danw
New Member
Posts: 6
|
Post by danw on Apr 14, 2014 12:33:35 GMT -4
I copied this from his website. Would it be better to post a link instead? ----- To: Those Who Have Asked Me to Stop the SKI Sewer Project From: Bob Simmons, QAC Commissioner Date: April 4, 2014
You have asked me to stop the SKI sewer project. Based on the information that I have now, I plan to support the project. My support is based on the information below. If you have additional information or new information becomes available at the public hearing to be held at KIHS on May 1, I will be happy to consider it in deciding whether to try to stop the project.
When I was elected as a County Commissioner in 2010, one of my platform positions was No Sewer Down Route 8 without a Court Order. Now I am recommending to residents of Kent Island and the citizens of the County that they support a compromise position to put sewer down Route 8 with limited growth measures included.
The problem for residents on Southern Kent Island (SKI) started long ago when developers created neighborhoods on SKI before the County even had a Planning Department that would have examined them for long range sustainability. Many of the lots were designed to be cabins or cottages for weekend or vacation occupancy only. Most of the lots did not include enough space to meet the requirements for a modern septic system or reserve space for extra drain fields when the first drainfield failed.
This has been such a long standing problem, that it was even included in the 1993 Comprehensive Plan and the 1975 Comprehensive Water & Sewer Plan. We have failing septic systems on most of Kent Island based on current State regulations that require a certain amount of separation between the highest groundwater level and the bottom of the septic drain field.
Some argue that there mere lack of separation does not constitute a failing septic system. They contend no one has gotten sick or died from anything that has been traced to a septic tank. There’s no doubt though that most of the lots on SKI do not have the required separation between the drain field and the high water level, and could not pass more modern perk tests, and therefore cannot be built upon.
Some say that techniques can and will be developed that will allow sewerage disposal on individual sites on SKI, but my conversations with State officials and my personal experience with government indicates that will not happen within the lifetime of any of us living now.
With a freeze put on additional square footage added to houses in the area, and no new houses being allowed to be built, the area is not progressing economically as it should. Many houses on SKI are being neglected and not being used to their maximum potential because of these constraints. These disadvantages were greatly accentuated in 2013 when the State began enforcing a policy that said houses could not be sold unless an inspection proved they did not have a failing septic system or unless they installed a pump out tank in lieu of a septic system. This policy will accelerate the physical and financial deterioration of SKI.
The County appointed an Advisory Board to the Sanitary Commission to study sewer down Route 8 and commissioned a professional study costing several hundred thousand dollars to figure out what to do about the septic problem on SKI. This report suggested several possibilities one of which was Plan F.
Plan F called for using a S.T.E.P. (Sewer Tank Effluent Pumping) system which collected only the fluids from individual, specially-designed septic tanks through a pipe little bigger than a garden hose to the existing central processing sewer plant. This system would be used as a vehicle to limit sewer connections to the existing houses only, and was supposed to cost less than a conventional sewer system or the vacuum sewer system that we normally use.
When I began analyzing the figures, they did not make sense: the cheap system was costing more than the normal system. I made a study of this and with the aid of our Public Works Department, was able to lower the estimated sewer costs by $11 million. I worked with the State to see if funds from the Bay Restoration Act could be used to fund this effort. After months of exchanges back and forth, the State reached the conclusion that they would make roughly $11 million in funds available with a plan that allowed a moderate amount of additional houses to be built in the existing communities. The final plan called for is a lot consolidation process that would reduce the number of lots that could be built on in nine neighborhoods from 1,600 to roughly to 658, of which 560 will likely be built upon.
Why do I support this compromise? First, it will relieve a tremendous amount of economic strain on the SKI residents because they will finally be able to add on to or sell their houses. Not only would this make a lot of financial sense to the SKI citizens, but it will stop the fall in value of housing in that area, and over time increase the taxable income to the whole County, helping to keep the tax rate lower.
Second, but not far behind that in importance is the impact on the environment, specifically the Bay. Properly working septic systems turn out effluent that has 60 to 90 mg. of nitrogen per liter. The S.T.E.P. effluent will now go to an environmentally Enhanced Nutrient Removal (ENR) treatment plant that will release it into the Bay at roughly 3 mg. per liter.
With the S.T.E.P. system approach there is not only environmental help, but financial help for the County because the Chesapeake Bay Watershed Implementation (WIP) requires the County (which means its property owners) to make significant reductions in surface and ground water going into the Bay. This program for SKI will meet 20% of the WIP goals of the County at the same time it is providing many other benefits for the residents of SKI.
The third reason I support the compromise is the health issue itself. No one seriously doubts that at least some of those existing septic systems are putting untreated or raw sewage on the surface of KI from time to time. All it takes is one autopsy report linking a death from a resident with a failing septic system to have the State step in and ,with a Court Order, require us to put sewer down Rt. 8. When and if it comes I am not at all sure if the Court Order is going to have limits on land use nor limits on building on SKI nor have I any idea that an $11 million grant is going to come with it, nor that the State will have funds available at that time.
When you consider the alternates that are available, I believe the combination of lower a cost sewer system (S.T.E.P.), combined with government aid, combined with a moderate increase in the number of houses, combined with the environmental help to the Bay, makes this a worthwhile compromise solution for the citizens of SKI.
People have raised some questions about the risk associated with this compromise. Everything has some risk. To do nothing is risky in that the State may force action that we have no voice in. To do nothing may result in houses being abandoned because there is no market for them. The lifetime investment that people made in their homes may be lost. The risk of illness from septic fluids is still there, even though they have not yet been recorded. The excess nitrogen going into the Bay every day is a risk. The sooner we can decrease these risks the better.
I believe that this is a good program. I am proud to have played a major role in developing it, and I urge your support.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Apr 14, 2014 17:34:01 GMT -4
Notice the balance Commissioner Simmons has in this letter. No inflammatory statements and the biggest statement made here is his switch from being a staunch "No Sewer" advocate to one who sees the forest for the trees. There is a point where something has to be done and the longer we wait the more costly it is for everyone in many respects.
One can understand how many folks who live in SKI are most fearful of the "expense" this will entail plus the inconvenience of change. Whoever wants to learn they've got a new bill waiting in the wings? Plus this is something everyone will know is happening and not getting a "surprise" at the wrong time when your septic does fail, and it will. At least here the county is supporting the SKI residents with the costs versus the higher costs to replace a failed septic field, on one's own, with no favorable financing and assistance.
BTW - two more septic fields have been failed in SKI recently. One just prior to a sale and another after the new owners moved in. County has mandated holding tanks for both. Who wants that surprise one day?
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Apr 14, 2014 20:37:19 GMT -4
Notice the balance Commissioner Simmons has in this letter. No inflammatory statements and the biggest statement made here is his switch from being a staunch "No Sewer" advocate to one who sees the forest for the trees. There is a point where something has to be done and the longer we wait the more costly it is for everyone in many respects. One can understand how many folks who live in SKI are most fearful of the "expense" this will entail plus the inconvenience of change. Whoever wants to learn they've got a new bill waiting in the wings? Plus this is something everyone will know is happening and not getting a "surprise" at the wrong time when your septic does fail, and it will. At least here the county is supporting the SKI residents with the costs versus the higher costs to replace a failed septic field, on one's own, with no favorable financing and assistance. BTW - two more septic fields have been failed in SKI recently. One just prior to a sale and another after the new owners moved in. County has mandated holding tanks for both. Who wants that surprise one day? He doesn't see the "forest for the trees", just like any other politician he see the votes in the ballot box. A switch by another name is also a FLIP-FLOP
|
|
|
Post by alleycat on Apr 14, 2014 22:42:56 GMT -4
Is every change of mind, perhaps based on new evidence, always suspect?
|
|
|
Post by deputy on Apr 15, 2014 6:25:57 GMT -4
Is every change of mind, perhaps based on new evidence, always suspect? In an election year, this big and sudden of a change.... yeah, always. much like the YMCA flip,
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Apr 15, 2014 7:34:34 GMT -4
Is every change of mind, perhaps based on new evidence, always suspect? Agreed Alleycat. This is the commissioner who walked in a KI parade with a no sewer sign down route 8 four years ago. Most of his support base is the anti-everything growth group and they want to say he flip flops for the votes? He is probably going to lose the reelection for this but after 4 years of studying the issue and speaking with the experts at the health department and MDE, he came to the conclusion that it is either going to be trucked out for $700 a month or pumped out for $100 a month. Shame on him for doing what is best for the residents of the SKI communities at the expense of his supporters who want zero growth and change.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Apr 15, 2014 10:50:00 GMT -4
Notice the balance Commissioner Simmons has in this letter. No inflammatory statements and the biggest statement made here is his switch from being a staunch "No Sewer" advocate to one who sees the forest for the trees. There is a point where something has to be done and the longer we wait the more costly it is for everyone in many respects. One can understand how many folks who live in SKI are most fearful of the "expense" this will entail plus the inconvenience of change. Whoever wants to learn they've got a new bill waiting in the wings? Plus this is something everyone will know is happening and not getting a "surprise" at the wrong time when your septic does fail, and it will. At least here the county is supporting the SKI residents with the costs versus the higher costs to replace a failed septic field, on one's own, with no favorable financing and assistance. BTW - two more septic fields have been failed in SKI recently. One just prior to a sale and another after the new owners moved in. County has mandated holding tanks for both. Who wants that surprise one day? He doesn't see the "forest for the trees", just like any other politician he see the votes in the ballot box. A switch by another name is also a FLIP-FLOP bchevy.. not a surprising response from you given your history of comments on the SKI issue. When someone examines ALL the information and facts and then changes their original stance, is it always with an agenda in mind? How about simply doing the RIGHT THING??!!
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Apr 15, 2014 10:51:22 GMT -4
Is every change of mind, perhaps based on new evidence, always suspect? In an election year, this big and sudden of a change.... yeah, always. much like the YMCA flip, deputy.. you and bchevy are kindred spirits.. think alike. No one can EVER change their stance after reviewing information and facts?
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Apr 15, 2014 10:54:42 GMT -4
Is every change of mind, perhaps based on new evidence, always suspect? In an election year, this big and sudden of a change.... yeah, always. much like the YMCA flip, alleycat... for bchevy and deputy, who have a history of snide/negative comments regarding the SKI project, anyone who winds up supporting it is suspect. If you go onto the KIDL Facebook page, they continue to spout this project will lead to THOUSANDS of new homes in SKI when the county has specifically indicated a goal to LIMIT the in-fill with a current projection of around 600 homes or so. The facts do not interest KIDL and the "No Growth" folks!
|
|
|
Post by deputy on Apr 16, 2014 7:03:58 GMT -4
In an election year, this big and sudden of a change.... yeah, always. much like the YMCA flip, deputy.. you and bchevy are kindred spirits.. think alike. No one can EVER change their stance after reviewing information and facts? Sure they can. They do it all the time, it's the timing that make it suspect. That's all. If you can't at least see that much something is wrong.
|
|
|
Post by deputy on Apr 16, 2014 8:55:30 GMT -4
In an election year, this big and sudden of a change.... yeah, always. much like the YMCA flip, alleycat... for bchevy and deputy, who have a history of snide/negative comments regarding the SKI project, anyone who winds up supporting it is suspect. If you go onto the KIDL Facebook page, they continue to spout this project will lead to THOUSANDS of new homes in SKI when the county has specifically indicated a goal to LIMIT the in-fill with a current projection of around 600 homes or so. The facts do not interest KIDL and the "No Growth" folks! For someone always quoting "truth" and "facts" it's amazing how you can't see the woods for the trees. Someone else posts an opinion anything remotely against yours and you attack. What you call snide and negative just happen to be the other side of the coin, the side that you and JB refuse to even look at. Go back to bchevy's post about AA County and Mayo, it was billed and sold as limited growth, then the lawsuits came. You will not be able to hold landowners back from building and connecting when there's a pipe in front of their property. 1000's of home will eventually come, count the lots and do the easy math. And by the way, you and JB keep spouting the $100. a month nonsense. If you truly believe you'll see that, or that it will stay at that price for any amount of time, I've got waterfront property in Arizona I'd like to show you.
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Apr 16, 2014 12:07:16 GMT -4
limited growth....I've heard that before. They were going to limit growth in Bay City and Cloverfields. Nope, didn't happen as planned. We need a plan G, one where the county buys all the homes with failing septics and demolishes them. We are thereby decreasing supply and increasing existing home values. Economics 101. We stabilized the market, did not increase our population and demand for services, the tax lost on the bought back homes will be offset by the increasing values of the remaining homes. Did I miss anything? Oh and we save the bay one failed septic at a time. Eliminate the waste.
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Apr 16, 2014 13:35:40 GMT -4
alleycat... for bchevy and deputy, who have a history of snide/negative comments regarding the SKI project, anyone who winds up supporting it is suspect. If you go onto the KIDL Facebook page, they continue to spout this project will lead to THOUSANDS of new homes in SKI when the county has specifically indicated a goal to LIMIT the in-fill with a current projection of around 600 homes or so. The facts do not interest KIDL and the "No Growth" folks! For someone always quoting "truth" and "facts" it's amazing how you can't see the woods for the trees. Someone else posts an opinion anything remotely against yours and you attack. What you call snide and negative just happen to be the other side of the coin, the side that you and JB refuse to even look at. Go back to bchevy's post about AA County and Mayo, it was billed and sold as limited growth, then the lawsuits came. You will not be able to hold landowners back from building and connecting when there's a pipe in front of their property. 1000's of home will eventually come, count the lots and do the easy math.And by the way, you and JB keep spouting the $100. a month nonsense. If you truly believe you'll see that, or that it will stay at that price for any amount of time, I've got waterfront property in Arizona I'd like to show you. I do not have any issues with contrary opinion, it is the manner it is being said and rather condescending. Secondly, please show me where the 1000's of homes is going to come from in SKI when the sewer is run? Are there new developments you know of in addition to the 9 in scope? Please remember it is limited to already existing communities and within those communities, the NC20 ordnance will limit the number of buildable lots to 600 or so. Thirdly, what information do you have to counter the $100 a month expense figure? Do you know what it consists of? If you provide me with some factual information which can counter this, great! Just don't make an offhand remark this is not to be believed. I've attended the hearings in Annapolis and it is very clear this project would be a "No Go" without the limitations the county is effecting on in-fill growth. Please provide me with your intel this is all a lie, which it appears you claim. Lastly, as for waterfront property in AZ, plenty of lakes there, which one are you on?
|
|
|
Post by burnerbill on Apr 16, 2014 13:41:37 GMT -4
limited growth....I've heard that before. They were going to limit growth in Bay City and Cloverfields. Nope, didn't happen as planned. We need a plan G, one where the county buys all the homes with failing septics and demolishes them. We are thereby decreasing supply and increasing existing home values. Economics 101. We stabilized the market, did not increase our population and demand for services, the tax lost on the bought back homes will be offset by the increasing values of the remaining homes. Did I miss anything? Oh and we save the bay one failed septic at a time. Eliminate the waste. well, Lainey.. that line takes the cake! Are you implying the tax payers of QA county would be willing to buy me, and other residents of SKI, out? A much more expensive plan than running the sewer line given the number of homes. You do know that most homes in the affected communities have technically failing septic systems. It is not just about the ability to flush the toilet. Lastly, it appears your stance is no new residents should be allowed on the island? When do you want the fences and toll gates to go up?
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Apr 16, 2014 14:56:56 GMT -4
For someone always quoting "truth" and "facts" it's amazing how you can't see the woods for the trees. Someone else posts an opinion anything remotely against yours and you attack. What you call snide and negative just happen to be the other side of the coin, the side that you and JB refuse to even look at. Go back to bchevy's post about AA County and Mayo, it was billed and sold as limited growth, then the lawsuits came. You will not be able to hold landowners back from building and connecting when there's a pipe in front of their property. 1000's of home will eventually come, count the lots and do the easy math. And by the way, you and JB keep spouting the $100. a month nonsense. If you truly believe you'll see that, or that it will stay at that price for any amount of time, I've got waterfront property in Arizona I'd like to show you. I do not have any issues with contrary opinion, it is the manner it is being said and rather condescending. Secondly, please show me where the 1000's of homes is going to come from in SKI when the sewer is run? Are there new developments you know of in addition to the 9 in scope? Please remember it is limited to already existing communities and within those communities, the NC20 ordnance will limit the number of buildable lots to 600 or so. Thirdly, what information do you have to counter the $100 a month expense figure? Do you know what it consists of? If you provide me with some factual information which can counter this, great! Just don't make an offhand remark this is not to be believed. I've attended the hearings in Annapolis and it is very clear this project would be a "No Go" without the limitations the county is effecting on in-fill growth. Please provide me with your intel this is all a lie, which it appears you claim. Lastly, as for waterfront property in AZ, plenty of lakes there, which one are you on? Hey Burner, If you take the position the earth is round based on all evidence available to you, Deputy would take the side that the earth is flat and just tell you you are out of your mind if you believe the earth is round based on all factual data available. The county has stated over and over again that the monthly fee for sewer for the homeowners will be no greater than $100. They have all the numbers broken down on paper on the SKI sewer website if anyone cares to take the time to actually look it over. The State has backed them up on that because they have reviewed the numbers as part of the grant fund agreement. What proof does Deputy have to back up his claim except there is some grand conspiracy against the homeowners in the impacted communities by the county and state to stick it to them. Give me a break! Sounds like sour grapes to me. One positive note of progress, Deputy use to spout off thousands of vacant lots but it looks like you have got him down to 1,000. Now That's Progress.
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Apr 16, 2014 15:08:43 GMT -4
limited growth....I've heard that before. They were going to limit growth in Bay City and Cloverfields. Nope, didn't happen as planned. We need a plan G, one where the county buys all the homes with failing septics and demolishes them. We are thereby decreasing supply and increasing existing home values. Economics 101. We stabilized the market, did not increase our population and demand for services, the tax lost on the bought back homes will be offset by the increasing values of the remaining homes. Did I miss anything? Oh and we save the bay one failed septic at a time. Eliminate the waste. OR we could round up all the crazies and put them in an institution and move all the homeowners in the impacted communities into their homes. We can start with Lainey and Deputy!
|
|
|
Post by overboost44 on Apr 16, 2014 21:58:40 GMT -4
Lastly, as for waterfront property in AZ, plenty of lakes there, which one are you on? Hey Burner, If you take the position the earth is round based on all evidence available to you, Deputy would take the side that the earth is flat and just tell you you are out of your mind if you believe the earth is round based on all factual data available. Give me a break! Sounds like sour grapes to me. One positive note of progress, Deputy use to spout off thousands of vacant lots but it looks like you have got him down to 1,000. Now That's Progress. JBQ and BB, They would usually be called trolls, but most have been around so long that they wouldn't fit the definition. Good news is that now there are two of us interested in your waterfront property. You know what that means? Bidding war...
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Apr 16, 2014 23:02:25 GMT -4
For someone always quoting "truth" and "facts" it's amazing how you can't see the woods for the trees. Someone else posts an opinion anything remotely against yours and you attack. What you call snide and negative just happen to be the other side of the coin, the side that you and JB refuse to even look at. Go back to bchevy's post about AA County and Mayo, it was billed and sold as limited growth, then the lawsuits came. You will not be able to hold landowners back from building and connecting when there's a pipe in front of their property. 1000's of home will eventually come, count the lots and do the easy math.And by the way, you and JB keep spouting the $100. a month nonsense. If you truly believe you'll see that, or that it will stay at that price for any amount of time, I've got waterfront property in Arizona I'd like to show you. I do not have any issues with contrary opinion, it is the manner it is being said and rather condescending. uh, yeah, right, because calling one's posts "snide and negative" is said so well and not condescending at all. In case you didn't know it, you and JBQ seem to be quite the peas in a pod, neither of you accept or want to allow any opinion or thoughts not in line with your own. Enjoy your thread
|
|
|
Post by bchevy on Apr 16, 2014 23:13:34 GMT -4
Hey Burner, If you take the position the earth is round based on all evidence available to you, Deputy would take the side that the earth is flat and just tell you you are out of your mind if you believe the earth is round based on all factual data available. The county has stated over and over again that the monthly fee for sewer for the homeowners will be no greater than $100. They have all the numbers broken down on paper on the SKI sewer website if anyone cares to take the time to actually look it over. The State has backed them up on that because they have reviewed the numbers as part of the grant fund agreement. What proof does Deputy have to back up his claim except there is some grand conspiracy against the homeowners in the impacted communities by the county and state to stick it to them. Give me a break! Sounds like sour grapes to me. One positive note of progress, Deputy use to spout off thousands of vacant lots but it looks like you have got him down to 1,000. Now That's Progress. Nice of you to chime in with your nonsense, it really adds legitimacy to your , um, your, your, point?
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Apr 17, 2014 7:07:23 GMT -4
Hey Burner, If you take the position the earth is round based on all evidence available to you, Deputy would take the side that the earth is flat and just tell you you are out of your mind if you believe the earth is round based on all factual data availabloole. The county has stated over and over again that the monthly fee for sewer for the homeowners will be no greater than $100. They have all the numbers broken down on paper on the SKI sewer website if anyone cares to take the time to actually look it over. The State has backed them up on that because they have reviewed the numbers as part of the grant fund agreement. What proof does Deputy have to back up his claim except there is some grand conspiracy against the homeowners in the impacted communities by the county and state to stick it to them. Give me a break! Sounds like sour grapes to me. One positive note of progress, Deputy use to spout off thousands of vacant lots but it looks like you have got him down to 1,000. Now That's Progress. Nice of you to chime in with your nonsense, it really adds legitimacy to your , um, your, your, point? Ok. I guess I should just let Deputy say whatever he wants. Got it. Did you say something about two peas in a pod. Your your you're right as always!
|
|
|
Post by deputy on Apr 17, 2014 9:01:58 GMT -4
Ok. I guess I should just let Deputy say whatever he wants. Got it. Why not? Don't you get to spew your nonsense at will? Polluting threads that have nothing to do with your agenda with your one hit wonder remarks?
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Apr 17, 2014 9:22:09 GMT -4
Ok. I guess I should just let Deputy say whatever he wants. Got it. Why not? Don't you get to spew your nonsense at will? Polluting threads that have nothing to do with your agenda with your one hit wonder remarks? Only nonsense being spread on this particular issue is Deputy and Lainey.
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Apr 17, 2014 11:23:42 GMT -4
limited growth....I've heard that before. They were going to limit growth in Bay City and Cloverfields. Nope, didn't happen as planned. We need a plan G, one where the county buys all the homes with failing septics and demolishes them. We are thereby decreasing supply and increasing existing home values. Economics 101. We stabilized the market, did not increase our population and demand for services, the tax lost on the bought back homes will be offset by the increasing values of the remaining homes. Did I miss anything? Oh and we save the bay one failed septic at a time. Eliminate the waste. well, Lainey.. that line takes the cake! Are you implying the tax payers of QA county would be willing to buy me, and other residents of SKI, out? A much more expensive plan than running the sewer line given the number of homes. You do know that most homes in the affected communities have technically failing septic systems. It is not just about the ability to flush the toilet. Lastly, it appears your stance is no new residents should be allowed on the island? When do you want the fences and toll gates to go up? Nope, that is not my stance. My stance is no new houses down SKI. Infill all you want where there is adequate infrastructure.
|
|
|
Post by jackbquick on Apr 17, 2014 11:49:25 GMT -4
well, Lainey.. that line takes the cake! Are you implying the tax payers of QA county would be willing to buy me, and other residents of SKI, out? A much more expensive plan than running the sewer line given the number of homes. You do know that most homes in the affected communities have technically failing septic systems. It is not just about the ability to flush the toilet. Lastly, it appears your stance is no new residents should be allowed on the island? When do you want the fences and toll gates to go up? Nope, that is not my stance. My stance is no new houses down SKI. Infill all you want where there is adequate infrastructure. Yes Burner. The infrastructure down on SKI is so inferior to all other communities in QAC. I got a waterfront lot in AZ to sell you as well.
|
|
|
Post by lainey on Apr 17, 2014 12:00:04 GMT -4
Glad to see you are finally getting with the program there JBQ! Yes, infrastructure down there is lacking to say the least. No sewer, privately owned roads, etc. You want my house JBQ? Its on sewer on a county road. It would have been a better investment than that house you have with a failed septic. Hey, but that must be my fault too. I must have made you buy a house with septic. And you call me crazy?
|
|