Archive for the ‘3 Lakes Sewer Project’ Category

More 3 Lakes Sewer Project

Wednesday, April 2nd, 2008

In case you didn’t read the original posting about the 3 Lakes Sewer Project, here is the link:

3 Lakes Sewer Project - Should there be a Jointure?

justabumpkin wrote about a week ago: 

As noted by “concerned”, conflicts do abound on a commissioner’s part. As BTMA counsel he has filed condemnations against properties owned or heavily tax-liened by the county. The sewer line easements may make these properties worth much less at tax sales and any chance of gaining tax dollars back will be lost - doesn’t the commissioner also have a duty to see that the back taxes are collected? Or is his own self-interest (seeing the sewer project go through to generate major fees for himself) clouding his vision? Is this why he also failed to give statutorily-required notices to the condemnees, to slide it through fast and without scrutiny?

 It is noteworthy that the Bridgewater Municipal Authority, who is embroiled in objections filed by landowners who have had their property condemned for the project, is apparently being represented by Bob Hollister, Esq., who has his office in with Michael Giangrieco, Esq., our minority County Commissioner.  Are we getting closer to a complaint to the Disciplinary Board regarding a significant conflict of interest boys??

At least the case is being heard in Wyoming County.  It’s amazing there was a change of venue for a condemnation case to build a sewer extension, but a guy on trial for his life (Stephen Scher), couldn’t get one.  That will be a separate post.

Your thoughts?

Posted in 2008, 3 Lakes Sewer Project | 2 Comments »

3 Lakes Sewer Project - Should there be a Jointure?

Friday, November 16th, 2007

Apparently, the proposed 3 Lakes Sewer project is being met with mixed reviews by some.  This project will ultimately clean up potential sewer issues at the lakes, upgrade the existing system as well as promote economic development along PA 706 East of Montrose. 

A little background.  The players are the Montrose Sewer Authority which has a collection system and a treatment plant which services Montrose.  The Bridgewater Municipal Authority has a collection system, however does not have a treatment plant.  In fact, it has been said that Bridgewater is a client of  the Montrose Authority.    One more piece of information - The Montrose Authority currently needs a state mandated upgrade. 

 Currently, the two Authorities are considering a jointure.  

The first question here is the following:  “Should the residents of Montrose Borough be responsible, at least in part for the cost of the 3 Lakes expansion?”

A second question is:  “Due to the requirement of a state mandated upgrade, should the existing customers only be responsible for the upgrade or should it be the responsibility for the 3 Lakes expansion customers to be responsible as well?”

 A third question is:  “If there were no expansion, would there still be a state mandated upgrade to the existing system and if so, how much additionally would it cost the individual customers?”

 A fourth question is:  “Assuming there is an expansion, would the cost of the mandated upgrade be spread among the new customers as well as the existing customers?”

A fifth question is:  “How much will this expansion cost the current customers individually (not counting the cost of the mandatory upgrade?”

There have been other sewer expansions in Susquehanna County.  Two notables are the Tri-Boro Sewer Authority expansion into Lanesboro and the expansion of the Hallstead - Great Bend Joint Sewer Authority to New Milford.  The Lanesboro expansion was done a number of years ago, however, the New Milford project is only recently completed.   It is believed that neither of these projects included an increase for existing users.  The local expansion was funded by bonds, as well as user fees.  The user fees however are different in both expansion towns from the original fees.   

The idea of creating a jointure for the 3 Lakes project could make sense under the right set of circumstances.  Especially if it helps to manage costs, makes it easier to apply for grants and reduces a level of bureaucracy.  However, if these three items and others are not at least being discussed, very publicly between the two Authorities, as well as the questions above with the existing and new potential customers, why?  

 Your thoughts?

Posted in 3 Lakes Sewer Project | 4 Comments »