Community Equity vs. Approved Sewer

SEELEY LAKE - It is clear by now that getting full, accurate and timely information about the proposed sewer project is like “getting blood from a stone.”

To have confidence in the costly project, one needs time to think about all the implications. Forty years with no escape clause is a long time to be stuck.

The sewer board has already announced four quick-fix, unfair policies.

First, debt service is not being pro-rated by assessed property value as are school and other debts. Sewer debt will fall proportionately heavier on low- and fixed-income residents.

Second, all hook-ups will be charged the same amount rather than a fee based on actual usage. This policy causes low-use individuals or couples to pay the same as significantly higher-use families, rental complexes or businesses.

That is not fair. The least financially capable portion of the sewer community, as well as limited-use seasonal residents, is thus forced to subsidize high-users and for-profit ventures.

By following the model set by our water district, a small management fee plus volume of water used each month, a more equitable fee structure could have been set.

Thirdly, policy requires property owners in Phases 2, 3 and 4 to pay towards the debt service (and perhaps for usage) for years before they MAY get service.

To date, no efforts have been made to do the engineering needed to estimate future costs. Phases 2, 3 and 4 were not included in the initial construction due to assumed high costs, yet they will cost even more if put in place years later.

There is absolutely no guarantee that those phases will ever get built. If they do, annual fees for all phases will reflect additional debt service and wastewater treatment costs.

Board members SAY they will get more grants—neither a given, nor a guarantee. Saying that “we might be able to get grants, though competition will be extremely tough,” would be more forthright and accurate.

As adult voters, do you believe in the Tooth Fairy? That the financially-limited should subsidize for-profit businesses? That our seasonal residents should been seen as cash cows to be exorbitantly milked at every turn?

That decisions on sewer policy will be any more effectively devised and fairly applied? WHAT MIRACLE WILL REVERSE YEARS OF INEPTNESS AND MISLEADING BEHAVIOR?

Forth, the ZERO formal, graspable information policy pursued by the sewer board makes it impossible to know what else is intended.

I have spoken for hours with managers of EPA-approved “model water quality units” across the country. To a person, they reported solid environmental outcomes and very reasonable costs using comprehensive water quality districts and site-specific sewer alternatives.

Within those districts, leaders tailor solutions to specific wastewater treatment problems rather than taking the wasteful and expensive, “one-size fits all” approach.

Alternatives to a very costly sewer system offer a much better opportunity to respect our social, economic and physical environments.

We CAN identify all of our water quality problems and solve them equitably and economically. Reject the current sewer proposal and form a water quality district for the entire Clearwater River watershed.

Many outside the current sewer district have loudly voiced their enthusiasm for the sewer project and “saving the lake.”

With a Clearwater Water Quality District, they too can have their wastewater treatment issues addressed. They can become active partners, participating directly in devising equitable solutions, rather than sideliners cheering us into financial disaster.

 

Reader Comments(0)