Here are the results to date with excerpts from the replies (permission to publish name granted in each case):
Here is my response to your e-mail regarding the new sewer proposal:
A. I would vote against the proposal.
B. Mainly for reasons 1 [It is still too expensive] & 2 [Septic tanks work fine, so there is no reason to change], and partially for reason 3 [If electricity fails, there might be sewage backed up into the house].
I know of no one in my part of the neighborhood who has had trouble with their septic tank. There is no smell whatsoever. Maintenance on a septic tank is very simple and has so far been inexpensive for me. $8,000 will go a long way towards future maintenance.
I'm not sure why the sewer system is being pushed so hard, but I suspect it has to do with the increased amount of development. If this is indeed the reason, I feel that the financial burden should be carried by the developers who benefit monetarily. In my opinion, we pay an enormous amount of property tax to live here; if we are forced to pay an additional $8,000 for a sewer system we do not want, we may be forced to relocate. I cannot justify the cost of a sewer system without some hard data on the possible increase in property value.
We chose to move into this area for many reasons, not the least of which was the rural atmosphere, which is diminishing every day thanks to the development. And to add insult to injury, we are now faced with additional costs for development we do not need nor desire.
A. Would you vote for or against the new proposal?
Answer: FOR
B. If you voted against it, is it because (choose as many as you want):
C. If you voted yes, is it because (choose as many as you want):
My wife is against the proposal, but I think it would be a worthwhile investment. Before I would actually vote, however, I would like more information about the complete costs, including maintenance. It would be interesting to see a cost comparison -- especially one spread over a 10 or 20 year time frame.
I would vote no. Reason - Current "Septic System" is working fine. Second,I do not [want] the potential for raw sewage in my home. Another point, if sewage would back up, how would this affect my house insurance premiums, re-sale ofmy home, environmental hazards, etc. etc.?
[Based on the answers to the following questions, Phil says his final decision will be determined by an economic calculation of the cost of eventually having to replace his septic lateral field vs the cost of the grinder pump system].
My questions:
Is the "pit' on my property accessible via a lid or is it buried?
Answer: A small lid, approximately 2' in diameter.
Who is responsible for maintenance from a cost point of view, and who
would actually perform the maintenance? What service
guarantees are there?
Answer: County will provide ALL maintenance for a flat fee (approximately
$30/year). Maintenance contractor will guarantee one-hour response time
(call back), two hours on-site, 24 hours/day, 365 days/year.
Is there some sort of an alarm system to indicate that there has been a
failure? I would like to see some sort of indication that the holding
tank is full.
Answer: Re-setable audio alarm (by home owner) w/flashing light (re-setable only by
service man). For pump failure, high water, etc.
Is it possible for my neighbor's pumps to push sewage back into my
holding tank with a potential to back up into my basement?
Answer: Absolutely impossible.
Are there performance restrictions. Such as:
Can I flush 2 toilets and run the dishwasher and the washing machine at the
same time?
Answer: Yes!
Are there restrictions on the material that it can handle,
i.e. anti-freeze, phosphates, coffee grounds, etc.
Answer: Absolutely no restrictions on use - if you can flush it, the pump can
handle it.
If the pit in my yard was large enough, the power problem becomes less
important, so what are the cycle times versus volume.
Answer: Too many variables but, for an average family, 12 hours of safety time
before a back up into the house.
Are there to be continuing use fees? If so, what are they? Who
and how would they be collected?
Answer: Approximately $30/year maintenance fee (on annual real estate tax bill)
A. I'd vote against the new proposal.
B. Our septic system is reliable and relatively maintenance free. Periodic maintenance is required, of course, but is manageable at much lower cost than any sewer proposal yet put forward. The new proposal adds worries about mechanical or electrical failures that we simply don't have with our septic system.
A. I'd vote against the new proposal.
B. I have had too much experience with waste water sewers backing up into basements to risk it again.
I am not at all confident that the County will have a vehicle ready to hook up electricity to our pumps in
the case of a power outage. Even if an outage occurs only once every 20 years, if it is your basement and
belongings that are ruined, that is one time too many. I am satisfied with my septic system and have never noticed any
smell from anyone else's.
Section 17 was very effective in turning out the responses on the last sewer survey . A group of us distributed information leaflets and operated a phone bank which contacted almost every household, first to inform them of the survey, then to follow up to ensure postcards were returned. The focus was on making sure that regardless of how the survey went, the results truly represented the wishes of the residents. In a few cases (including an important one involving a large landowner), we insured that a second postcard was sent to the proper address. The work was relatively easy because we had representatives across the Section and could split up the work.
If you are interested in participating in a similar effort for this survey , please contact me by e-mail (phillips@kcnet.com) or phone (685-1445). Also pass on the word to others near you who might be interested in helping. We can then arrange to get together, organize ourselves, and figure out how to best get everyone in the Section to submit a response . I suspect we have plenty of time before the survey actually occurs.