environmental management. She frequently asks board members to consider impacts on the local ecosystems and has advocated for the BPW to implement sustainable, long-term solutions in planning.

What is your preferred path forward for Lewes’ wastewater treatment?

Alfred: Option 3-B. Go with the county. When I was president and a member of the board, we signed an agreement with the county that has been beneficial to our customers and has worked well. Fifteen years ago, when the current plant was constructed, it was state of the art. That was then. Today, the plant has severely aged and has become very costly to operate. This is our opportunity, by joining with the county, to provide the needs of our citizens for years to come.

Curtis: I am in favor of the option that best protects the environment at the lowest cost to Lewes BPW customers. Outsourcing to Sussex County's to-be-expanded Wolfe Neck treatment plant and discharge of the treated water to constructed wetlands on-site is appealing on both fronts, but with caveats. Unknown are whether constructed wetlands will be approved and whether discharge to the canal will be required. If the latter, and if results of the modeling study assessing impacts on the canal, Roosevelt Inlet and the bay shoreline conclude there will be no adverse environmental effects, then good. Although Lewes’s residents are unhappy with many Sussex County decisions and policies, refusing the county's offer will not deter new development – private utility companies have been stepping in. As a contingency, I recommend the formation of a task force to look at hardening the existing plant or building new elsewhere. It will take at least two years before design plans are approved and environmental impact study results are in. Contract terms need to be negotiated. New technologies that save energy, produce cleaner effluent, reduce air emissions, require less land and are simpler to operate are available and bear consideration.  

Lee: The Lewes Board of Public Works is still in the process of hosting workshops, soliciting public input and deliberating on the GHD report regarding the BPW’s long-range planning options. This is the most important issue that has come before the board in my 12 years of service. As a longtime resident of Lewes and a board member, I take this decision very seriously. I am a professional engineer and have designed wastewater plants throughout Delaware, Maryland and Pennsylvania. I therefore understand the technical pros and cons of the options being considered. I am also a long-term resident of Lewes, so I also understand concerns of many residents regarding the commitment of working with the county. As board president at the time, I understood there would be considerable interest in the future of Lewes’ wastewater treatment facilities. From the outset of the project, I was committed to bringing the public into the discussions early. With that in mind, the board immediately scheduled a public workshop. That took place even before we engaged engineers. Since then, we retained the services of GHD, a large, highly respected consulting engineering firm, to prepare an extremely detailed and well-documented report of potential long-range wastewater treatment options. After receiving their report, we’ve had several additional workshops to solicit public input and to provide updates on our ongoing efforts to finalize our decision. Additional workshops will be held in May and June. We anticipate making a final decision in June. Due to the importance of this issue, it is important that I not come to a decision until all public input and other information have been received and considered.

Perform a brief strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats analysis of the BPW.

Alfred: The safety and security (sabotage) of our facilities and infrastructure is paramount to our operations. One of our main and most important strengths is the dedication of our employees who continue to collaborate well with our customers. This leads to a better cooperative relationship both internal and external. We have an opportunity to correct problems of the past. We need to listen to the voices of our customers.

Curtis: Strengths: Knowledgeable and dedicated management team and board. Wastewater discharge quality. Location of water supply wells. Weaknesses: Age of the infrastructure. Supply chain disruptions. Use of contractors for operation of the wastewater treatment plant. Opportunities: Grants available to improve resiliency in coastal communities. Opportunities to rebuild smarter vis-a-vis energy conservation, alternative energy sources and storage, stormwater management and water conservation. Threats: Sea-level rise and storm surge flooding. The single incoming line for electricity supply. Vulnerability of water supply. Managing stormwater as groundwater table rises. Storm emergencies. Heat waves and potential drought conditions.

Lee: Strengths: An informed and active community that appreciates and supports quality utilities. A general manager and well-trained staff that work hard every day to provide reliable utilities and prompt, professional services. Competitive utility rates, including the lowest electric rates in the state. Excellent, reliable source of high-quality groundwater. Independently elected board of directors that is dedicated specifically to oversee the utility’s technical, administrative and financial management. Weaknesses: A single source of incoming electric service into the community; most communities have redundant sources increasing overall reliability. Wastewater treatment plant is in a flood zone, and susceptible to storm damage and sea-level rise, hurricanes, nor’easters and other storm damage. Although most of the utilities have been updated, there are older water mains and sewers that still need replacement. Stormwater management in low-lying areas such as the beach, areas around Canary Creek, etc. Opportunities: Relocation of offices to the Army Reserve property. New water storage tank. Electric vehicle charging stations. Smart meters to provide users and BPW cost savings through more efficient use of their utilities. Community solar facilities. Community battery electric storage to reduce peaking costs and offer short-term system backup. Threats: Sea-level rise. Saltwater intrusion into wells. Vandalism and terrorism. Major system interruption to our single-feed incoming power supply.

What are your thoughts on the use of renewable energy?

Alfred: We need to work with our federal, state and local governments to secure grants and monies that will be needed in the future. Renewable energy is cleaner, cheaper and healthier, and it can lead to employment opportunities for those who are currently employed in the fossil fuels industries.

Curtis: A necessity going forward. There are so many options: solar, wind and wave/tidal energy. How to integrate into the grid, timing for maturity and cost-effectiveness of different technologies, and funding are some of the variables that need to be worked through.

Lee: There is no question that we must continue to increase the development of renewable energy. We can’t continue to rely on fossil fuels to supply our energy needs long term. I’ve totally supported all the BPW’s efforts in moving toward renewable energy. Since I’ve been on the board, the BPW has increased its use of renewable sources to about 21% of its total power. Our power is purchased through the Delaware Municipal Electric Corporation, an organization to which all Delaware municipal utilities belong. The BPW and DEMEC have targeted to use 25% renewable sources by 2025. In addition, the BPW has helped facilitate an increase in the number of its residential solar customers to over 130 homes. That’s about 3.5% of Lewes’ population, the highest percentage of residential solar installations of all municipal utilities in the state, which averaged about 1% in 2021. The BPW is also tied into the University of Delaware’s wind power generation unit. It provides up to 30% of BPW’s power needs when it’s operating. In addition, the BPW has been evaluating the creation of community solar facilities and the use of battery storage.

What steps should be taken to mitigate climate change and sea-level rise?

Alfred: We need to shut down our existing wastewater plant because of its location, raise and harden our pump stations and electrical transformers, and institute a program to plant more marsh plantings as they add to the damping of wave energy during a storm.

Curtis: I serve on the BPW mitigation team that developed plans and priorities to protect critical infrastructure. In conjunction with the wastewater treatment plant study, these steps started the process. Longer term and for new projects, finding ways to reduce energy/fossil fuel use, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, protect groundwater from saltwater intrusion and improve stormwater management will help. Coordination with the city to update codes, develop best practices and educate the public is essential. 

Lee: The BPW is already moving forward with steps to mitigate climate change and sea-level rise. A year ago, the board established a mitigation committee to specifically address climate change and SLR. I’m the chair of that committee. The committee comprises five environmentally knowledgeable residents from the community and the general manager. The board president and assistant general manager also attend the meetings. Over the past year, following the recommendations of the committee, the staff identified and mapped all the BPW’s major assets. An accompanying spreadsheet has been prepared, listing each asset, its exact location, the elevation of its flood-sensitive equipment and the FEMA flood zone in which it is located. For assets that are at an elevation that is predicted to be impacted by SLR, the spreadsheet lists the year those assets should be adjusted or replaced to avoid damage. Any major asset renovations or new construction would also have to be built to the new criteria. Other improvements, such as sealing sewer manholes, raising meters, etc., have also been addressed. The information generated in this effort will be added to the BPW’s system-wide geographic information system. The BPW has recently become aware of potential grant money that will be available to be used for the planning and implementing of the recommendations of the committee. If secured, improvements could begin on many of the most vulnerable assets soon.

How will the BPW afford necessary and recommended upgrades?

Alfred: We need to work with state, federal and local governments, continue to monitor and review our investments, seek other funding sources and grants, and continue to monitor our rates as budgets are adjusted. Our finance committee is reviewing the different utilities to ensure that our budgets accurately reflect the costs associated with each.

Curtis: The BPW has directors with financial experience and the board benefits from their knowledge. Federal grant money should be aggressively pursued where available. Setting priorities and looking at how capital projects can result in energy and operating cost reductions should help. And BPW should explore how other municipalities are equitably funding needed improvements, such as Rehoboth Beach’s consideration of stormwater fees based on impervious surface coverage. 

Lee: Throughout my time on the board, the costs of routine system upgrades have been included in the BPW’s five-year capital and operating budgets. These expenses are covered by the regular utility rate schedules. The rates are periodically reevaluated and adjusted accordingly. The board recently approved a rate study that should be finalized in the next few months. All new service connections are required to pay a connection fee and an impact fee. The connection fee is for the cost to tie the utility service lines to the property. The impact fee is to help reimburse the BPW for the cost of the existing infrastructure being tied into, and the portion of infrastructure needed to provide their future service. Large capital projects are typically financed by grants, long-term loans or bonds. State and federal agencies generally have programs that award grants or establish low interest rates, recently averaging between 2% and 3%. The BPW has only a few years left for payments on bonds issued when the existing wastewater treatment plant was upgraded several years ago. The final payoff of these bonds could free up money to use for future large capital projects, such as a future treatment plant or a new elevated water tank.