Seven Villages, Janet Joakim

 There is a lot of misinformation floating around out there with regards to the special ballot question election on October 13. The town council got a closer look at a flyer with misleading statements and figures at recent council meeting. The author of the flyer and a related website is unknown as they have not filed the requisite forms establishing a ballot question campaign with the Town Clerk. Such filings create a record of who is responsible financially, and otherwise, for content and materials supporting a ballot question campaign.

 Information on this flyer, handed out at public places like flu clinics recently, stated that if the ballot question passed, all property owners in Barnstable will be imposed with betterments up to $150,000. This is simply not true. 

 The actual question on the ballot on October 13 is specific to the second phase of the project in Hyannis around Stewart’s Creek and effects 120. This is the only sewer project currently planned. An earlier plan that encompassed 1600 houses around Wequaquet Lake was VOTED DOWN by the council.

 Further, as suggested in a letter published in the Barnstable Patriot last week, the same people are suggesting that I independently stated that there would be, or that I would support, a $150,000 betterment cost assigned to homeowners in my area. This is ridiculous and false.

 This statement might have roots in a council discussion about this item. During a conversation about Stewart’s Creek project at a town council meeting this summer, I echoed a point that a fellow councilor made about the need to find alternative funding for sewer projects. I stated, as my fellow councilor had suggested, that by the time we go to discussions about bringing sewers to the western part of this town, a separate sewage treatment plant may well be needed; to fund this with 100 percent betterments, the costs may reach $150,000.

 I repeated this again a later meeting and it was taken out of context. The point was; this is something that isn’t plausible. There is no such plan, and I would never support such a plan. Further, I doubt this council as a whole would support such a plan. 

 We cannot rely on 100% betterments to fund future sewer service projects because the costs would drive people out of town, my own family included (if there ever is a mechanism to expand to the western part of town.) The town administration and most town councilors understand this.

Two projects came before the council this summer because stimulus money was available. That money provides mechanisms for 0-2% loans and 8% subsidies from the federal government.  The town applied and was granted the two projects, one project was voted down by the council and the other is now moved to a ballot.

 Additionally, the same group that is working to defeat the ballot question has declared that there is currently a permitted plan to build a second sewage treatment plant somewhere in town for $160 million dollars.  This is not true.  Any such project would have been publicly discussed and reported by local newspapers and radio stations. This is not something that could, or would, ever be done “behind closed doors.”

The only sewer project in the pipeline right now is the Stewart’s Creek Project – phase two of which is subject of the ballot question. Phase one was approved in April.

 I have serious issues with the council imposing betterments of any kind. When residents of a private road need to repair a road they have an option to do this with betterments. Fifty percent of the residents involved have to respond favorably for the DPW to get involved. This means that ultimately the decision is left up to the residents who live on the road. That is how betterments should work.  I would take it a step further and say 60-75% would have to approve before any such project moves forward.

 When residents came out to meetings to speak against Phase II of the Stewart’s Creek project in July, I listened and voted against imposing betterments.  When the project came before us a second time with new funding options I was prepared to vote against it until I began hearing from residents before the meeting who would be paying those betterments and who wanted the item – now the ballot question – to pass. Many of these people were simply afraid to come to a town council meeting and speak in favor because the atmosphere at the public hearings had become vitriolic.

 Septic systems in the Stewart’s Creek area are failing. There are residents in the affected area who were given permission to make temporary repairs to their title V systems expecting that the sewer system would soon be available to them. Without this project, many residents will ultimately have to install costly self-contained systems.

 The council and town staff has planned, since the beginning of this discussion, and work is going on now, to research ways to help residents who will have difficulties paying for this project. Even councilors who are known to oppose any kind of outside assistance are working on this effort.

 Phase two of the Stewart’s Creek project – that involves only 160 households not the entire town – was moved to a ballot question and special election when the group who seem to oppose everything the council does gathered the requisite signatures this summer.

 Unfortunately, this risks our opportunity to take advantage of federal stimulus funds because deadlines have passed. The applications for stimulus funds have already been approved, but the delay of this final vote jeopardizes our access to these funds.  If this question was placed on the ballot in November it most likely would have been too late, and we would have lost millions of dollars that will provide some financial relief to the homeowners in the Stewart’s Creek project area.

 Now, on October 13, bringing sewer service to 160 households is up to voters town-wide per a ballot question election. It is a shame that the voting isn’t limited to the small group of people who are actually affected by the outcome of this vote.

 We are faced with a serious waste-water problem Cape-wide and most Cape legislators understand that we need to identify alternative resources to pay for solutions.

Town Council President Chirigotis has asked the town’s Comprehensive Financial Advisory Committee, (CFAC) to study the funding issue and research alternative funding for any future consideration of sewer projects. The group that is working to defeat the ballot question clearly objects to the way the Stewart’s Creek project is funded, but haven’t come forward with any viable options. It is unfortunate that the group who disagrees with most council decisions chooses to continuously try to incite distrust for town government rather than be a positive participant in seeking solutions.