The City of Apopka continued its information campaign about the Cross-Connection Program with additional details on its City website, and with a presentation to the City Council at its Match 16th meeting.
"On March 9th, we revised the cross-connection guide to include frequently asked questions that have been posted also on the website," said Public Services Director Deodat Budhu. "And, that guide was also included with the [mailed] utility billing.
On the front page of that guide is a section entitled "Backflow Prevention and What You Need to Know" and it states:
"In its ongoing efforts to protect your drinking water supply, and in accordance with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection’s (FDEP) requirements, the City of Apopka has expanded its’ Cross-Connection Control Program. The ordinance was approved by City Council in December of 2021. This requires testing every two years unless it is a dual check device, which requires maintenance every five years. This is for all residents with an irrigation system or anyone that has a non-potable water source at the property.
Due to the large volume of testing needed to be performed, FDEP has granted the City of Apopka a grace period, as long as you are on an official waitlist from a private company or the City. The City of Apopka will work with FDEP to meet the obligations under Rule 62-555.360.
This program is to prevent City customers' potentially contaminated water from flowing back into the City's drinking water supply through a “CROSS-CONNECTION,” (a physical connection between a drinking water supply and a non-drinking water supply).
The most important tool of the program is the backflow prevention device. This device is installed on your drinking water line between your home or business and the drinking water meter. Backflow preventers come in many shapes and sizes depending on use and application. The City’s Water Maintenance Department will help you to determine which backflow prevention device is right for your property and how often you need to have it tested by a certified technician."
To review the guide, go here.
Budhu also informed the Council that 1,886 resident calls were received by the City about the program.
Commissioner Doug Bankson was grateful for the presentation after receiving multiple emails and calls from residents about the subject.
"There's just been a lot of confusion," said Bankson. "I'm assuming everyone [on Counci] has been getting the same emails and the concern. I just wanted to make sure that there's clarity for the people. It seemed that many of them were under the impression that it was the City that was responsible for maintaining the Backflow Preventor. And I want to make sure I have clarity that I'm explaining it correctly, that this is something that is part of the individual homeowner's system when you get an irrigation system put in its part of that system. So this is owned by the homeowner, not the City. Is that correct?"
"That is correct," said Budhu.
Bankson went on to confirm several other questions he received from residents.
"I've explained it in the sense that just like we have filters for air conditioner systems... and if for some reason they deemed that it could be harmful, and they put a mandate that we [the City] would remind them to check their own system. We don't have that. But we do with the water because of the possible issue of the siphoning from a broken line. So basically, this is just our responsibility. And where we hadn't done... what we had missed... was just simply reminding them for their own sake and their own health that they should be testing these on a periodic basis. Am I right?"
"You're correct," said Budhu.
"Okay, and that's where some of that confusion has been," said Bankson. "Because there was an impression that because we didn't maintain, and we were supposed to... that's why people are getting these big bills. I've tried to relay that. And so the best place for them to find that information that I've explained would be on the website, as you [Budhu] stated here."
"That's correct," said Budhu.
"Is there a way... looking at some of the systems that some of the other [municipalities] have done, where they've just gone ahead and charged a fee by the month? Obviously, it would need to be higher to cover this system. Is that something we've looked into? That we're considering? Are we just kind of starting here and keeping it open? In case this doesn't flow well for us?"
"That's a good question," said Budhu. "In fact, we are just going with the information that we provided to you. There is no discussion that I'm aware of for any alternative."
But according to Apopka Mayor Bryan Nelson, getting everyone compliant first would make more sense than changing the program midstream.
"The problem is now that we've started the program, we've got to get everybody in compliance," he said. "Then, if we want to take it on as a City responsibility on a monthly basis, we can do it. But for us to start in June when you got one-third of people already replaced, then it wouldn't be fair to them to start out with the $3 a month when the others haven't done anything and would get the $3 a month. So we've got to wait until we get everybody into compliance."
"Would the $3 a month be something that is charged to every homeowner or just those who have backflow preventers? Bankson asked.
"Everybody that has an irrigation system," said Paula Brown, the Cross Connection Coordinator for Apopka. "So it's only charged [to those with backflow preventers] the extra $3 fee."
"We've just got to be able to protect them from people who are just unscrupulous in their business practices," said Bankson. "So, you know, there are those who want to... who prefer to do it for themselves. We want to keep that liberty for them, obviously. But then there are many who would say 'I just would prefer that the city handled that. And it's a fee, and I don't have to think about it.' I'm just glad those things are beginning to be clarified. And you know, we had a short time to do the rollout. And there was some confusion involved. But I'm glad that we have that on the website and hopefully different ones who may watch tonight can understand that more and I am still in favor of that other option if that becomes something that's just more feasible in the future."
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here