Jefferson Utilities

[BigTom]

As an owner of homes served by Jefferson Utilities I just recently recieved a letter from J. U. informing me of their plan to upgrade the water system on the mountain and asking for my support. I think the system does need a major overhaul and at least from what I know at this time would lean towards supportting it. But I also know there are alot of people on the forum who appose it (and anything else with Snyder's name attached to it) so before I commit to a position I'd like to hear for what reasons I should oppose it.
Be advised that I may question or even challenge what you have to say. I'm not trying to stir anything up, I'm just trying to take an informed position, and felt there are people here with more experience with this issue who could help educate me.
I want what's best for my tenants, safe, reliable water at an affordable price.

A note to the Mods I assummed this was the place to put this since it's not exactly politics but feel free to move it if you must.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

The thing is... This man should have NO MORE control over any resource than he has now.

The reason he keeps asking for rate increases if because he's been running in the red for, like, ever now.

YES, he manipulates and uses one of his companies (Snyder Environmental) to suck JUI beyond dry... That's not what's terribly important. What is, is that his books paint him as incompetent and therefore, he is. Why would anyone want to give this documented loser any more control over any resource.

[LFE]

I'm not aware of currently being served by Jefferson Utilities, and so long as my taxes do not go into helping a private company, I really do not care much one way or the other. Do you, or anyone else know how far down Mission road this would effect? As they would be tearing up the roads, does JU cover all the cost to replace/repair the damage?

Only pushing for a water system does not make sense to me either BTW.
A sewer system needs to be considered as the cleaner the water is at the source, the less treatment it needs and the safer it will remain. Why only try to take care of half the job (larger profit margins with a faster ROI is my quick guess).

We have new well and septic systems down here making it really cost prohibative for us to consider voting in favor of this.

[John]

People should not be required to pay $80 to $100 per month for water when there may be cheaper and more reasonable alternatives to JUI's plan available.

The systems need to be rebuilt. They should be rebuilt in the smartest and most efficient way possible, while keeping rates affordable.

JUI customers are not going to be helped by having the water system rebuilt if in the end they can't afford to stay in their homes.

[Leprechaun]

It's totally ass-in-ine to bring water/sewer to 'the mountain' (i.e. land east of the Shenandoah)! Responsible and prudent leadership needs to declare a permanent moratorium on new homes and concentrate on having all future development take place in the flat lands of Jefferson County. I will WV before I pay JU one cent!!! It's ludicris to have a unauditable sham-business providing a public utility.

[LazerFlash]

YES, he manipulates and uses one of his companies (Snyder Environmental) to suck JUI beyond dry... I thought that JUI and SE were owned by different (albeit, related) Snyders? And, the last thing that *I* read was that they weren't exactly friendly to each other...

[John]

Lazer,

You may be thinking of Hydrochem Labs, the chemical analysis company owned by Senator Herb Snyder. Jefferson Utilities, Snyder Environmental Services, and the land development company Oak Meadow, LLC, are all owned by Lee Snyder.

[Shasta]

Are water and sewer supposed to come to Shannondale? I thought they were to be done for Blueridge Acres and another subdivision out Chestnut Hill Road who have serious water problems with their private water companies.

[Shasta]

I goofed. I meant to say Keyes Ferry Acres. duhh

[BigTom]

My original question has to do with rebuilding the current system in Keyes Ferry Acres and Harpers Ferry Campsites. Those neighborhoods are already being serviced by poorly installed water systems.
Is there reason to believe water bills would be $80.00 to $100.00 a month? Aren't rate increases controlled by the county? Are there any other plans being offered? Synder has 4 or 5 other water systems in the county, what do those customers pay and are they happy with their service? Are people fighting this mainly to avoid future development in KFA and HFC?
Sorry for being so ignorant on this subject. I do need to educate myself and decide where to stand. If there's a way to get better water service to my tenants I have to consider it.

[derricksonb]

BigTom, before making a comment on how I feel about Snyders "Plan" to upgrade the systems in those subdivisions it would probably be best to read over is plan. Did the letter you received contain a version of the plan?

[John]

Is there reason to believe water bills would be $80.00 to $100.00 a month? Aren't rate increases controlled by the county? Are there any other plans being offered?

There is much more than just reason to believe the $100 per month rate. That is actually the rate he is asking for, in the document that his letter to you is asking you to support at the Monday night PSD meeting. The expected rate was apparently left out of the letters that JUI has been mailing to customers but it is clearly stated in the proposed IJDC filing on the PSD web site. Here is a copy of the appropriate section:

6184

Notice that the $108 per month rate is for 4,000 gallons per month. Many families use more than that, and would be billing an even higher amount per month. The lower $81 figure is dependent on grant money that will probably not be available at this point. It would have been available last summer, but JUI was unwilling to provide the necessary financial data until a few weeks ago, so the funding request is going in many months after most grant money has been disbursed to other projects around the state.


Synder has 4 or 5 other water systems in the county, what do those customers pay and are they happy with their service?

No. Many JUI customers from around the county are unhappy with both service levels and rates. They will certainly be unwilling to support rates in excess of $100 per month for a rebuild of the mountain systems - particularly when there may be less expensive alternatives available.


Are people fighting this mainly to avoid future development in KFA and HFC?

No, at least no one that I know of. I know that Snyder often claims this in order to obscure his actual goals, but the fact is many of the people he lists as opposing the rebuild are the same folks who have been pushing hard for years to force him to do the necessary repairs. I have not met anyone that is opposed to fixing these failed systems. There are however, many people who believe that there are cheaper and more efficient ways of providing safe, clean, and AFFORDABLE water to customers of the Mountain systems than the extravagant plan being pursued by JUI.



Sorry for being so ignorant on this subject. I do need to educate myself and decide where to stand. If there's a way to get better water service to my tenants I have to consider it.

No problem at all. It is a tough and complex problem that will take a lot of effort to solve. But working together we will solve it.

[BigTom]

I didn't see a projected monthly bill amount in the letter I received but I doubt my renters want to pay $100.00 per month. Of course they do realize if the system is redone water will cost more. The letter did say J.U. was relying on goverment grant money to pay for about half of the project and the balance to be funded by a state loan. (Maybe we'll get to use some of our own tax money for a change) I'm not real comfortable with the public/private partnership aspect of it. The letter does state that the $12.00 surcharge recently implimented would pay for the new system, whether that's true or not I do not know.
Has anyone offered any other plan? If so are these plans on paper and truly possible? Because I think any viable plan needs to be considered. Just saying there's got to be a better way doesn't hold much water (excuse the pun) if there are no other plans fall back on.
I appreciate the info given so far and will continue to research both here and other sources before taking a stand. Thanks.
On a side note Synder does own more water systems in the county than anyone else so at least he's experienced, although I know he's not very popular.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

Aren't rate increases controlled by the county?

You're funny. Yes, they are, but it would behoove you to look into the history of JUI. JUI has no employees, just him and his wife. He uses SES to contract everything to JUI, at very high rates, leaving JUI in the red and all of JUI's money flow goes to SES. He also 'loans' JUI money from SES, and there's, of course, interest. He has it set up to where JUI is always in the red, and always needs rate increases.

He has the documentation every time he files a rate increase. MY real question, which has been overlooked every time I ask it, is why can't these documents be used to show his incompetence as a public utility service provider? I mean, if he's always in the red, can't that be used to force a sale to protect the public's interest? Or maybe we could force a competitive bid process for the contracted work? Since this is a pseudo-public entity, don't we get a say? Can a petition process be started to force an election about this?

I ALSO WANT TO KNOW HOW BERKELEY COUNTY KICKED HIM OUT.

[lar]

I am not pro or con bringing water but I am definitely not interested in paying anywhere near $100 per month for water. But, I already pay minimum $40 per month to take my white clothes to the laundrymat everyweek. It would be more if I took my darks to town too.

[BigTom]

You're funny. Yes, they are, but it would behoove you to look into the history of JUI. JUI has no employees, just him and his wife. He uses SES to contract everything to JUI, at very high rates, leaving JUI in the red and all of JUI's money flow goes to SES. He also 'loans' JUI money from SES, and there's, of course, interest. He has it set up to where JUI is always in the red, and always needs rate increases.

He has the documentation every time he files a rate increase. MY real question, which has been overlooked every time I ask it, is why can't these documents be used to show his incompetence as a public utility service provider? I mean, if he's always in the red, can't that be used to force a sale to protect the public's interest? Or maybe we could force a competitive bid process for the contracted work? Since this is a pseudo-public entity, don't we get a say? Can a petition process be started to force an election about this?

I ALSO WANT TO KNOW HOW BERKELEY COUNTY KICKED HIM OUT.

I don't know that would work since he still owns the system. If you get rid of him can he take his water system with him when he goes? ( I just take my toys and go home)

[Chutney Daftcraft]

I don't know that would work since he still owns the system. If you get rid of him can he take his water system with him when he goes? ( I just take my toys and go home)

You know, that wouldn't be the worst thing that ever happened...

[Fuddy]

I'm not interested in paying $100 a month!

[Chutney Daftcraft]

I'm not interested in paying $100 a month!

Even at 50 a month, it's one of the highest water bills in the country... Most people pay like 45 a quarter...

[Kensey]

Aren't rate increases controlled by the county?


You're funny. Yes, they are,

Are they? I thought the state PSC approved rate increases.

[John]

Are they? I thought the state PSC approved rate increases.

That is correct. The state Public Service Commission reviews rate increase requests. They compare the utility's expenses to its revenues and then approve a rate that allows a 10% rate of return.

As an example, JUI last year requested an increase to $95 per month. The PSC reviewed JUI's expenses and "cost of providing the service" and instead approved a rate reduction - to a minimum fee of approximately $33 per month plus a $12 per month surcharge.

JUI customers have been paying the "interim rate" that was in effect until the new, lower rate was finally approved just last month. If they are very careful about water usage and can keep at or close to the minimum of 3000 gallons per month customers should see significant savings soon.

A problem though - is that JUI has already submitted documents indicating they are preparing yet another rate increase request.

They are claiming that expenses last year were up significantly because of the legal expenses they paid trying to get the increase last year, (the case that they lost). They also had legal expenses fighting COBRA's attempts to force a general investigation and a system rebuild (cases that were settled).

In addition, they had consulting services payments in connection with fighting the proposed zoning ordinance, and postage and printing expenses for all of the letters to customers complaining about the local citizens that are being mean to JUI. While we can't be certain, it is possible that SES had to bill JUI for the time that its employees spent putting up the large "Vote No" signs last fall.

All of these additional expenses have apparently put JUI back into the red so that they are now once again preparing to ask the PSC for an increase.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

And the cycle continues and continues and continues.

Artificial failure to gain revenue. Only here could this happen...

John, is it even remotely possible to force them into a competitive bid process and see if SES really is the most efficient supplier?

[BigTom]

I haven't found alot of people who were fond of Snyder or his plan. Is there any real chance of the county or the state purchasing the current system and then rebuilding it properly? Something needs to be done. I tell my tenants on JUI's system not to drink the water. I know it's tested and supposed to be safe but it just doesn't look right.
I was working at one of my vacant houses with a jacuzzi tub several years ago. My back was hurting pretty bad so I thought a hot soak in the tub with the jets on my back might make me feel a little better, but after filling the tub and seeing the water no way. I wouldn't even bath in it. That house now has a double filter system on it. Since then I won't buy houses on that water system.

[LFE]

Although it might not be easy to do, forming some sort of HOA with proper funding and they maybe able to install a private system that is 100% under their own control?

[OzGirl]

It would still cost huge $$$$$$ and most people dont want to pay regardless or are not in a position where they can pay. We cant even get $45 per year out of our members for road maintenace, a mail shed and community property taxes!

[tkelvington]

I am the local representative for the design engineering firm and would be glad to answer any technical questions you might have about the proposed system or other alternatives. Feel free to shoot me a PM and I will respond.

Just keep in mind that because of the general disdain for Lee and JUI, much of what you hear has been tainted by past history, legal cases, and general "tit for tat" banter. There are some real facts in the matter that are often overlooked in preference for the more inflammatory issues.

[Kensey]

I am the local representative for the design engineering firm and would be glad to answer any technical questions you might have about the proposed system or other alternatives. Feel free to shoot me a PM and I will respond.

My big one is: Why is JUI so bent on getting water from the valley or the Shenandoah instead of right on the mountain?

[tkelvington]

My big one is: Why is JUI so bent on getting water from the valley or the Shenandoah instead of right on the mountain?

That one is fairly easy. At the current time, the valley supply option is the cheapest solution that can be measured with a degree of certainty. We know the capacity and quality of the supply and can easily estimate the cost of the project. This cost estimate is the key to submitting the IJDC application. Since the public raised such concerns over this supply, they have shifted to the next option which is the river with treatment plant on the mountain side. This again is because we can calculate the cost of the project.

The problem with the mountain wells is that we currently do not know the capacity or the quality of the water so we cannot do the engineering or cost calculations. The problem with waiting for a study of the wells is that we lose the window of opportunity to qualify for grants and the project is delayed another year unless you want to finance the whole project and that would place the rates exponentially higher.

These are facts that exist with or without JUI.

[Kensey]

That one is fairly easy. At the current time, the valley supply option is the cheapest solution that can be measured with a degree of certainty. We know the capacity and quality of the supply and can easily estimate the cost of the project. This cost estimate is the key to submitting the IJDC application. Since the public raised such concerns over this supply, they have shifted to the next option which is the river with treatment plant on the mountain side. This again is because we can calculate the cost of the project.

OK, I get that -- I have to make similar tradeoffs in my own job. It's not necessarily germane to this debate, but why doesn't the same certainty already exist for the mountain supply as those other supplies? If I were a guy running a failing water system, and knew I needed another supply, I'd have been out there looking close to home first, years ago. It's not like the state of the mountain systems is anything new.

[John]

The estimated cost of the project with the proposed Shenandoah River source has climbed to 18 million dollars.

The estimated "resulting rate" after completion of the project is $83 per month for 4,000 gallons. This depends on 11 million in grant funding - which is not likely to be approved. We may be able to obtain grants for 7 or 8 million if we are very lucky. This would put rates at $100 or more per month.

JUI customers will have to decide if they want to pay that much.

[tkelvington]

OK, I get that -- I have to make similar tradeoffs in my own job. It's not necessarily germane to this debate, but why doesn't the same certainty already exist for the mountain supply as those other supplies? If I were a guy running a failing water system, and knew I needed another supply, I'd have been out there looking close to home first, years ago. It's not like the state of the mountain systems is anything new.

Agreed. JUI has some data on the existing wells but two issues exist:


Is anyone really going to let us get away with using JUI supplied data for the analysis?
As I am aware of it, the existing wells, while possible to supply a good amount of water, will not supply all of the known need (remember we have to supply fire hydrants) so new wells or improvement of the existing wells will have to occur. This takes a hydrology study. Time is our enemy on this option.
I realize rates are a real hotbutton and for good reason. I just try to stay focused on the engineering and other facts. Those pushing for other options or delays in the project may certainly be trying their best to look out for the rate payers. My worry is that the perceived savings may not really be there and the oppotunity costs are climbing.

[John]

Agreed. JUI has some data on the existing wells but two issues exist:


Is anyone really going to let us get away with using JUI supplied data for the analysis?
As I am aware of it, the existing wells, while possible to supply a good amount of water, will not supply all of the known need (remember we have to supply fire hydrants) so new wells or improvement of the existing wells will have to occur. This takes a hydrology study. Time is our enemy on this option.
I realize rates are a real hotbutton and for good reason. I just try to stay focused on the engineering and other facts. Those pushing for other options or delays in the project may certainly be trying their best to look out for the rate payers. My worry is that the perceived savings may not really be there and the oppotunity costs are climbing.

Luckily we don't have to make a choice between proceeding with the request for grant funding and investigating lower cost options.

The County and the PSD have decided to do both at the same time. A preliminary application for grant funding has been filed, and at the same time an RFP is being drafted for the necessary hydrology study so that lower cost options can be investigated.

I hope that both of these efforts prove successful.

Even if the county funded hydrology study and test wells are able to shave 4 to 5 million off the cost the total is still going to be too high for rate payers to afford.

And even with significant grant assistance an 18 million project is still too expensive.

But if the PSD can get commitments for 7 or 8 million in grant funding AND the well option proves workable, the price of the project may come down to where it can actually proceed.

West Virginia PSC guidelines say that water bills should not exceed 1.5% of median family income. That would put rates at about $53 per month for Jefferson County. Most people that I have spoken with would accept a $53 rate if it solved the Mountain Systems problem. The combination of grant funding, good engineering, and a cost effective source should get us a solution that keeps rates in that range.

[tkelvington]

While it is difficult to determine what the political climate may be at the time, I believe you will also see the availability or at least be able to get some time with state and federal elected officials once a project is solidified. This is never a guarantee, but without a project you will never get their attention. Many other municipalities in the state have seen success by first locking down a viable although costly project and then gather additional funding from federal sources and appropriations.

Just a sidebar but important to the overall intent to get a project approved as soon as possible.

[John]

Federal appropriations still come from tax dollars, and 18 million dollars for a city sized water project to serve just 350 families is not a wise use of tax payer funds.

Especially when those families will be asked to pay $100 per month for the water they get from the new plant once it's complete.

We need creative thinking to come up with a right sized project that will be cost effective for both tax payers and system customers.

If most of the cost iof this project is in replacement of the distribtuion lines, why not eliminate them all together?

Wells could be drilled and pumps installed for all 350 customers for a fraction of 18 million dollars. Customers would then have no water bills at all, and there would be $15,000,000 left over for other important projects. Imagine would 15 million in road maintenance on the mountain might accomplish.

[Jenniffer]

Now there's some outside of the box thinking. I can guess why that plan hasn't been given much consideration.

[tkelvington]

Definitely an interesting scenario and not one that we have been asked to explore (as far as I know). I think that kind of solution does create some unique questions:

1.) Use of public funding to install individual systems that would become the property of the homeowner would certainly be problematic.

2.) The utility certainly has equipment and other capital improvements within the system, how will they be compensated for the abandonment of their system?

3.) Evaluation of the capacity and supply of a few centralized wells is difficult enough, determination of the ability to install 350 individual and sporadic wells in multiple aquifers is an undertaking to say the least.

4.) What would be the water quality standard for each of the 350 wells and how will this be obtained? Each water source would have to be evaluated and then individual treatment/filtration/softening options installed at each residence.

5.) How would you handle someone who's property could not sustain an individual well either because of hydraulic conditions or because of the required separation distances between well and septic?

Sorry, I am not trying to defend any one solution. We simply study the scenarios provided to us. But as engineers and scientist, we try to eliminate as many unknowns as possible and then "solve for X". In the scenario you suggest, we would have to solve for "X, Y, Z....." That scenario, while not impossible, is probably not as practical as it may sound upon first read.

[Willis]

Definitely an interesting scenario and not one that we have been asked to explore (as far as I know). I think that kind of solution does create some unique questions:

1.) Use of public funding to install individual systems that would become the property of the homeowner would certainly be problematic.
2.) The utility certainly has equipment and other capital improvements within the system, how will they be compensated for the abandonment of their system?
3.) Evaluation of the capacity and supply of a few centralized wells is difficult enough, determination of the ability to install 350 individual and sporadic wells in multiple aquifers is an undertaking to say the least.
4.) What would be the water quality standard for each of the 350 wells and how will this be obtained? Each water source would have to be evaluated and then individual treatment/filtration/softening options installed at each residence.
5.) How would you handle someone who's property could not sustain an individual well either because of hydraulic conditions or because of the required separation distances between well and septic?

Sorry, I am not trying to defend any one solution. We simply study the scenarios provided to us. But as engineers and scientist, we try to eliminate as many unknowns as possible and then "solve for X". In the scenario you suggest, we would have to solve for "X, Y, Z....." That scenario, while not impossible, is probably not as practical as it may sound upon first read.

My interpretation of the proposal to which your refer, TK, is that it's not for individual wells to serve individual customers, but a much smaller number central wells. Health Department regulations wouldn't allow individual wells on most of the properties in the 3 subdivisions presently served or others that the utility hopes to serve because of the limitations you've described. Well distance to individual septic systems would eliminate most from well permit approval and routine monitoring that many wells would be a prodigious and costly undertaking.

I'll let others respond to correct me if necessary, but I'm sure the proposal wasn't expressing a plan that would call for 350 wells or any figure near that number. From the perspective of an admitted lay person, if homes were served by a much smaller number of central wells, it would seem to me that the need for an elaborate, costly distribution system would be much lessened. The ultimate cost to the consumer would decrease proportionally. I think that's the rationale for determining just how much water is available on the mountain.

[LazerFlash]

Let's not forget what the number one priority is for this project: To maximize the amount of money that Mr. Snyder makes... Saving consumers money is not high on his list, I'm sure.

[John]

It is perfectly appropriate for JUI, a private, for profit company, to attempt to maximize its profit. It is the responsibility of government officials (and of all of us as citizens and voters) to make certain that public funds are not misused ... or even worse - used for the direct benefit of speciifc corporations and individuals rather than for the public good.

An 18 million dollar project that will leave 350 families to pay $100 per month or more for water when complete - is not a good use of tax payer money.

This project should be redesigned so that it will directly and efficiently solve the problem of providing safe, clean, reliable and affordable water to the 350 families that need it.

[Chutney Daftcraft]

Definitely an interesting scenario and not one that we have been asked to explore (as far as I know). I think that kind of solution does create some unique questions:

1.) Use of public funding to install individual systems that would become the property of the homeowner would certainly be problematic.Because using public funds and passing off ALL costs onto users for a system that would be privately owned by one individual is a MUCH better idea. For that one individual, of course...


2.) The utility certainly has equipment and other capital improvements within the system, how will they be compensated for the abandonment of their system?

Since he's been 'losing money' on that system for so long, it sounds to me like giving it asway for free would be quite a lucrative deal, eh?



3.) Evaluation of the capacity and supply of a few centralized wells is difficult enough, determination of the ability to install 350 individual and sporadic wells in multiple aquifers is an undertaking to say the least.



It's hard to imagine a neighborhood where a bunch of sporadic houses are tapped into multiple aquifers. You know, it's kinda like imagining EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE MOUNTAIN except for these three...


4.) What would be the water quality standard for each of the 350 wells and how will this be obtained? Each water source would have to be evaluated and then individual treatment/filtration/softening options installed at each residence.

Compare it to JUI's existing supply water. If it tests better, it's better. For what it's worth, most customers on these three water systems already have in-home "treatment/filtration infrastructure" in place...


5.) How would you handle someone who's property could not sustain an individual well either because of hydraulic conditions or because of the required separation distances between well and septic?

I would pipe them up water from the valley, make them pay for all the pipes, the installation, all of it. I would pass on EVERY cost incurred to the ratepayers, so I don't have to pay for my infrastructure, but yet I can reap all the profits from other people's investments... Oh, wait...


Sorry, I am not trying to defend any one solution. We simply study the scenarios provided to us. But as engineers and scientist, we try to eliminate as many unknowns as possible and then "solve for X". In the scenario you suggest, we would have to solve for "X, Y, Z....." That scenario, while not impossible, is probably not as practical as it may sound upon first read.



I guess you're right. What WORKS WELL for every subdivision on the mountain could not possibly work for us at all...

[tkelvington]

Wells could be drilled and pumps installed for all 350 customers for a fraction of 18 million dollars. Customers would then have no water bills at all, and there would be $15,000,000 left over for other important projects. Imagine would 15 million in road maintenance on the mountain might accomplish.

Sorry - I though drilling 350 individual wells is what John was getting at here. The idea of centralized wells is going to get explored and that option still requires a distribution system. Because of the requirement for fire hydrants, I don't see how you are going to avoid the distribution element of this project. The only variable becomes source which is being fully investigated.

Chutney - A couple of clarifications. Under the new partnership, the PSD will own the equipment and JUI will operate it (as I understand it). Secondly, as you compare various developments, remember that all those individual wells were installed over a period of 50 years. Not all at once.

[LazerFlash]

Under the new partnership, the PSD will own the equipment and JUI will operate it (as I understand it).So, what's the contingency for JUI going out of business? Is the PSD ready to take over as owner AND operator?

[tkelvington]

The PSD gets a 10-year purchase option to buy out JUI (mountain system). Whether either party decides to execute this option will have to be seen.

[John]

Sorry - I though drilling 350 individual wells is what John was getting at here. The idea of centralized wells is going to get explored and that option still requires a distribution system. Because of the requirement for fire hydrants, I don't see how you are going to avoid the distribution element of this project. The only variable becomes source which is being fully investigated.


The cost of drilling 350 individual wells provides a reasonable check point againt the proposed cost of this project. The proposed solution will cost tax payers and customers at least 5 times what it would take to drill 350 wells.

18 million dollars in public funds for a plant capable of supplying the entire mountain is not a reasonable way of solving the water needs of 350 families. Especially when they would be charged $100 per month for water once the project is complete.

There are good engineering firms involved with this project. Scrap this plan and bring some creative solutions to the table. This is not a feeding frenzy for utility constuction firms.

[John]

The infrastructure problems Jefferson County is faced with are going to be very expensive to solve. We really can't afford to be doing things piecemeal and we can't afford to be spending this much money on such a small part of a much bigger problem.

The extremely high water rates that will result are going to be dwarfed by even higher future sewer rates - and we will have exhausted state and federal funding sources on this one poorly planned and out of scale project.

Who is going to pay for the rest of our infrastructure needs?

The sewage treatment plant at Shepherdstown is under a DEP imposed moratoriom, the Charles Town plant regularly exceeds limits and will probably soon follow. The PSD was unable to obtain grant funding for their proposed Flowing Springs plant - which appears now to be DOA. The Federal EPA is preparing to impose new stormwater requirements as a part of the Chesapeake Bay clean up which will come with heavy penalties for noncompliance.

Who is going to pay for the rest of our infrastructure needs?

[Chutney Daftcraft]

18 million dollars in public funds for a plant capable of supplying the entire mountain is not a reasonable way of solving the water needs of 350 families. Especially when they would be charged $100 per month for water once the project is complete.


^^^ THIS RIGHT HERE! ^^^

I hope ALL mountain people are paying attention to this. There is a larger goal here. Don't think for a second that this can't or won't happen to you if you live outside these neighborhoods. The only benefit to living outside these neighborhoods in terms of Snyderwater is that you'll get a little extra time...

[Chutney Daftcraft]

The PSD gets a 10-year purchase option to buy out JUI (mountain system). Whether either party decides to execute this option will have to be seen.

Does this option work in reverse? In other words, does Snyder have the same option to purchase it from the PSD?

Is this the same agency that sold Snyder the Bardane/Burr Water System at a fraction of what it was worth?

[Willis]

In the Journal :
Officials seeking funding for project


With a compromise agreement in place for a multimillion dollar infrastructure project on the Blue Ridge Mountain, officials say their focus now is on obtaining grant funding to finance the effort.Members of the Jefferson County Public Service District's board of directors recently agreed to submit a compromise application to the West Virginia Infrastructure and Jobs Development Council for long-sought water upgrades on the Blue Ridge Mountain. The application, officials said, is the first step in obtaining funding for the project, which is expected to cost nearly $18 million to complete...


"The Small Cities Block Grant is a way to get $1.5 million to put toward solving the water problem on the mountain," said Jefferson County Commission President Lyn Widmyer.
The grant, she said, is one of the key reasons why officials sought to quickly reach a compromise on the project and get the Infrastructure and Jobs Development Council application filed in February.


It seems to me that the residents who will be receiving the "benefit" of the project weren't included in any compromise. Only those who weren't recipients of the ballyhooed project's water won concessions. It appears to me that Blue Ridge residents' interests were flattened by a juggernaut hastening to get to the Federal Gubmint's trough.

Another quote in the article oozes with those "TRUST ME" qualities that cynics lust LOVE to hear
Snyder said Monday that the project is not expected to result in any cost increases for consumers at this time. Rate increases that are being discussed are related to the existing cost of service, he said. The bulk of the project's price, he added, will be covered by a surcharge that is already being charged to customers' bills.

It doesn't take a kollege grajit to see where this is headed.

The full article HERE (http://www.journal-news.net/page/content.detail/id/531968.html?nav=5006)

[ronald]

This is scaring me... This project for 350 families that you are talking about thats not going to effect people like on Gate 4 etc.. that already have wells and septic systems correct?

If they are going to make a system capable of supplying the entire mountain I hope this will not turn into a you are now required to hook up to our water and sewer systems.

I am all for them making a plant to house the 350 families.. if we do well systems people also dont realize that will impact water levels in the mountain and impact everyone who has wells.. you will need to make your wells deeper or move your pump deeper if its not already deep enough etc..

I want whatever system it takes to where my home is not impacted at all. I own my own well and septic system. I moved to the mountain to avoid utilities. Water, sewer.. not needed on the mountain and neither is power with piezoelectricity generators.

[Scott T]

In my view what is being proposed is about Snyder and his plans, not what is good for the people in these communities. Grant money must be looked for, but this must be about fixing the problems for those of us who live in these communities at a price we can afford. Again...Mr. Snyder...you want some water to your lots???? You pay for it and stop the bulls**t about not being able to make any money. By the way...nice new building and truck you have.