Lagoon isn't 'growth'

Jan. 23, 2012

Richmond, Iowa

To the Editor:

I recently had an opportunity to read the minutes of the meeting of the Feb. 1, 2011 Washington County Board of Supervisors at which four of our five supervisors voted for the Richmond lagoon sewer project. I was very disturbed to read Supervisor Wes Rich saying that this project ?is extremely important for the future growth of Richmond,? and that the ?system will enhance growth in the town.?

I have no idea what Wes Rich even means by ?growth.? Most of my friends and neighbors seem quite content living in the pleasant little village of Richmond, and I don?t hear anyone clamoring to have it made into anything else. If residents of Richmond wanted to live in a bustling city or in a sprawling suburb, then that is where they would be living. We really wonder what interest Supervisor Rich has in transforming our community, and what he wants to transform it into.

Also, I have heard Wes Rich a number of times repeating his mantra, ?This is the most cost-effective way of solving this problem.? How could anybody possibly know that? There is no evidence that there are any serious sanitary problems in Richmond, and if any minor problems do exist, nobody knows what they are since the county hasn?t allowed Richmond residents to inspect or upgrade their septic systems for the last 14 years. Yet Supervisor Rich assures us that a complicated $1.8 million lagoon system is ?cost-effective?!

My understanding of the DNR?s normal procedure is that if there is a complaint, the DNR comes and takes samples. If tests come back positive, property owners are officially notified that they should correct their problem. This is a sensible approach.

However, instead of following the standard practice, four of our county supervisors and RUSS appear to trying to use the DNR as an excuse for an expensive and completely unjustified, but somehow ?cost-effective,? lagoon sewer system.

I really can?t decide whether Supervisor Rich?s unwelcome calls for Richmond to ?grow,? and his fantastic statements about this wasteful and unnecessary lagoon system being ?cost-effective? represent a severe lack of good old-fashioned common sense, or some ulterior motive ? or both.

Randy Berg

Richmond, Iowa