Thursday, July 1, 2010

Interceptor sewers are expensive but apparently not as much as a public vote on the Robald gate

Hello fellow citizens of Shelley. It has been awhile since I last reported on city government. Since I last posted the gate issue went to the city council and was not resolved. They have decided to keep the gate closed for the summer while they try to work out a solution. My guess is whoever is the loudest of the two sides will win this one regardless of what is right. At the council meeting where this was discussed at length Mr. Darrington quoted the great Austrian economist Ludwig von Mises about the protection of private property being essential to freedom. How true that is but my question at the time was how are his property rights being violated? Do we have legal claim on the air that carries sound? If so that must be a wholly new category in property law. Should we force all citizens who desire to use Robald to muffle their mufflers? Mises also stated that "in the political field it is always the will of the majority that prevails, and the minorities must yield to it (Liberty & Property, 12)." Along with the protection of private property, another important part of our republican political system involves majority rule. The minority cannot be trampled in their rights but rights in this case must not be confused with inconveniences. There was to be a committee formed to work out a compromise solution but it is my understanding that supporters of the gate have dropped out and the committee dissolved. It has reached the point where no compromise between the parties involved will be found. If the city council is unwilling or unable to decide the issue once and for all then the only solution now must be what I suggested in my last post. The gate must be placed on the ballot so that the citizen-tax payers who have every right to that road may have their say. And when the results are in, it is understood that the people have spoken and as long as no rights are violated, thus it must be. When I suggested as much to a member of the city council I was told it would be too expensive for such an issue and I agree. But if the council fails to act then it has come to that and if we can spend millions on sewer lines, beautification and a vehicle for the Urban Renewal Agency surely we can expend money to let the people's voice be heard because as it stands today, it appears to have fallen on the deaf ears of the council.

For those citizens interested in this issue you can follow the efforts of those who want the gate removed by clicking here.

The curbing and paving for the new waste water treatment plant will cost the city $40,000 but will be reimbursed those fund at the end of the fiscal year by something called the Eastern Interceptor Segment B Project? For those of you who like me had know idea what that is here is a definition in brief: "large sewer lines that, in a combined system, control the flow of sewage to the treatment plant." The low bid from HK contractors to connect the sewer lines to the new plant came in around $7.3 million but the mayor assured those in the meeting that this is $1 million less than what city engineers had articulated. Another $34,760 will be spent on lining the sewer along Seminary Ave. And the emergency school levy was passed in May at $500,000 over two years. Tax payers of Shelley have been placated by officials who claim that there will be little rise in property taxes. I will wait to see. All said for the months of April and May the city of Shelley paid out $1.4 million to keep the city going. To say nothing of the 500,000 to keep the schools from cutting more. This number of course will increase as the new sewer lines are put in and the lighting and green belt walkway are restored. Modern conveniences are nice and even necessary but not cheap. In the end, I must applaud the city council for taking the lowest bid for the installation of the sewage lines.

p.s.-for those of you not cutting your grass look out there will be a notice coming in a future utility bill reminding you of the ordinance to beautify your yards.

No comments:

Post a Comment