|
Post by jackbquick on Jan 22, 2015 10:35:08 GMT -4
Why don't you get the concept, the money you are using to build that system does not allow for more homes compounding the problem. You don't get to make the rules when you use someone else's money. Pay for your own ride on that bus. State funds are for homeowners. Not speculators. We have a constitution that protects all property owners. The State doesn't get to pick winners or losers with our tax dollars. That's why we have a judicial system. We will see what the courts have to say about O'Malley and his repressive regime that tried to trash property rights for 8 years.
|
|
|
Post by oriolesfan on Jan 22, 2015 11:44:43 GMT -4
Guarantee those with lots will be able to tie into it and build
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Jan 22, 2015 12:10:28 GMT -4
Guarantee those with lots will be able to tie into it and build I care about property rights. I want the courts to do what is legal. Not sure if they will or not but it is all you have left after the government takes all your other rights away from you.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Jan 22, 2015 12:20:46 GMT -4
dano, lainey and shorelovinit,
I hear you all. 20 years ago, as I said, there was no "Flush Tax" or any save the bay initiatives that were in position to assist with installing sewer systems or upgrade septic systems. Today, there is, and these funds are being used all over the state to help with saving the bay etc. The limitation on the number of new homes within SKI is within the EXISTING communities. No different than the empty lots that existed in Bay City and Cloverfields when you all got sewer. Also, the limitation on in-fill was consolidated by combining adjoining, 10,000 s.f. lots, owned by the same person(s) into 20,000 s.f lots reducing over 1600 single, small lots, to 632 larger, build-able lots. If a single owner of a single lot that is 10,000 s.f and has no adjoining lot, that owner is allowed to build. From what I understand all the "legal" elements allowing the limitation on in-fill has been vetted and approved. Obviously, any lawyer will gladly accept fees to file a lawsuit, no matter what chance it has to win, from land owners who feel shut out of this project.
shorelovinit, you made an excellent point about what the residents of Cloverfields and Bay City have to pay as part of the debt support for the expanded sewer plant. There was a meeting last year with the commissioners regarding this exact topic. The rate set for homeowners in Bay City and Cloverfields was based on service eventually being provided to the 9 communities in SKI. If the SKI project does not happen, from what I recall from that meeting, in 4 - 5 years, with no new customers coming on line from SKI to assist in paying the debt service for the expanded plant, homeowners in your two communities would see their rates go up 20 - 25%. This has always been the plan. What has held it up is inaction on the part of the commissioners and opponents to the SKI project who did not want to see additional growth down there. The grant from the "Flush Tax" is designed to help with the debt service on the project and assist in keeping the costs down for existing SKI homeowners. One of the oft made comments about this project is the cost to the older homeowners in SKI, many more than there is on the north end, who would be hurt financially even at the $100 a month. BTW, that $100 is a two part element: Approximately $30 a month for the STEP system sewer services and $70 a month to carry the debt service on the hook-up fee of Approximately $12,500 for 20 years. After 20 years the monthly costs drop to whatever the current service fees would be for sewer.
The next step for this project is the engineering for the trunk line, pipes within the communities and installation engineering for on-site STEP tanks etc. to be voted upon by the commissioners to fund.
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Jan 22, 2015 15:51:48 GMT -4
BurnerBill, I agree with everything you just posted, except one caveat: the next step is to reply to the lawsuit as it is seeking an injunction to stop the project. From what I have seen, the County is asking the courts to dismiss the case. We have to let this play out in court before any work can proceed.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Jan 22, 2015 16:07:58 GMT -4
BurnerBill, I agree with everything you just posted, except one caveat: the next step is to reply to the lawsuit as it is seeking an injunction to stop the project. From what I have seen, the County is asking the courts to dismiss the case. We have to let this play out in court before any work can proceed. What's the basis of the suit? To simply stop the project as a whole by the minority, with money to spend, (I can see QACA behind this) who are against it or some land owners who want to build who have been shut out due to the in-fill limitation?
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Jan 23, 2015 9:08:13 GMT -4
Kevin Quinn and what I assume is his company, QA Research and Development, are suing because their lots were yanked out of the project by the State. He filed in U.S. District court. He is suing the county, the sanitary district, and MDE. He threatened to sue, see the bay times, in November when the state gave us the $$$ with their strings attached to our plan. He is not a QACA or KIDL member to my knowledge, but then again, neither I am, so what do I know?
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Jan 23, 2015 9:21:55 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Jan 23, 2015 10:00:54 GMT -4
Kevin Quinn and what I assume is his company, QA Research and Development, are suing because their lots were yanked out of the project by the State. He filed in U.S. District court. He is suing the county, the sanitary district, and MDE. He threatened to sue, see the bay times, in November when the state gave us the $$$ with their strings attached to our plan. He is not a QACA or KIDL member to my knowledge, but then again, neither I am, so what do I know? OK, THANKS. I recall him making statements at the SKI Sewer meeting at KIHS last year. He is one of those land owners who must feel they are "entitled" to build on the land they own and the county can't stop him? Is it written anywhere that when you buy land, it comes with a guarantee you can build on it? I believe the land he owns has no roads or other infrastructure like the in-fill lots the county is allowing in this project.
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Jan 23, 2015 11:08:14 GMT -4
Exactly, he has land with either no roads or private unimproved roads. The state money is not to be used to develop new roads even within existing communities. The vacant lot on an existing road next door to a residence is not excluded. Sewer or STEP was never promised to anybody in this county. It was speculation only.
|
|
dw
New Member
Posts: 11
|
Post by dw on Jan 23, 2015 11:10:24 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Jan 23, 2015 12:26:00 GMT -4
Exactly, he has land with either no roads or private unimproved roads. The state money is not to be used to develop new roads even within existing communities. The vacant lot on an existing road next door to a residence is not excluded. Sewer or STEP was never promised to anybody in this county. It was speculation only. You win some and you lose some. Quinn is losing here and he does not like it. I guess he not only wants to win, but, have the state/county build the roads to allow his lands to be developed too?
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Jan 23, 2015 13:26:50 GMT -4
Exactly, he has land with either no roads or private unimproved roads. The state money is not to be used to develop new roads even within existing communities. The vacant lot on an existing road next door to a residence is not excluded. Sewer or STEP was never promised to anybody in this county. It was speculation only. He has just as much right to sue as QACA has to sue everything and everyone. Let the courts decide his fate instead of politicians who have their own personal agendas. Including Governors! See 4 seasons wetland permit. Maybe he gets some monies and the lots do not get built and he wins and those who do not want more lots built win.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Jan 23, 2015 13:35:42 GMT -4
Exactly, he has land with either no roads or private unimproved roads. The state money is not to be used to develop new roads even within existing communities. The vacant lot on an existing road next door to a residence is not excluded. Sewer or STEP was never promised to anybody in this county. It was speculation only. He has just as much right to sue as QACA has to sue everything and everyone. Let the courts decide his fate instead of politicians who have their own personal agendas. Including Governors! See 4 seasons wetland permit. Maybe he gets some monies and the lots do not get built and he wins and those who do not want more lots built win. This is the compromise in the middle of two extremes: Build it all or build out nothing. Someone will be unhappy, unfortunately. Quinn will have to prove the state/county has no right to limit his right to build on his property. My understanding is you need a building permit. Is a property owner entitled to get a building permit all the time? Is there a law to that effect?
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Jan 23, 2015 14:35:28 GMT -4
He has just as much right to sue as QACA has to sue everything and everyone. Let the courts decide his fate instead of politicians who have their own personal agendas. Including Governors! See 4 seasons wetland permit. Maybe he gets some monies and the lots do not get built and he wins and those who do not want more lots built win. This is the compromise in the middle of two extremes: Build it all or build out nothing. Someone will be unhappy, unfortunately. Quinn will have to prove the state/county has no right to limit his right to build on his property. My understanding is you need a building permit. Is a property owner entitled to get a building permit all the time? Is there a law to that effect? I understand but there was no compromise for Kevin. He is out almost 100%. Maybe it was his fault for not working some out with the county in advance like trading residential lots for some Comercial space. Not sure what but...
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Jan 23, 2015 15:28:34 GMT -4
JBQ, Evidently Kevin has no issues with you not getting sewer. He asked the courts for an injunction to stop the whole project.
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Jan 23, 2015 15:45:54 GMT -4
JBQ, Evidently Kevin has no issues with you not getting sewer. He asked the courts for an injunction to stop the whole project. As I read the Quinn complaint, he is not seeking an injunction to stop the project. He is seeking an injunction to stop the consolidation (which I doubt he wins) and to stop the exclusion of large lot blocks (former attorney general seem to think they can leave them out).He is also asking the court to stop the grant because the grant is contingent on leaving out his large block lots and forcing him to combine. If the county includes 400 more lots they can keep the costs the same without the grant. I read through his complaint as well as the county dismissal and both state that Quinn concedes that "addressing the urgent health risk of failing septic tanks" is a "legitimat purpose" page 41 of the county dismissal. It is my understanding from the Public Health Officials that Public Health Trumps All so I doubt his case will stop the State and County from protecting the public but that is what I have been told. I am not a judge. Now what the existing Commissioners do because of their own agenda is up for debate but I am guessing the county will be sued again if they do not follow through with eliminating the public health issue that is documented by those who have the power to say so. MDE Secretary can enforce it and I doubt a Judge will stop the government from quickly eliminating the health risk. Do you have anything to add Lainey?
|
|
|
Post by shorelovinit on Jan 24, 2015 12:36:49 GMT -4
I agree with you Lainey. I'm sick and tired of hearing the Southern Kent Island residents whine about sewer and wanting other Queen Anne County homeowners pay for their expense. My home in Cloverfields wasn't given any state grant or county guarantee that my bill will never be over $100! Why should I and the other Cloverfields and Bay City homeowners have to subsidize those homeowners? What makes them so special? We in Cloverfields had all the lots built out. We didn't want it, but it was done and actually everything worked out ok. Nothing terrible happened. But if Southern Kent Island homeowners don't want infill, leave all the lot owners out. Pay for the system themselves, but don't use my taxes to do it. Pay for it themselves out of their own pocketbooks. Or if they really want to do it right, just put everyone on holding tanks. That way the county will not have to subsidize the homeowners like we have had to subsidize the county's sewer loan for the sewer not having gone down Route 8. What was done borders on criminal. So many residents on the north side of Kent Island have had to pay for the Southern Kent Island homeowners' lack of understanding of the issues.
|
|
|
Post by oriolesfan on Jan 25, 2015 11:27:40 GMT -4
Everybody always wanting something off of others backs.
You want it then pay for it
|
|
|
Post by saildogs on Jan 25, 2015 17:51:35 GMT -4
I have lived on southern Kent Island since 1979 and have heard for years that sewage was coming down Route 8. Hasn't happened yet. It should have been done when Bay City and Cloverfields were done but the county commissioners at that time did not decide to extend sewage to us. I think everyone on this list should remember that the county commissioners are the folks making the sewage decisions and not the SKI residents. Also, homes ON SKI are almost impossible to sell due to the sewage issue.
|
|
|
Post by shorelovinit on Jan 25, 2015 23:49:52 GMT -4
I feel bad for you saildogs. But homeowners in SKI are no different than the lot owners down there in that you all were making investments. Homeowners elsewhere should not have to bail you all out, like the government bailed out the banks. Just because you all can't sell the houses down there isn't our problem. You just made a bad investment. You can't blame the commissioners. You can blame a handful of your residents down there, one who was a commissioner at the time. Another who was on the corrupted Public Works Board. They all drove the train and worked in conjunction with the then sitting commissioners to not run the sewer and to spend our tax funds to pay the debt service. It borders on deceitful fraud and most people don't realize what happened.
|
|
|
Post by deputy on Jan 26, 2015 8:06:43 GMT -4
I feel bad for you saildogs. But homeowners in SKI are no different than the lot owners down there in that you all were making investments. Homeowners elsewhere should not have to bail you all out, like the government bailed out the banks. Just because you all can't sell the houses down there isn't our problem. You just made a bad investment. You can't blame the commissioners. You can blame a handful of your residents down there, one who was a commissioner at the time. Another who was on the corrupted Public Works Board. They all drove the train and worked in conjunction with the then sitting commissioners to not run the sewer and to spend our tax funds to pay the debt service. It borders on deceitful fraud and most people don't realize what happened. There is a BIG difference between the average Joe Homeowner in SKI, and the people who scooped up lots dirt cheap because they "KNEW" that sewer had to be coming and they would make a killing in the market when their $1000. lots jump to $30k with public sewer available. These guys took a risk and don't need to guaranteed anything on the backs of the rest of us. Joe homeowner bought a house to live in that had functioning septic and well AT THE TIME and wasn't IMO looking for huge profits down the road.
|
|
|
Post by deputy on Jan 26, 2015 8:11:09 GMT -4
Why don't you get the concept, the money you are using to build that system does not allow for more homes compounding the problem. You don't get to make the rules when you use someone else's money. Pay for your own ride on that bus. State funds are for homeowners. Not speculators. And again, they tried that in MAYO, AA County, and once the pipes were in front of the lots, the law suits came, then EVERYONE could build, and BUILD they did. GO LOOK AT MAYO The plant is overwhelmed, and now they are working on shutting down the plant and pumping the crap UNDER THE SOUTH RIVER to the Annapolis Plant. You can't win here, no one can except the speculators. They will in the end. big time.
|
|
|
Post by shorelovinit on Jan 26, 2015 8:48:13 GMT -4
Deputy, There really isn't a difference. Whatever they paid for the lot or houses, both knew that sewer would serve the entire community just like it did in Cloverfields and Bay City. It was in the comprehensive plan and the master water and sewer plan. The only ones that your scenario applies to would be those homeowners who purchased 30+ years ago. And if you do those homeowners paid $40,000 or $50,000 for their homes. So with sewer they will be worth $250,000-$300,000. Sounds like a windfall profit to us up in Cloverfields. Why should we have to pay more taxes to help those homeowners out? We shouldn't!
|
|
|
Post by shorelovinit on Jan 26, 2015 8:57:11 GMT -4
Deputy, You can again thank the former Commissioner who lives down there along with her small anti-growth crew. The right way would have been to have what we have water and sewer with the best technology available. We don't have any problems. The commissioners and public works board corrupted the process and pushed for that system because they thought it would help them serve only the houses. They pushed for it and they now are getting an inferior system and now they want us taxpayers in Cloverfields pay for their mistakes. I say no! Live with your mistakes. They are putting in a holding tank with step system anyway, so why not just do a regular holding tank and pump it out? That way they can keep the lot owners from connecting. Like we homeowners in Cloverfields don't want to have to pay another dollar into SKI's mistakes. So homeowners down there lose money..the homes are just investments. Those living down there just made bad investments. Like they say "A home is the largest investment most people will make in their lives."
|
|