Justification for lagoon is evaporating

Richmond, Iowa 52247

September 10, 2012

To the Editor:

I attended the Washington County Board of Supervisors meeting on August 28, 2012, and I found it very interesting indeed.

Mr. Dennis Ostwinkle, director of the Washington office of the Iowa Department of Natural Resources (DNR) came to the meeting and refuted the oft-repeated canard that his agency is mandating a lagoon sewer system for the village of Richmond.

He clearly stated that the DNR was not mandating a lagoon system for Richmond, and that the choice of a lagoon was made by the Washington County Supervisors. He also stated that there are many other methods of addressing Richmond?s situation which would also be acceptable to the DNR, including proper onsite septic systems.

Supervisor Adam Mangold looked like a deer caught in the headlights as he exclaimed, ?You mean onsite systems are alright?? Whether Supervisor Mangold was feigning ignorance or has actually gone through his entire term in office without understanding this fundamental fact about the project he has been pushing and voting for, this was certainly not his shining moment.

As he tried to set the record straight, it really did seem as though Mr. Ostwinkle was tired of seeing the DNR falsely used as a ?Boogie-man?. However, readers of Ron Slechta?s article of Aug. 29, 2012 in the Kalona News would never know it. Mr. Slechta did a masterful job of selecting and rearranging Mr. Ostwinkle?s words to make it look like he actually supported the Richmond lagoon.

On the same morning of Aug. 28, Mr. Terry Jones, from the same Washington DNR office, was in Richmond investigating an anonymous telephone complaint claiming that sewage was running in the streets at three specific addresses.

Not only did he not find anything that warranted sampling, or that was even possible to sample, but he later told me that he looked over the little town and didn?t see any of the red flags that would indicate that there may be sanitary problems.

I found it interesting that two of the reported addresses were at or very near the same locations where the samples used to justify this whole lagoon project were collected in 2001.

When I visited the DNR office later that week I was told that their policy was that when a positive sample was from a known source, the property owner was notified that there was a problem, and that it was his or her obligation to correct it. The DNR has never been able to explain why this policy was not followed in 2001.

Indeed, as we collect more and more information, any possible justification for a multimillion dollar lagoon project in Richmond is evaporating before our eyes. This matter clearly needs to be investigated very carefully before the county digs itself any deeper into this boondoggle.

Sincerely,

David H. Rosen

Richmond, Iowa