Examine the flaws in Chatham water deal
April 2 2010

Chatham and New Berlin citizens need to clearly understand this extremely important point: The village of Chatham will not own, operate or have any control of the water rates of the new water plant. It will be owned and operated by a group calling itself the South Sangamon Water Commission, led by Del McCord. 

I witnessed, on March 23, the arrogant takeover of Chatham’s water supply system by a village board that has absolutely no concern for the Chatham citizens they are supposed to represent. They took an oath to serve all of the citizens, yet they voted to serve Del McCord, who is currently a village employee, and his newly formed water commission. 

The only board member with the courage to vote “no” was Matt Mau. He apparently is the only board member who knows the importance of an oath to serve all of the citizens, not just a privileged few. 

The other board members voted to buy Chatham’s water supply from Del’s new water commission knowing this action is laced with these important flaws, plus many others. 

* No set price on the wholesale cost to the village for the well water — only projected prices using fuzzy math. 

* No guarantee of the cost to the village ratepayers to build this well water plant and bring it on line— only projected costs, again using fuzzy math. 

* Some of the land, if not all of it, still has to be acquired for the construction of the water system. 

* Costly court battles are looming for those yet-to-be-acquired land rights. 

* No explanation as to why a guaranteed contract with City Water, Light and Power is inferior to an open-ended contract with a Chatham employee using projected costs. 

 Bob Judd
Chatham

No need for Chatham to leave CWLP
March 23 2010

Chatham water customers: Beware! 
It’s my personal opinion that Chatham’s water supply is being hijacked by a select group of people who have their own personal gains as their primary interest. To them, the rest of Chatham’s ratepayers are merely a secondary concern. 

I believe we will end up paying obscene water rates for a lower-quality product. I also believe this select group of people is very aware of it. It could possibly cause our property values to take a hit and it may even stop some people from wanting to build in Chatham. 

The businesses in Chatham that use high volumes of water may have to raise prices on their products to override the higher rates. The quality of well water may also alter the taste of certain foods and drinks such as coffee and tea. The need for water softeners and filtering is a high probability. Machines that use water, such as washing machines, dishwashers and coffee makers, may also develop maintenance problems as has happened with other small towns’ water systems. 

With our water now coming from Springfield CWLP, those problems are not present. The water we now have is as good quality as we can get and the rates are as fair and reasonable as a village can expect. We Chatham citizens have no need for this well-water plant. 

New Berlin citizens, I believe, may also regret that they didn’t consider CWLP water first, instead of putting their trust in this group from Chatham. 

This well-water plant idea is, simply put, an arrogant action by a select few wanting to fix something that’s not broke. Except for this group’s self-serving gains, there’s absolutely no reason to leave CWLP. 

Bob Judd
Chatham 
Why think Chatham can handle water?
Sept 23 2009

My family and I have lived in one of the older “subdivisions” on the east side of Chatham for 20 years. When we first moved here, the electricity failed on a regular basis. Lately, our electricity has gone out as often as once a week or more, and on average every other month. 

I’ve noticed that as the village has grown, the traffic light situation and street layouts have done little to alleviate traffic congestion. The railroad tracks and lack of crossings limit east-to-west traffic. The village decided to block a crossing a few years ago so RP Lumber could have a better yard. 

Probably most people in Sangamon County are aware of the way police protection is administered in this village. Making decisions behind closed doors regarding inappropriate use of force by the police does not foster trust. 

If the village of Chatham can’t do electricity, traffic and police protection, how are they going to do water? 

Steve Clausen
Chatham


Springfield can’t expect Chatham to beg for water 
July 27 2009

Chatham is not senseless in the pursuit of a better water contract with Springfield. I’ve trained sales forces all over the country, and it is clear that Chatham is the buyer and Springfield is the seller in the great water fight. 

Sellers must take action; buyers must react. If the buyer shows eagerness to purchase, the price goes up. 

It’s up to Springfield water sales representatives to make an appointment to talk to Chatham’s water buying representatives to pursue the order. 

Springfield reps should be trained in asking probing questions to (1) diagnose Chatham’s water issues, (2) discover the impact of each of Chatham’s options, and (3) help Chatham form a vision of a solution using Springfield water. Springfield cannot expect Chatham to come begging for water; the outcome would be a disaster for Chatham. 

Wayne Lovern
Chatham


Wants someone to pay for stolen water meter May 9 2009

I see where the village of Chatham is about to raise utility rates! 

With this forthcoming raise, perhaps they can pay for a new water meter that someone took off my mobile home. I live in a mobile home. I am not trailer trash, but I sure look like it now while village and owners of the mobile home park try to decide who is to put the new meter up AND repair my skirting. 

I was told it was on private property so “park” owners should do it. The village owns the meters, therefore they should do it. 

My big question is, if this had happened to someone in a house, is that not considered private property? 

Though I live in a mobile home, I am tired of being considered an underdog and looked down upon. Frankly, I have seen many mobile homes that look a hundred times better than some of the houses. 

The end, though I do not rest my case! 

Donna Mull


Springfield’s water rates sure look good
October 8 2008

I agree with your editorial on Chatham water (“City, Chatham need to discuss water issues,” Friday). We live in Westbrook subdivision, a three-block oasis surrounded by Springfield water service. We have Curran Gardner water — 4,000 gallons cost $40. The first 2,000 gallons, the minimum, is $30. Each 1,000 thereafter is $5. So Chatham is well off at $2.73 per 1,000 gallons. 

Wish we had Springfield water. Its main runs along Meadowbrook Road, which some of our back yards abut. So Chatham, beware of the $3.75 price — it may not reflect current costs. Let the Curran Gardner water rates be a warning of the cost of a smaller water district. It’s not worth it. We sprinkled our lawn once. The bill was $95, so that system has been shut down.

Hello, Springfield, can we be annexed and have your water and electricity? I bet the savings would more than pay the tax increase and eliminate the fire district charge as well as give us free streetlights (we currently pay for them through CILCO). Let’s get together and pull this west side into the Springfield metro area.

Ed and Theresa Davison
Springfield

Springfield might not need another water source Jan 14 2009

Isn’t it interesting? For decades, Chatham has bought its water from Springfield, under a contract that assures Chatham as much water as it needed when the contract was established, with a provision that Chatham could buy more water as long as Springfield had it to spare. When the two communities started to collide, Springfield started to have water shortages. Whenever they were competing for control of a new subdivision, Springfield responded by not having enough water to meet Chatham’s needs. That was the real reason Chatham started exploring other options. 

It was after Chatham’s engineers proved the Sangamon River aquifer could meet Chatham’s needs that Springfield became interested in buying a gravel pit they would be able to pump from — surely part of the same aquifer Chatham proposes to use. Riverton now is concerned that Springfield will dry up Riverton’s water supply. Does Springfield intend to pump from the source Riverton and Chatham developed, and then sell our water back to us? 

Actually, once Chatham’s new system is online, if other communities that have expressed interest start buying from Chatham, Springfield’s water market will drop by 10 percent or more. That might mean Springfield won’t need another source. 

Robert Gruen
Chatham

Chatham president misses the point 
Otto Fafogli
Feb 24 2015
Water ‘war’ costly to Chatham residents 
Daniel W. Kent
May 20 2014
Chatham water is terrible 
Curtis Barmes, Chatham 
June 1, 2012 
No excuse for Chatham water ‘surprise’ 
Jim Wiggins, Chatham 
Jan. 29, 2012 
SJ-R views city differently
Jan. 12, 2012 
Irritated by Chatham electric rate hikes Paul Edwards, Chatham 
Sept. 7, 2010 
Keep eye on CWLP, Chatham dealings John Levalley Springifeld
March 24 2010 
Our Opinion: 
Chatham ought to look again at water figures  
Sept. 24 2009
​Tom Skelly:
Chatham residents deserve straight answers
 Jan 27 2015
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

The State Journal-Register welcomes letters to the editor from readers. Our guidelines:

Length: 250 words max.

Required: Writer’s name, address, hometown and a phone number where he or she can be reached to verify authorship. (Addresses will not be published.)

Frequency: Writers are limited to one published letter per month.

Editing: All letters are subject to editing for length, style and content. Publication is at our discretion, and we do not guarantee every letter will appear in print or online. We also do not guarantee a publication date.

How to submit: We prefer letters be sent to us by email at letters@sj-r.com. 
However, we also accept letters that are mailed to:

The State Journal-Register
Attn: Editor
P.O. Box 219
Springfield IL 62705-0219

When submitting a hand-written letter, please be sure the writing is legible and that the author’s printed name, hometown and phone number are included.

State Journal Register
Tom Gray: 
The Chatham-Springfield water war is over 
Feb 20 2015
Wayne Lovern: 
Anger won’t solve Chatham water problems 
Dec 28 2014
More on Chatham, New Berlin, CWLP and water
March 21, 2010
Tom Skelly: 
Sadly, mission accomplished in Chatham 
May 12 2014
Likes Chatham water 
June 6 2012
Village Voices
Chatham Water Timeline