Cary News, 23 Dec 04

[Wuptdo]

I have mentioned this topic in several different threads here in CP and there it is on the front page of the Cary News!

http://www.carynews.com/front/story/1952927p-8317532c.html


This is scary! I wonder if people on the TC or staff ever read this blog?

Then again, what I really want to know is: Who is really running Cary; the Town Council, Staff, or Chamber of Commerce? Curious minds want to know!

Wuptdo B-)

[Rono]

One thing that is forgotten as well, (and Adam did not mention it in his article) is the $1.25 MILLION DOLLAR WATER SETTLEMENT that the TOC paid to Raleigh! Please remember, after this 2001 water agreement, whoever runs the TOC thought it best to quit paying on a water contract Cary had with Raleigh. Raleigh of course went after Cary, and Cary ended up settling and paying Raleigh this amount.

My question is, what funds paid this settlement? General Obligation Funds? The Water Bonds that Cary residents approved in the late 90's that put themselves in this mess? Or perhaps increases in Water and Sewer rates paid the settlement. Or maybe this was washed into general obligation bonds over the past few years. Or maybe this will just be a hidden part of the cost of the new sewer plant. Who knows!

Let's see, get more water by water bonds (sell the approval of the bonds to the voters as water shortage relief) and supply lots of the water to the southeast UA Urban Services area, which by waste dumps it into the existing wastewater treatment plant that discharges into Middle Creek, then force taxpayers to pay for new Wastewater Plant and remodeled sewer system to redistribute discharge to replenish loss to the original water source area. WHAT IS WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE???

I wonder where all this cost is added to the TOC estimates of the cost of annexation?

Rono

[johnb]

Ssshhh! It's best for troublemakers like you if you don't point out the obvious Ron. You're "mean" and "divisive" when you do stuff like that. You're supposed to pretend you don't notice the fact that the city staff and council does things like that. You're supposed to pretend that everytime the Law of Unintended Consequences or the Principle of Responsibility kicks the staff or the council in teeth that its the first time that's ever happened and it couldn't have ever been predicted or expected by any reasonable person.

Don't go wandering off the reservation.

[StanN]

Rono,

Do I understand you correctly - Cary is currently supplying water and sewer services to the UA - or do you mean Cary intends to supply such services once that UA is incorporated into Cary?

Regardless of the answer is your implication that the sole reason to obtain water was to supply it to a UA - (before or after znnexation)?

As far as JohnB's "unintended consequences" everyone knows that when you obain your water supply from one basin and discharge it into another, i.e. take it from the Fear and discharge it into the Neuse, you have a responsibility (as spelled out at the time the state gives you the authority to tap the first basin) to either limit your take to avoid shotages downstream, or later replenish that water so that it is available to the downstream residents of the first basin. This basic law is so well known (it goes back to Old English Law) that everyone involved knows that eventually you will have to abide by the ruling of the state/Environmental Management Commission. The only excuse may be for someone who has lived out west where the law is essentially first come - first served.

The law does not apply to Raleigh since it gets it water from the Neuse and discharges it to the same river basin. Cary's geography/topology is by and large such that to return the water to the Fear it would have to pump it uphill - very expensive. The interbasin system allows it to use gravity instead. I assume the new wastewater plant will discharge into the Fear. I am not up-to-date as to where the water is being drawn.

Cary's utility staff is world class and its beyond belief that anyone was suprised by anything that transpired here.

So somebody please explain the "unintended consequences".

stan

[johnb]

One thing that is forgotten as well, (and Adam did not mention it in his article) is the $1.25 MILLION DOLLAR WATER SETTLEMENT that the TOC paid to Raleigh! Please remember, after this 2001 water agreement, whoever runs the TOC thought it best to quit paying on a water contract Cary had with Raleigh. Raleigh of course went after Cary, and Cary ended up settling and paying Raleigh this amount.

Of course one could also mention the Welfare for Politicians Act / Public Campaign Financing Ordinance the City Council passed which the SBOE found to be a blatant and inexcuseable violation of state campaign finance rules. But what the heck.....

Or perhaps we could dwell on their slashing spending on roads at a time when we have what? 5 or 6 intersections given failing grades in the city limits.....what might the unintended consequences of that action be in the real world? More automobile wrecks perhaps? A few more ambulance trips possibly? Maybe a fatality or two? The continued irresponsibility of the council to properly address real city priorities combined with their apparent inability to see the obvious, no Regency Park will not "pay for itself" is something to worry about.

Who the hell is really worried about the inter-basin transfer of water? I understand you've probably already written a multi-volume screed on the topic but for the rest of us it's a non-starter.

You're right Stan, the city council is all wise and doesn't ever act in an irresponsible fashion nor does it pass ordinances that violate state or federal law.

[StanN]

john,

Only I am right 100% of the time. :lol: Your shovel inssults in such volume and in so many directions that you are bound to be right at least part of the time. You ought to take your shtick into the clubs. Don Rickles made a fortune doing what you do for free.
.

stan

[washere]

So under "other orgs" who/what did you guys figure???

The REALTORS? :wink:

[johnb]

You are wrong in one unstated assertion in your post Stan.

Don't for a moment discount your own ability to be condescendingly arrogant and insulting.

While you phrase your attacks in a far more polite fashion, the venom is still toxic my friend. Where I call the city council critters thieving SOB's you do a cleaned up hatchet job on Ken Gardner, as an example.

[StanN]

It simple John - you go after Gardner and company and leave the CTC to me.

Stan

[johnb]

...but Stan, Gardner is a wonderful human being, honest and full of love for humanity...what's wrong with ol' Ken? ;)