Should Gatley Join a Regional Water System? A Grade 11 Debate Kit

Resolution: "The town of Gatley should transfer ownership and operation of its water system to the Rathbone Regional Water Authority."

Background: Gatley is a fictional town created for this debate. Its water system serves 2,400 customer connections. It employs one full-time licensed operator, who plans to retire within three years, and most of its distribution mains have not been replaced since the system was built. The town has issued two boil-water advisories in the past five years after main failures. The Rathbone Regional Water Authority, also fictional, runs the water systems of six nearby communities. Each member community holds one seat on its board. Under the proposed transfer, Gatley's system, debts, and rate-setting authority would all pass permanently to Rathbone.

The national backdrop is real. EPA's most recent needs assessment estimates that $625 billion in drinking-water infrastructure investment is needed over 20 years. Distribution pipes account for about two-thirds of that need, and a water main breaks somewhere in the United States roughly every two minutes. The ASCE 2025 Infrastructure Report Card gave the nation's drinking water a C-. Meanwhile, roughly one-third of the water workforce becomes retirement-eligible within the next decade. Small systems often struggle hardest to replace departing licensed operators.

Format and roles: Two teams of four to six face each other. Each team delivers an opening constructive speech, one cross-examination round, and a closing rebuttal. A moderator keeps time, and two or three judges score against the rubric. During the preparation session, every team member contributes to the written case brief. Each speech must name the evidence it uses.

Case for the transfer:

1. The scale of national infrastructure need falls heaviest on small systems. EPA estimates $625 billion in drinking-water investment is needed over 20 years, much of it for distribution pipes like Gatley's. A system with 2,400 connections spreads those costs across very few bills. (Source: EPA Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment.)
2. The workforce problem is immediate for Gatley. Roughly one-third of the national water workforce becomes retirement-eligible within the next decade, and Gatley's only licensed operator retires within three. A regional authority with a larger certified staff can cover shifts, vacations, and emergencies that a one-operator town cannot. (Source: EPA America's Water Sector Workforce Initiative; AWWA State of the Water Industry.)
3. Gatley's system already shows the strain, with two boil-water advisories in five years. A fictional engineering review prepared for this debate concludes the town cannot fund its main replacement schedule from its own rates at any realistic level. (Illustrative assessment created for this debate.)
4. Consolidation pools purchasing, engineering, and compliance expertise across seven communities. The ASCE 2025 Report Card's C- for drinking water suggests standing still is the riskier choice. (Source: ASCE 2025 Report Card for America's Infrastructure.)

Case against the transfer:

1. The transfer is permanent, while the problems that prompted it may turn out to be temporary. Once assets and rate-setting authority pass to Rathbone, Gatley holds one seat on a seven-member board. Decisions about Gatley's rates, projects, and priorities can be outvoted by six other communities with their own needs. (Structural feature of the proposed agreement described in the Background.)
2. Rate harmonization can move money away from Gatley. The fictional Gatley Ratepayers Committee argues in testimony written for this debate that a regional rate could rise to fund other members' projects first. Rathbone sets one schedule for all seven communities. (Illustrative testimony created for this debate.)
3. Alternatives short of full transfer exist. Gatley could contract with Rathbone for staffing while keeping ownership, pursue state small-system funding, or share an operator with a neighboring town. Each option preserves the choice to consolidate later on better terms. (Options framed by the fictional engineering review created for this debate.)
4. A local system answers to neighbors. The national statistics that show strain, including a main break roughly every two minutes nationwide, describe systems of every size and ownership type. Consolidation is not an automatic cure, and accountability to local voters is a real asset a town gives up only once. (Source: ASCE Report Card talking points, with the accountability point drawn from the Background.)