Letter to the Editor - Fairley Workman - June 16 PSD Meeting

Letters to the Editor July 24, 2008

Dear Editor:

The intent of this letter is to provide a perspective on the Slaty Fork sewage treatment plant, especially as it relates to the PSD meetings in Slaty Fork (June) and Snowshoe last Wednesday night, July 16.

Before I present the issues, I want to take this opportunity to make a public apology to Scott Millican (PSD) for my pointed, personal remarks directed at him during the Snowshoe meeting. These remarks were counterproductive and had no place in a public forum. In addition to Mr Millican, I want to extend my apology to any meeting participant who was offended by my remarks.

On the other side of the coin, at the last Slaty Fork community meeting in June, Thrasher Engineering presented the findings of the site investigations of a private engineering firm. The three sites under consideration and commented upon were as follows:

Site 5: Railroad authority near Slaty Fork bridge. This site was deemed more “risky” than site 7 due to flooding, underlying karst, and cost, about $3 million more than site 7. Further, this site requires about 4 miles of additional piping of raw sewage over unstable karst limestone, thus increasing the risk of an environmental disaster due to leakage.

Site 6: Split Rock/Morning Glory: This site has a very large underground air void and was withdrawn from consideration.

Site 7: Snowshoe property at the bottom of the mountain. This was considered the least “risky” of the three sites with no potential for flooding and, as noted, is much less expensive than site 5.

Further, the plant design was described as a combination of SBR (old technology) and Membrane (newer technology).

By far, the meeting attendees were overjoyed at the news that site 7 was preferred. In fact, most folks were ecstatic.

Then came the Snowshoe meeting which was intended to review the site selections and make a final decision on the location.

After about 2 hours of discussions which entailed sites, alternate plant designs, etc; a “bolt of lightening came out of nowhere” when the PSD announced that they would select site 5 for the sewage treatment plant. At this point, I asked for an explanation of the rationale used to make this decision. After pressing for an answer, we received some lame reference to future development.

It was quite evident that the vast majority of the participants felt betrayed and went further to express anger over this apparent snub of public opinion. The PSD asked the “stake holders several times to attend meetings and give our input into the site selection. This was done by us in good faith and many good ideas were exchanged and discussed. As to the current meeting, I am not sure how the other attendees feel, but as for me, this has all the signs of a ruse on the part of the PSD. In other words, they pretend to listen when, they had already made up their minds. In other words, it was just a waste of time and effort reminiscent of the Sharp Farm meetings in Durbin.

In conclusion, during the more than three year span of this issue, two county commissioners, both commission presidents, were voted out of office due to ignoring the voters concern over this problem. However and unfortunately, there appears to be no “checks and balances” when it comes to the PSD.

Sincerely,

Fairley Workman
Slaty Fork