Wake Up Call for Thursday: Mission Obvious with Larry Downs, Jr.

 

Today on the wake-up call live on WPNN 103.7 we discussed state, local, national, and international topics of interest.  We also welcomed onto the show Larry Downs Jr—a guy who is involved in local issues as a frequent visitor to local government meetings over the last decade or so.  He had texted in to the show last week and wanted to talk about Fluoride in the drinking water-which we did discuss in depth on the show today.  He is a character, and you will want to hear this interview.

In addition to this, we discussed:

-local news—tornado and murder suicide in Gulf Breeze

-Military Jet Crash in So. California

-Tulsi Gabbard confirmed as DNI despite ONE (1) Republican (Mitch ‘the GOBBLER’ McConell) voting against her…

-Trump speaking with Putin to end Ukraine war

-Eggs being sold individually “loosies” due to high prices

-a recent move in Escambia County to go back to an “elected” superintendent

Listen to my interview with Larry Downs Jr here

You can hear a complete recording of today’s live show here.

We are live each weekday morning from 6:00AM-8:00AM on WPNN-Pensacola's Information Station, where local, conservative morning-drive talk radio is ALIVE and Well and where we give you the most powerful hour(s) in local morning drive talk radio.

News, weather, traffic, humor, and educated, intelligent discourse with no PC filters....

The Wakeup Call with Jeff Bergosh on WPNN FM 103.7:  Radio UNRESTRAINED.

Fluoride in the Water: ECUA D1 Board Member Vicki Campbell Joins us on Today's Wake Up Call

 

We had the opportunity to speak with ECUA District 1 Board Member Vicki Campbell this morning on the Wake up Call on WPNN.

The discussions during the  live interview centered on the use of Fluoride in the water locally--and the recent controversy this might be causing as the soon-to-be installed Secretary of Health and Human Services as well as current Florida Surgeon General Joseph Ladapo have both recently made statements that water systems should not use Fluoride in the water.

We also discussed recycling and a soon to be built transfer station in District 1's Bellview community.

We also discussed a host of other news and information topics covering local, national, and international stories of interest.

Listen live to the show every weekday from 7:00-8:00 on AM 790 or FM 103.7 WPNN.

Catch the replay of the show here if you missed it!

The Mystery of the More Than $7,000.00 1-Month ECUA Water Bill?!?

Just imagine it.  You go online to pay your routine bills, to include your ECUA bill for water, sewage and garbage.  Ho hum, just something you do once a month.

But when you log in to pay your bill, you spit coffee through your nostrils and adrenaline pumps through your body and your blood pressure skyrockets  as you see something that CANNOT be right---a bill that is normally around a hundred bucks is $7,326.00 dollars!

What!?!     (picture the Allstate Commercial where the guy on your door cam starts smashing your car window and you aren't there to stop him from doing it)

What?!?  Seven Grand!!!

Making matters worse--you quickly realize this isn't a "mistake."

Uh oh, spagetthi o's--or as Scooby Doo might say "Ruh-Roh Raggy!!"

In this instance of a true story that unfolded yesterday afternoon/evening--------the bill was, in fact,  correct.  Apparently--the culprit was a water leak on the property-owner's side of the meter that was not noticed by anyone. (not sure how, but that's a question for another time I guess--once folks calm down and come back from the ledge) 

So what do you do?  Well,  you --the property owner---quickly contact your county commissioner--- (who has no play in this at all-- by the way--but whatever:  I am here to help!)----who quickly forwards the issue to his ECUA counterpart--and lo and behold there is an explanation.  And, thankfully, a solution.

In this story--the quick actions of ECUA staff and board member Vicki Campbell are to be commended.  ECUA immediately went out to the property, checked the situation, and determined a leak was the culprit.  No word back yet on what caused it or whether or not it has been repaired by the property owner (hopefully it has been!--but it must've been leaking a while to run up that kind of a billing--how did the property owner not notice this?).

Thankfully--there is now a happy ending to this story coming.....

Because ECUA offers its customers a one time credit for such catostrophic occurrences.  (I know this firsthand because I had a similar situation occur and was able to wipe away the charges with this one-time facility provided by ECUA.)

Thankfully (and mercifully)--this is a bill that this homeowner won't have to pay.

Whew--that's a relief!

Two Town Halls Upcoming in District 1

I look forward to hosting  two town halls in the first two months of 2022---one in Perdido/Innerarity and one in Beulah.

As I recently said I would do, I have now scheduled two town halls for the first two months of 2022.

With a lot of changes to the county's district lines as a result of our once-per-decade redistricting process having been completed--I thought it imperative to schedule these so that I can hear input directly from the constituents of the newly formed District 1 as soon as possible.

On Monday, January 31st we will have our first of these two town halls in the Perdido Area of District 1, at the Perdido Bay United Methodist Church, 13660 Innerarity Point Road.  It will be scheduled from 5:30-7:00 PM.  I will have staff with me, and I will also have my District 1 peer elected representatives from ECUA and the School Board as well--and they will have the opportunity to give remarks at the meeting.  Primarily, I want to have staff give updates and I want to hear from residents.  What are their concerns, priorities, and observations.  I will have a list of questions for which I will elicit simple responses from the audience utilizing "agree" and "disagee" placards--and comment cards will be distributed and collected so that the maximum number of questions/comments/concerns can be taken in by myself and staff.

On Tuesday, February 22nd, we will have our second of these two town halls--this one in Beulah at Beulah Middle School, 6001 West 9-Mile Road.  It will also be scheduled from 5:30-7:00 PM.  Again, I will have staff and my counterparts from ECUA and the School Board at this meeting as well.  We will utilize the same format and we will have an agenda for the meeting.

I look forward to hearing from the constituents and continuing our momentum in District 1 at completing big projects for the citizens.

Beulah Blowout Brings a Boil-Water Notice....

Certain residents of Beulah off of 9-Mile Road awoke Sunday morning to find the water wasn't working.

Several neighborhoods lost water after a PVC pipe buried 10 feet underground failed nearby.

I'm certain more than a few residents were late for Church services as a result.  Thankfully--most residents were back up and running with water by 3:00 in the afternoon.  Luckily-- we live in America where things like this are quickly fixed by responsive crews from utility service providers.  

In some parts of the world, something like this could take weeks (or months, or longer) to repair.  In many parts of the world--there is no running water in the first place.  Here, the lights go on when we flip the switch, and water comes out of the sink when the knob is twisted.  It's what we expect, and 99.9% of the time, it's what we get.

So yeah, we do live in a great country.

So what happenend with this situation in Beulah, then?

According to ECUA Board Member Vicki Campbell, it occurred where an 8" line was connected to a 16" line.  It appears, from the picture on the right provided to me by Vicki late Sunday afternoon, that this was newer pipe in an area adjacent to the latest expansion by NFCU on their sprawling Beulah campus location.  According to Vicki Campbell  "....[could be] PVC pipe failure, hard to say.  Could have been installed in a bind.  I'm sure they will get to the bottom of it.  Shouldn't be age as it appears to be fairly newer pipe.  Boil water for 48 hours."

It will be interesting to know precisely how this happened.  I'll certainly post the reasons once I get them from ECUA.  Meanwhile--I thanked Vicki profusely for the quick action and response of the ECUA crews to get us back up and running!

Request for Transcript Release Motion Dies for Lack of a 2nd--Why Was it Even Brought Before the Board Now Though?

Commissioner Doug Underhill brought an add-on to last night's regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners.  It was a motion to release the confidential transcripts related to the Innerarity Island Sewer project.

So at the end of the meeting he was recognized by the chairman and brought forward his motion.

He made the motion.  Then silence from the rest of the board.  crickets.  You could hear a pin drop.

It didn't even get a courtesy 2nd for discussion.  Died right there for lack of a second.  DOA.

But why did he even bring it though?  He had already taken the unilateral action (unauthorized, not approved by the board) of releasing the confidential transcripts way back on May 11th.  Given he released them way back nearly a month ago--we must naturally assume that these are widely disseminated now--and folks that are interested now have the transcripts.  ECUA, residents of Innerarity that are angry and threatening litigation against the county, the press, other folks in the community-----the genie is out of the bottle and there's no putting it back.

So why waste our time with this weak and meaningless request??

The thing that gets me, and that I want to know, is this:  He released the documents the day he received them, May 11th.  We've all now been sent the proof and the confirmation of that fact.  He did not wait, he released the confidential documents even though they were clearly marked confidential by the attorney--complete with a statutory citation--the day he received them.

But then at a meeting of the board just three days later---the Committee of the Whole---he appealed to the board during commissioner's forum  (minute 0:30-6:00 of this video) to "authorize the release of the transcripts"--which the board took no action on.  Why didn't he just tell us then  "Hey guys--I released them because I believe they are a valid public record not subject to confidentiality!"  Nothing, he said nothing though.

Then, seven days later during commissioner's forum of our regular meeting--commissioner Underhill once again asked the board to release the transcripts (at the beginning of this video-minutes 0:10-7:25)--which the board did not do--again.  So why did he say nothing--why not admit he had already released the documents?  Why the time-wasting, ridiculous Kabuki Theater?

Interestingly--even though the board did not authorize the release at either of these meetings, Commissioner Underhill DID NOT fess up and admit that he had, in fact, released the classified records 10 days earlier.

Not a peep, not a word.  He sat there like a wax statue, like a mime.

Even as I reported that I had information that one board member had released the transcripts  without authorization and that I wanted this leak investigated---Commissioner Underhill did not admit it, he sat there quietly.  He sat there silently on this.

I asked him point blank last night:  "You knew you released them, why didn't you just tell us you did-why sit through two meetings and ask us to release them-what was that all about?"  To which he responded with a gibberish response that was meaningless and a glazed-over stare back.  Just ridiculous.

Subsequent to the  meeting on  May 21st, and once it became apparent that Doug Underhill in fact released the classified transcripts on May 11th, a citizen has now reported this conduct to the Florida division of Ethics via a formal complaint against Doug Underhill.

Then the county sent their findings of who it was that leaked it to each commissioner---something most of us knew already---Commissioner Underhill did it.

After the May 21st meeting and on social media and radio shows prior to last night's meeting though--Commissioner Underhill has come out and finally admitted he leaked the documents.  Worse yet--he ignores the fact that the rest of us were holding back on release of these documents on advice of counsel due to litigation--and instead runs us down and assails our collective character by insinuating we are purposely "withholding public records."  What a despicable thing for him to say and do.  And dishonest and dishonorable.

So the board did not and will not condone his conduct "after the fact" by authorizing release of the transcripts--- which is what he has wanted and what he has requested ever since he released the confidential documents.

He got that answer "Loud and Clear" from the Board last night.

We'll see what comes of the complaint made against him to the division of ethics, and I hope that the decision he made to release these transcripts without authorization does not work against us as we seek to end the litigation over this sewer system responsibly.

Who is Responsible for Water/Sewer Line Repairs in the County's Right of Way?

Apparently the answer is, it depends.  Meaning if you are on a gravity system and you have a blockage off your property but before the sewer main----under current codes the costly repairs could be on you, Mr. Homeowner.

During a discussion on the platting of a subdivision in District 5-- an interesting topic of conversation turned to homeowner responsibilities as it pertains to sewer line repairs in the county's right of way (ROW).

The above drawing was provided to commissioners on the dais by ECUA Executive Director Bruce Woody, who attended our morning review session.  He explained ECUA's position, backed by their codes, that determine responsibility (homeowner or ECUA) for line repairs dependent on WHERE such repairs are needed.  He was asked questions about it, and due to his very brief tenure at ECUA he was not aware of the history of when these codes had been updated.

My counterparts wanted to know when the codes had last been changed.

For my part, I asked why there appeared to be a double standard on the responsible party determination as it pertains to the gravity sewer line;  according to ECUA and as illustrated in the above diagram--ECUA is responsible for low pressure sewer or water line repairs from the meter or homeowners property line (whichever is closer to the house)  over to the main line----except in the case of a gravity sewer systems--where the homeowner ----apparently -----is responsible for any line repairs from their property, through the county's ROW, and up to any roadway.

This seems odd, and I asked if costs of repairs in the ROW was used in ECUA's decision to have this distinction in their code (e.g. is it costly historically for ECUA to make repairs in the ROW for gravity sewer lines?) I was told that an answer on this was not known.

I asked why this distinction was made?  I voiced my opinion that ECUA should be responsible for ALL lines from the property lines or meters (whichever is closer to the homeowner's improvements) through the county's ROW to their main lines.  I asked that this change be made by ECUA.

My counterparts agreed.

Mr. Woody stated that he would bring this feedback to the ECUA board for their consideration.

Stay tuned on this one.........

Transfer Station On the Back Burner in Light of New Information

If ECUA knew in late March/early April that service in Santa Rosa County was being terminated---why did they not reveal that fact when also requesting permission from the Escambia Board of County Commissioners to build a Transfer Station?  Can an ECUA Employee make this call without an action and/or vote of their governing board?

I have been meeting with and speaking to County staff and others associated with ECUA about the potential of a new transfer station off of Pine Forest Road.  I've been having these discussions for about a year and a half.

I have been told this was absolutely, unequivocally needed without delay.

So I went out and toured the site and listened to ECUA's sales pitch on this.

I even wrote this blog post on it--which was very negatively received in my district.  Very, very negatively received.

But I did my best to explain the justifications for it, and I also publicly stated that I would not support it unless and until one or more public meetings was scheduled in the Bellview community of District 1 at which the ECUA could let citizens know the following:

1.)  Why a transfer station NOW
2.)  Why a transfer station HERE
3.)   A business case analysis illustrating precisely the operational cost savings this would achieve for ECUA and the rate-payers.
4.)  A complete and thorough illustration of HOW the transfer station would look, operate, and be kept clean and smell-free.


That was two weeks ago.  A lot can change in a couple of weeks.......

Now comes the revelation that ECUA has already decided it will end it's twice weekly waste and recycling collection services in neighboring Santa Rosa county this year (via a letter sent on April 2nd.).

Also--I'm told the ECUA's regular, heavy use of the County's Palafox Transfer station has only just begun over the last 10 months.  They are overwhelming the capacity and filling up the transfer station by Thursday of most weeks.  But this is a new practice by ECUA I'm now told.  I wasn't told this before I agreed to a discussion about a new transfer station.   So, if ECUA just started using our Palafox street transfer station heavily and regularly over the last 10-12 months---why now, and where did they take it before?  Why this new change?

So we are getting new revelatory information after the big push to approve an interlocal---why after the fact, why not before?  Do they even need a new $10 Million Dollar transfer station?  Why did they not disclose the fact that they unilaterally decided to end the twice weekly residential waste pick up in Santa Rosa County--they obviously knew this when they decided and sent the letter in early April--but why leave the County Attorney and County Administrator and District 1 County Commissioner in the dark about that important fact?  (none of us knew this until very recently)

Had I been told this stuff before the initial draft of an interlocal between ECUA and the County had been brought to the board in May--I would have been a lot less supportive, and I would have had a lot more questions.  Maybe that's why we weren't told?

Importantly:  How did an ECUA employee unilaterally make this decision to end garbage collection if the ECUA board didn't vote on this?  With the end of service in Santa Rosa--why can't ECUA now re-deploy these resources (excess drivers and and excess trucks used for twice weekly trash and recycling pick up in Santa Rosa County) back to Escambia County to more efficiently route the pickup of garbage here--which would potentially negate the need for a new ratepayer funded $10 Million Dollar transfer station?

Too many questions, too many facts withheld.

This transfer station, so far as I am concerned and for my vote, is now officially relegated the back burner, on life support, until I get some answers and explanations about the revelations described  above.

Who Spilled the Beans, Redux?

People can say or do what they want, but there are consequences to face for taking actions against legal advice and that unilaterally usurp the board, the "client" from deciding on whether or not it wishes to release key documents that are privileged......

I've now been contacted by numerous individuals who appear to be in possession of documents that are privileged and that pertain to ongoing litigation (albeit in the waning stages) between the county and ECUA over the Innerarity water/sewer debacle from 2014--today.

The documents in question are the transcripts of the then Board of County Commissioners' shade meetings, or "executive sessions" that pertain to the litigation strategy the board would pursue (or not pursue)as it struggled to contend with the abandoned utility at Innerarity--and whether or not joint receivership in the courts would be sought by the BCC--forcing ECUA to jointly share the BURDEN of taking on this water/sewer utility that went belly-up.

Upon receipt of these transcripts, our attorney admonished all board members that these documents were confidential and not to be released to the public.  Her exact quote in her email sent to board members containing these transcripts was as follows:

"CONFIDENTIAL RECORDS ATTACHED

Commissioners,

By request, attached are the transcripts of the attorney-client sessions related to the receivership of IIDC (Innerarity Island water and sewer).  The litigation is still open and is not expected to be concluded until after the transfer to and acceptance of the sewer system by ECUA.  Thus, these transcripts are CONFIDENTIAL until the conclusion of the litigation (per section 286.011(8)(e), Fla. Stat.) and should not be released or shown to the public or the media.

Separately, I am gathering a timeline for you from Legal’s perspective, and I assume some other departments may be doing that as well.

Please do not reply all, but get directly with me if you have questions or concerns.

Alison"   

At a subsequent meeting, I even asked county attorney Alison Rogers, point blank, if a release of these documents would constitute a breach of ethics, to which she responded "Yes." (minute 3:33-5:00 of this video)

As one board member, I felt it may be helpful in this instance to release the transcripts---as I was not on the board at the time and the transcripts would shed light on the thought process that led the board to take the action it took back then.  But I was told I could not and I was given the reasons why and I totally understand and concur that it is inappropriate for any one (1) commissioner to release these.  Only the "client" can voluntarily waive this privilege and release these records.  In this instance, the "client" is the full board, not one (1) individual member and part of the client.

Disturbingly, it appears as if a member of our board just decided unilaterally to release these documents and did so.

This was a mistake.

Now, it weakens our bargaining position with ECUA on not only this project, but others as well.

These documents were classified for a reason, and as our attorney advised above--should not have been released.  So we will see what happens now as a result.

Transfer Station Concept For Increased Efficiency and Traffic Reduction Moving Forward in District 1

The initial, draft conceptual drawing of the proposed District 1 Godwin Lane Transfer station was provided back in January.  The purple line shows the proposed ingress-egress of the trucks that will enter and exit the facility daily

Back in January I toured ECUA's proposed transfer station site on Godwin Lane at Pine Forest Road.  With me for the tour were ECUA District 1 Board Member Vicki Campbell and ECUA Residential Waste Services Supervisor Keith Kyles.  I had lots of questions and the ECUA staff present had the answers.

This transfer station project has been pursued by ECUA for several years as the community has grown, the demand for residential waste pick up has increased,  and as the County's Palafox Street transfer station has out grown its capacity.  A transfer station is simply a place where residential waste garbage trucks can consolidate their loads into larger trucks, keeping the residential trucks in the field locally longer without the need to drive all the way out to the Perdido Landfill in Beulah between route stops.  The route garbage trucks fill up-- and then transfer their loads to much larger semi-truck trailers that then carry the larger loads to the landfill multiple times daily.  This process increases efficiency for the routes, saves fuel, and most importantly----reduces traffic congestion in District 1 between Pine Forest Road and the Perdido Landfill on Beulah Road.

The transfer station property on Godwin lane in District 1-- where the proposed new transfer station will be built-- is already owned and maintained by ECUA at this time.  It is currently an administrative office complex, truck parking facility, Pensacola Energy CNG refilling station, and waste container storage yard.  There is plenty of space to build the transfer station while leaving plenty of natural vegetative "buffer" between what will be built and nearby properties.  I have spoken to nearby business owners who seem generally accepting toward the new plan---with reasonable limitations in place.

At this past Thursday's BCC committee of the whole meeting of the Escambia of County Commissioners, these limitations were discussed and formalized into a written document.  An inter-local agreement was put forward by staff which was generally acceptable to the board.  This agreement has some stipulations that the county added which were reasonable:  Hours of operation will only be between the hours of 6:00AM and 6:00PM daily, the trucks will ONLY use Pine Forest Road (not Godwin Lane) for ingress and egress, and garbage will not be kept on the premises overnight or for extended periods of time.  There are other stipulations and limitations in the agreement which protect the county's position on multiple other points--most important of which is the flow control concept.  Flow control is simply the rule which stipulates that the garbage generated and collected locally by ECUA must be brought to our landfill in Escambia Count;  the reasoning behind this is that ECUA's business brings a lot of revenue to the county's landfill and therefore it is in the county's interest to maintain this revenue stream by not permitting these loads to be taken out of the county.

For my part, I was only going to accept this agreement if the term was broken up into an initial term and subsequent extension years--which the board agreed was a reasonable modification.  (e.g. as presented, the original agreement gave the ECUA a 20 year license to operate the transfer station.  After I objected, everyone settled in on an initial term of 10 years with one or more options for an additional 10 year period.)

Once the Inter-Local agreement is ratified at a subsequent meeting of the Board of County Commissioners and ECUA's governing board--the process to design, plan, peremit, and ultimately construct this facility will commence in earnest.  And the project will go through the county's development review process to insure it meets with all environmental and building codes prior to approval.

More to follow on this project in the months to come--but initially this is a good example of coordination between entities to improve service to citizens.

Multi-Agency Town Hall Tonight at 6:00 PM- at Jim Bailey Middle School Cafeteria

Multi-Agency District 1 Town Hall Monday, September 30th 6:00-8:00 PM

A District 1 Multi-Agency Town Hall will be hosted by Commissioner Jeff Bergosh on Monday, September 30, 2019. This meeting will be held at Jim Bailey Middle School, from 6 to 8 p.m. 

The elected representatives who will be 
participating are:

Jeff Bergosh, Escambia Board of County Commissioners, District 1
Alex Andrade, State Representative, District 2
Vicki Campbell, ECUA representative, District 1
Kevin Adams, Escambia County School Board, District 1

Specific topics of discussion will include:

---Sorrento Road Improvement

---Blue Angel 4-Lane project status

---Traffic

---Storm-water management

---Water front access/amenities for residents

---Appointed Superintendent update

---New Pleasant Grove Elementary - Sorrento Rd.

---Future new elementary school Beulah and update on additional District 1 school construction projects.

---Security, and Hazardous Pathways to Schools.

---Upcoming legislative session & educational issues

---Smart Growth

---Septic to Sewer Conversion

---Identify Solutions for Growth in Sanitation

---Continued Implementation of Customer Friendly Technology

Citizens are encouraged to attend the Town Hall to become informed about relevant issues in their community and to ask questions of their representatives

Cleaning up the Creekwood Mess....

Creekwood Homeowners got a raw deal.  Together with the County and ECUA--they are in the process of cleaning up this mess.....

What happened at Creekwood?

The Creekwood Home Owners Association (HOA) got a raw deal:  They bought nice homes in what appeared to be a nice community in a nice part of Escambia County’s District 1.

But back in the early 2000’s when Creekwood was being developed, a very common community wastewater amenity was permitted by the county to be constructed and operated by the builder rather than the utility that manages wastewater.  This was the first step in a series of events that turned into a huge mess for these homeowners over the past few years.

This amenity in question is a sewage lift station.  What is a sewage lift station?  That’s what many of the homeowners in Creekwood wondered I’m sure—many did not even know what a lift station was--let alone the fact that they would eventually OWN one!  Here is a brief primer and video on sewer lift stations (just in case you were wondering :)  ).

So the problem was that after this sewage lift station was initially constructed in the early 2000’s by the builder and deemed a “private lift station” (no longer permitted under updated county ordinances--thank GOD)—as the years went by the system became obsolete, it broke down, and in 2012—when the company that constructed Creekwood declared bankruptcy and went insolvent (until they quickly re-emerged under a new corporate name and began building houses again in Escambia County)—it (the old lift station) became property of the Creekwood Home Owners Association!  

Congratulations Creekwood homeowners--you're now the owners of a wastewater pumping system (and guess what, it's failing)!!!!

What?!?.

Yes, they were quit claim deeded the failing lift station...And the problem became that the system was aging, and the utility that manages wastewater, ECUA, refused to take ownership of this lift station because it didn’t meet current, revised, “standards."  And it was/is deemed to be a “private” lift station.  So the HOA got slammed with ownership of a failing system and began to pay to keep it running. Not popular.  These owners simply wanted what made sense, they wanted ECUA to take the lift station off their hands before it totally and completely failed.  If the system failed—no toilets would work, drains would not function properly, and the neighborhood would have a major sewage spill on their hands. If that worst case scenario happened—not only would it be expensive, it would be messy and a potential health hazard.

The ECUA would only agree to take ownership and responsibility for this lift station if it was rebuilt to be in compliance with current (very high-tech, high dollar) standards---at the homeowners’ expense.

Naturally, this idea did not sit well with many of the homeowners…..but the HOA agreed to meet

My Issue with the Creekwood Agreement...

The ECUA crafted agreement with Creekwood smells worse than a fetid garbage dump.  I don't blame the homeowners for not wanting to sign this garbage.

Yes, I ripped up that garbage agreement at the meeting.

I ripped it to shreds and called it what it is----Garbage.  It smells worse than an ECUA sewage spill....

The County and the Homeowners have been working to get the ailing lift-station at Creekwood fixed; a majority of Creekwood residents have grudgingly agreed to take on a special tax assessment to the tune of $625,000 to get this done.

Nobody is happy about the language that keeps the HOA on the hook for any problems with the repairs and construction of the new, ECUA approved lift station, in their subdivision----but the language that forces the HOA to indemnify the County, ECUA, and the contractor during the construction (which may take as long as 18 months to complete) is just too much....

I was under the apparently mistaken impression that the contractor, once engaged in the construction, would be responsible for this lift station and the homeowners could finally breath a sigh of relief.  Wrong.  Why won't ECUA see that the homeowners are acting in good faith, they have secured the financing to fix the lift station, and they are prepared to move forward.  Why must the ECUA keep their boot on the collective necks of these homeowners, rubbing salt in the wound?  Why?

The garbage rhetoric I have heard is "It would not be fair to our ratepayers to take responsibility for this lift station before it is brought up to our standards"  But wait---these residents are ratepayers!  How about a little compassion for their plight!

Initially, I felt that the least I could do to keep this process going to get this lift station fixed was to get the County on board with the badly flawed agreement, which would allow ECUA to take action on it next, and ultimately it would allow for the HOA to sign it/not sign it--because ultimately the ECUA is controlling this process; they won't take the lift station until it meets their standards.

But when the attorney read some of the most onerous language that keeps the homeowners on the hook through the entire process--I just couldn't support it.

I have a new strategy I am formulating that I will soon be discussing with the HOA.

I think we can do better than that garbage agreement.