Published: May 01, 2008 12:43 pm         

Letters for May 1, 2008

Letter needs clarification

This letter is in response to a misleading letter written by Doug Hallberg and published in last week’s Crier. Mr. Hallberg, who does not own property in the proposed sewer district, has expressed views that indicate a lack of understanding of the Otsego Lake septic system management program and the proposed Hickory Grove sewer project.

The septic system management program for Otsego Lake, which is led by the Watershed Supervisory Committee (WSC), and is considered a model program across the state, was developed based on needs expressed by a watershed management plan developed in the 1990s. A combination of water quality data and an inventory of existing systems formed the basis of the program. In developing the approach to upgrading septic systems around the lake, all options were investigated, from a sewer line around the lake to systems being replaced individually. Consideration of economic factors, area topography, and site constraints, led to the solutions being proposed, which include the use of advanced technology systems for both individual and shared use. This solution, which obviously considers the “whole lake,” has the approval of DEC and DOH, and is being sought after as a model by municipalities on other lakes.

The DEC awarded a grant to the WSC to install a number of advanced technology lakeside septic systems in recognition of its wastewater management program. The SUNY Biological Field Station (BFS) has partnered with the WSC to provide monitoring of these systems. The BFS is also a partner with the WSC on a project to develop a low-cost phosphorus removal system. However, to be clear, the WSC has the lead role as far as the septic system management program is concerned. SUNY Delhi’s Onsite System Training Network (OTN) is also involved because of the WSC’s program, and utilizes the program as part of their student training.

The Hickory Grove sewer project is part of an overall approach for Otsego Lake to reduce the number of failed septic systems around the lake through sharing, and to use the best long-term technologies available to protect the lake. The currently proposed district of 56 properties represents 16 percent of the total systems around the lake. The proposed treatment system includes primary treatment at each camp followed by shared secondary treatment and sub-surface disposal. It is a large septic system, not a “sewage treatment plant” as one would find in the City of Oneonta. It is an underground system that will not be seen, heard, or smelled. It is primarily a passive system requiring minimal maintenance. A similar, smaller system has already been installed on the lake and is currently serving two camps.

Of the 56 camps, 39 have been inspected and 17 remain to be inspected. Inspection letters were sent to all property owners, but not all have responded. Additional letters will be sent in May requesting inspections, and if not responded to, the septic systems will be considered to be in failure. The Hickory Grove area has a failure rate of 74 percent, the highest of any area around the lake. The disposition of the 17 camps not inspected will be known by the end of July, which is when the process for sewer district formation will be finalized.

Mr. Hallberg also asserts in his letter that “by law anyone residing in the sewer district will pay a significant annual fee if they are hooked up or not.” This is a misleading statement. The local municipality, in this case the Town of Otsego, has a high degree of latitude regarding those in the district who do not hook up initially. It is true that the town is required by town law to collect a fee from those not hooked up, but it can be a nominal fee as low as $1 per month, which is certainly not a “significant annual fee.” Those not required to hook up initially include those who passed inspection and those who recently installed a replacement system as part of the inspection program. Mr. Hallberg’s further assertion that the district will have to expand and that costs are unknown is false. As part of the sewer district formation process, user fees are known up front. All potential users know exactly how much they will be paying for operation and maintenance and repayment of debt, and they get to decide if they want the district or not. Also, the district cannot simply “expand over time.” If an expansion is proposed, the new potential users will get to approve or reject the expansion by the same process used to originally establish the district.

In closing, the Watershed Committee has developed a comprehensive plan for addressing all septic systems around Otsego Lake. The formation of a sewer district is being offered as an option to those residing in the Hickory Grove area. They will get to decide whether or not the district is formed. By law, failed septic systems within 500 feet of Otsego Lake and 100 feet of a tributary stream must be replaced with a system approved by the WSC.

Otsego Lake is a drinking water “reservoir,” and failed septic systems polluting the lake cannot be allowed. Replacement of the failed systems in the Hickory Grove area will be either with a shared system or with individual systems, whatever the people there decide.

Next steps in the process include a review of an amended engineering study at the May Otsego Town Board meeting (May 14), and a public information meeting in June (date to be announced at the May 14 meeting).

Win McIntyre Cooperstown

Work together on pesticides

We attended the Village Board of Trustees meeting on April 21 because we had heard some questions were going to be raised about the abundant use of pesticides and herbicides in and around Cooperstown. This matter has concerned us for a number of years, and we have made some enquiries and been assured that all is safe and well. However, the public at large now has too much awareness that it has become classic for a chemical to be widely used only to find out down the line that, indeed, it was toxic to those who were exposed to it.

While we should not make ``chemical’’ a dirty word since homo sapiens depend on all kinds of chemical interactions to live a normal life, we should not assume that all chemicals introduced unnaturally to our environment are safe. The testing and proof of safety has so often turned out to be insufficient. Therefore, we citizens have a right to raise questions, to be concerned, and to seek reassurance, even though we may lack the knowledge base to understand all the information. I was pleased to observe how Mayor Waller and the Board listened and received the information and questions presented by Andy Mason and Michael Whaling, both known for their commitment to keeping our environment safe. However, since that time those responsible for proof of safety seem to be reacting as if some terrible sham has been unleashed. Angry defensiveness seems to be in the atmosphere. Why?

Why should we citizens have the burden of proof and not they? If these are truly benign chemicals, I say, ``Fine — use them!’’ However, at the April 21 meeting a physician presented some upsetting information to the effect that the incidence of autism is drastically higher in this area than it is nationally. Why? There may be no connection between the high use of unnatural chemicals in this area and our higher incidence of autism, but there may be. Lay people just do not know. It should not be an upsetting social gaff to ask for truth and scientifically sound information about what we are putting into the environment. Our progeny may one day be grateful that some cared enough to seek the truth about what is safe for us human beings.

Hilda and Sam Wilcox Cooperstown Borgstrom

running for school board

I am running for a term on the Cooperstown Central School Board of Education. The Board of Education has a great responsibility to its students and the community. I am confident that my background and abilities will enable me to live up to that responsibility. Our future lies with our children. Providing them with the necessary skills, motivation, and opportunity to grow is critical to their success, both within the Cooperstown schools, and beyond.

Our school board has a duty to provide the best educational experience possible to all the children of our district. Without a positive learning environment, Cooperstown would not have the ability to attract high quality educators and other professionals to our community. I have devoted much of my professional life to the education of physicians and surgeons, so I am quite familiar with the need for quality education at all levels of personal development.

The Board of Education also has a duty to the members of the community. I have demonstrated my fiscal responsibility as the President of Cooperstown Youth Baseball, where creating a positive athletic and personal growth experience with limited funds has been essential. As a member of the Board, I will ensure that the Board of Education maintains a continued dialogue with the residents of our school district in order to facilitate positive communication between the Board, staff and faculty, and the community. This positive relationship is essential to allowing the Board to fulfill its commitment to our students.

Through my experience, both as a volunteer and a surgeon at Bassett Hospital, I have been able to assess the needs of our school and our community.

Through my work with other boards, both professionally, and as a volunteer, I have come to understand the dynamics of group decision- making. I will bring my experience to the Board of Education to further the goals of the students, parents, and taxpayers in the district.

David Borgstrom, M.D. Cooperstown

Stop chemical use now

It is encouraging to read that the Village of Cooperstown has enlisted the help of Dr. Ted Peters to look at the golf course pesticide situation. Missing from this discussion is the answer to some questions, Why not stop using these chemicals now? What is the justification for applying 1,600 pounds and 137 gallons of pesticides on the southwest shore of Cooperstown’s drinking water source? Does the creation of artificially perfect playing conditions take priority over public drinking water protection? More frequent, targeted water tests are certainly necessary, but to really get ahead of this, we need to follow the precautionary principle, which puts the responsibility and proof of the safety of an action on those proposing it — rather than waiting for the public to prove the harm later.

Totally organic maintenance of the Leatherstocking Golf Course would be a point of pride for the Otesaga and the first village on the Susquehanna River as well.

Michael Whaling Sharon Springs Sewer

moratorium needed

We urge the Otsego Town Board to place a moratorium on the proposed sewer district until all septic systems in the district have been tested. The Watershed Supervisory Committee (WSC) is entering year four of a five-year inspection program of all septic systems within 500 feet of Otsego Lake. Failed systems are required to be replaced by the end of 2009. The proposed district encompasses only one half-mile of Otsego Lake, but what is more troubling is that costs for this enormous infrastructure are based on the projected number of users.

The WSC February 2008 newsletter states that the town of Otsego will own and operate the system, and assess only users of the system an annual fee which will cover debt repayment and operation and maintenance.

However, the April 2, 2007 Town Board approved minutes state that ``all properties in the district will be taxed even if they’re not connected to the system.’’

We have asked for an amendment to these minutes, but to date they remain unchanged.

We urge the board and the Watershed Supervisory Committee to complete the remaining 30 percent of inspections and to reconsider the proposed plan.

We must find a “whole lake” solution. Then and only then can residents make an educated decision on whether the creation of a sewer district would be in their best interest.

The next Otsego Town Board meeting will be Wednesday, May 14, at 7 p.m. in Fly Creek. Become involved in the process. Tom and Kathy Chase Marcia and Bob D’Amico Veronica Gil Seaver Sarah “Sash” Seaver Schatzi Hall

Kay Additon Jim Bell

Time for change at CCS?

The headline of Cooperstown Central School’s recent newsletter appears to be one more step in a lengthy journey of deceit. ``Quality Education While Controlling Costs.’’ Certainly, it would be unfair to cite it as a blatant lie.

Yet, I believe it would have been more responsible of the Superintendent and Board of Education had they added some adjectives.

Perhaps, ``Below Average Quality Education While Loosely Controlling Costs’’ might have been more appropriate. Seem harsh? Perhaps, what is harsher is the fact that Cooperstown has declined academically over the past 10 years.

Currently, CCS ranks 12th out of the 12 school districts in Otsego County, according to the New York State Department of Education’s data. Furthermore, on a statewide basis, CCS ranks below average. Should one wish to reference this data in assembled format, they can visit www.itbeskool.com. As far as budget control, Cooperstown is seeking percentage increases in excess of her neighboring districts. Most of us are proud in supporting our children’s education. Many of us moved to this area with the realization that our tax burden would be higher.

We accepted this due to the belief that CCS stood above other area schools. Now, when we see our dollars being pumped into a faltering school, we have reason to be angered.

Last year, I wrote a similar letter addressing these very issues.

Forty-five faculty and staff members responded with a claim they were performing above average.

This was not true. I wish someone would respond now. No need to be defensive. Just please provide a plan. We want our school to get back on track.

Perhaps, each of the three Board of Education candidates could respond with their assessment of CCS’s current academic status. As newly elected board members, will there be anything they can do to return Cooperstown to its previous academic standard? Do they believe that we (the taxpayers) should be satisfied with the status quo?

Is it wise to continue on a plan for ``greatness`` when the school is below average? Should the school attempt to raise their current academic standard before they reach for new whimsical programs? Do they have the courage to stand up for our children even though it will likely require less than pleasant tactics? School turnarounds often require administrative change.

Eric Rheinhardt Cooperstown