Water board considers sewer issue

“We need to button this up,” said Point Roberts water commissioner Lorne Nielson, facing another month with the sewer comprehensive plan lagging on the agenda under old business.

The state department of ecology and the county began reviewing the plan in June and in a July 2 letter to district engineers the DOE submitted a list of conditions that need to be met before the plan is approved. “They wanted the district to formally adopt it,” said district engineer Bob Bergstrom. Most other conditions involve minor changes to the plan and concurrent county reviews, but no substantive modifications.

The plan outlines three options for future sewer service in Point Roberts. The first is to maintain the status quo, under which wastewater is handled by single home septic fields and some larger systems serving developments. Option two is for a small, expandable sewer system to serve the central commercial core and large developments. Option three is for a system to serve the whole Point.

District commissioners have been putting off commenting on the plan pending any changes but are now preparing to take a stand on which, if any, of the options it outlines they would support. “What I really want to do is set a policy on what aspects of the plan are going to be implemented,” said Art Wilkowski at the district’s July 9 meeting. “I think the board should say once and for all that, for example, option three is not feasible at this time and will not be implemented. We’ve had enough public input and I think we need to put sewers to bed.”

Commission president Madeleine Anderson remained reluctant to take a stand. “I don’t think we can dictate what will happen,” she said.

Wilkowski and fellow commissioner Lorne Nielson had stronger opinions.

“Looking at this draft I think we can say at this time the water district will not be implementing option three,” Wilkowski said. “It’s not feasible. My opinion is option one is feasible for the near future. For option two, sewering the commercial core, I want the responsibility to be put on the property owners. They need to petition us.” If the owners of more than half of the property in a given area submit a petition to the district they would move forward forming a local improvement district to fund the system.

“I don’t agree,” Nielson said. “When does the water district take responsibility? Isn’t it the district’s responsibility to make sewers available to people whether they are used or not? In Maple Beach, for example, when is it the water district’s responsibility to say this area needs sewers. I’m a little disappointed in the comprehensive plan. The public meetings asked who wants sewers and we should be asking who needs sewers.”

Wikowski said that it was the county health department’s responsibility, not the water district’s, to decide if septic systems posed a possible environmental health risk, and they presented no evidence to that effect during the comprehensive planning process. “When they do determine it’s a problem the property owner has the opportunity to correct it or petition us to form an LID,” he said.

Nielson said that, in the case of the central business area, the district had the responsibility to encourage the development of the local economy by providing infrastructure necessary for business. Wilkowski, who is also president of the chamber of commerce, said he wanted that momentum to come from the business community itself. “I want to see them standing up there saying they have 20 people signed up to pay for it,” he said. “If you give someone free cake…”

“I’m not saying free cake. I’m saying it’s our responsibility to create a good business environment,” Nielson replied. Their disagreement boiled down to a different view of what drives and limits the local economy. “I don’t think sewers affect the economy, I think it’s that line,” Wilkowski said pointing at the border. “Sewers have a significant impact. Enormous,” Nielson countered. The discussion will continue when the commissioners meet again August 13.

BACK TO TOP