Often one of our members brings up an interesting point which bears

repeating: Another tribute to bureaucracy is, "NATO admits Russia" and

carries on as if it is still needed. How I wish it read, "NATO disbanded

after fulfilling its mission well." If the world community cannot see the

irony and stupidity of this event, what chance do we in Martin County have

to keep in check our own self-aggrandizing bureaucracy?

    One more vehicle, one more building, one more computer, one more

employee, one more study, one more tax/fee. Each item on its own may be

justified, but where does it end, and who foots the bill?  

    The Martin County Taxpayers Association exists to guard against taxpayer

abuse by government. One of the most difficult aspects of our job is

determining when public funds apparently will be spent on a valid public

purpose, but are in fact being spent for another purpose entirely.

    The recent decision by the Board of County Commissioners to remove

septic tanks from three areas of the county and replace them with central

sewers falls in this category. At first, it seems both sensible and

politically correct to support removal of septic tanks. After all, we know

what goes in them, and it must be causing pollution, right? But what if the

technical evidence is, in reality, overwhelmingly in favor of septic tanks

being a safe and environmentally friendly method of wastewater treatment and

recycling? Then our alarms go off, and we wonder who is really benefiting

from this program.

    First some background. Every septic tank permit includes a fee used for

research into improving septic tank performance, and documenting any

environmental threats caused by septic tanks. This body of research is very

large, and has been conducted over the past 30 years at great cost,

literally millions of dollars.

    The Martin County Commission suggests that septic tanks are a threat to

the St. Lucie River and Indian River Lagoon. Extensive studies conducted in

local conditions, including Rio, find they are not a threat.

    There is a small area near Fort Myers in which any nitrogen is a threat

to surface waters due to high phosphorus levels from runoff out of the

phosphate industry drainage basin. The Florida Keys do not have soil

suitable for septic tanks. These are the only two areas in Florida with

documented reasons to remove septic tanks on a large scale.

    The county staff reports that septic tanks discharge a lower quality of

water than central systems. This is misleading at best. The quality of

effluent measured 6 feet from a typical septic tank drainfield is

consistently better than the quality of secondary treatment effluent from

any central treatment plant in Martin County.

    Septic tanks recharge groundwater to the benefit of the local water

table and surrounding wetlands. Central utilities generally pump the

effluent into deep wells, removing it from our local environment. While a

fraction may also be used for irrigation, this re-use comes at considerable

additional expense. Recharging the groundwater table for irrigation use

makes a lot more sense.

    Enough background, what about costs? Septic tanks are a very low-cost

treatment option for low-density development. Every other wastewater

collection and treatment option costs more. What central sewers do best is

allow higher density development than can be served by septic tanks - i.e.,

more people and pavement.

    This appears to be the main motivation in including Rio in the sewer

plan, to increase density and allow more intense development. It may also be

a factor in Lighthouse Point and North River Shores, as house renovations

are limited by yard space required for drainfields. We wonder whether the

increased paved areas will not be much worse for water quality in the river.

 

    However, as long as policies to increase density and redevelopment

potential are publicly debated and agreed upon, we have no argument with

them. We do have a major problem with those who benefit being subsidized by

those who do not. We believe that the landowners who will benefit

financially from central sewers should pay the cost to install them. This is

not the course the county has selected.

    First, the county wants to issue bonds to install the sewers - bonds

secured with general revenues, not utility revenues. This is a very

dangerous departure from past fiscal precedent. Second, in order to make the

program more palatable to the people being served, the county proposed to

"discount" the cost of service to them, and charge all the other utility

customers in the county the difference.

    Finally, the proposed system of vacuum sewers will be more expensive

than gravity sewers to operate. The long-term operations and repairs cost

has not been revealed, but either those benefiting will pay more, or

everyone connected to the utility system will pay more in order to cover the

costs.

    There is no evidence this program of removing septic tanks will improve

the river. The same amount of money could be better used to manage non-point

source pollution and actually benefit the river. In total, this program will

simply require the rest of us, including tourists, to subsidize unnecessary

utility expenses for a selected few. A majority of those few live in very

expensive waterfront homes, which is doubly insulting to those of us who

cannot afford such real estate.

    We believe this program is a classic Trojan Horse project,

misrepresented by our local government and capable of major fiscal mischief

in the long run, to all taxpayers' expense.