David Fleming - Pocahontas County Commissioner - April 15 2009 - Letter to Editor

Dear Editor:

In her April 2 editorial in the Pocahontas Times, Pam Pritt made the claim that for the Pocahontas County Commission to oppose funding to the Pocahontas County Public Service District (PSD) for the proposed Snowshoe/Slatyfork regional sewer project would be “naive” and perhaps even “irresponsible.”

In an earlier editorial from May of 2007, Pam offers her thinking at that time:

“But if I were on the Public Service District Board and I was given the opportunity to look at a plan that retrofitted Snowshoe Mountain Resort’s existing treatment plant, put the effluent into the Shavers Fork of Cheat instead of the Elk and cost estimates were less than half the $20 million pricetag of the traditional plant … I’d sure as heck take a good long look.”

It’s fine she has a different view now. This project of course doesn’t hold still, and I think we all have experienced different views along the way. That’s good actually, an indication of being able to adapt to the needs as they are understood and evolve.

But to me, Pam’s earlier thinking is more apt now than ever before. The home market is in crisis. Many Snowshoe homeowners and affected rate payers are in foreclosure already, with still others looking at the very real prospect of walking away should they be faced with exorbitant increases in their costs. So if Pam’s earlier thinking no longer applies, then yes, I am naive.

If I may change focus to a more specific concern, there is also the aspect of interim effluent limitations as set forth in the Consent Decree. This is an agreement between the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) and the Pocahontas County PSD which raises the effluent limits on the existing permits so as to remain in compliance. Regardless of any discussion or action on the part of the county commission, this aspect of the agreement is in effect “from the date of entry of this Consent Decree until June 30, 2009, or such later date agreed to by the parties as reasonable and appropriate after evaluating the progress of a regional sewer solution (which agreement shall not be unreasonably withheld).”

Thus very soon, at a minimum the PSD must take up this discussion again. My hope is that, beyond that minimum, we as a county commission and an affected community will truly be heard in that discussion as well, especially as we consider the significant and new ideas such as a separate PSD for the service area and our willingness or unwillingness as a county commission to see further funding go towards this project as currently envisioned.

As the Consent Decree states, the effluent limitation agreement “shall not be unreasonably withheld.” As such, I am confident we can work with the WVDEP as we seek a solution more appropriate to the economic conditions facing the homeowners and rate payers.

It is imperative that we remain in compliance with WVDEP stipulations, of course. It is also imperative that we as a county government do all we can to address all concerns expressed. I for one feel that our PSD hasn’t sufficiently met this imperative, and that to let them continue on present course would be, well, both naive and irresponsible.

David March Fleming,
Pocahontas County Commissioner

Editor’s Note: I didn’t change my mind about anything. Again, the editorial said, in short, we need to stop being mired down in this particular controversy and we should hold on to the money that will fund the solution. The one thing I wish I had said in the original editorial is that the Elk Headwaters Watershed Association is doing exactly what needs to be done to find the solution—a community based initiative that will investigate what the surrounding area needs. But at this moment, the project is still in the hands of the PSD.