11/7/2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

I has no problem since she put in a new drainfield about 10 years ago. Her neighbor has an above -ground system and she had no objection to its appearance nor did she have a drainage problem because of it. She did not have the money to pay annually on the $6,700 assessment. She was very concerned because the County would place a lien on her property and could foreclose on the lien and take away her home if she was unable to pay. Tracy Scarborough, 2046 79`' Avenue, thought several drainfields could be purchased with the same money that an assessment and connection would cost. He has had no problem since he put in his raised drainfield. He did not understand how the repayment system would be handled and did not know how people on fixed incomes could afford to pay, especially if they had already paid for a new septic system. Stephanie Pooley, 2146 79' Court, was unhappy that at the informational meeting, the above -ground septic "mounds" were referred to as "Indian burial grounds." She is a descendant of a Native American Indian and thanked everyone for not using that term today. She wondered if a grant might help. She was opposed to the assessment. Brian Jones, 2056 79" Avenue, was opposed to the sewer project because he could not afford it and had no problem with his drainfield, which he had replaced about three years ago. It seemed to him that the majority in the neighborhood were not having problems. It was determined that no one else wished to be heard and the Chairman closed the public hearing. Chairman Adams felt the main problem is cost; she recalled that the initial concern for the sewer lines was translocation of sewage into the river. Mr. Smith believed cost was the major factor in the petition against the sewer project. He gave an historical account of the project since 1998 when the Board first authorized it. November 7, 2000 70 BK 1 15 PG 777