Newspress.Com
Consider other options
for NFM sewer plant
http://www.news-press.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070624/OPINION/70624014
Lee County owns and operates the existing
Waterway’s Estates sewage treatment plant in North Fort Myers, which sits on
approximately 1 acre of land on an island located on the banks of the
Caloosahatchee.
The existing level of service provided by this plant must be improved because it
is at its capacity limits and has been discharging excess phosphates and
nitrates into the river. In addition, because the population growth in this area
has exploded, more capacity in this immediate area is needed.
Originally, this sewage plant was placed at its present waterfront location by
the subdivision developer in order to discharge the treated effluent into the
River. Such direct discharges are no longer allowed, so a waterfront location is
no longer required.
The remainder of the island, upon which the plant sits, is 5.8 acres of land
currently zoned for a marina with 283 boat slips, a restaurant, a swimming pool,
and an outdoor Tiki-hut. On May 1, 2007, Lee County Board of County
Commissioners (BoCC), in a 3-2 vote approved Lee County Utility staff’s
request to purchase the marina land in order to expand the plant at its current
location.
Four significant policy issues were inherent in that decision to acquire this
property. The BoCC should have made these policy choices directly by addressing
each one in a full Board discussion and considered the costs and implications of
each of the alternatives for the project. None of the issues should be ignored
by accepting one option without considering the policy implications and
opportunities lost when rejecting other alternatives.
The four policy decisions are:
1) Shall the BoCC encourage co-operation with the cities within the County
whenever our mutual interests are involved?
2) Shall the BoCC seek to enter into public/private partnerships where cost
savings through such relationships are available?
3) Shall the BoCC respect the objectives of the water oriented land use overlay
of the comprehensive plan?
4) Shall the BoCC provide wastewater treatment services to the Waterways Estates
service area at the lowest practical cost?
There are three alternatives for replacing and expanding this treatment plant:
1) continue servicing the area with a county owned facility at the current
location or at a new location further inland,
2) connect the entire Waterway Estates service area to a nearby City of Cape
Coral plant pursuant to an inter-local agreement,
3) connect the entire Waterway Estates service area to the new privately owned
utility plant operated by North Fort Myers Utilities (NFMU) pursuant to a
contractual agreement.
Continuing with a County Owned Sewage Treatment Plant:
On May 1st, the County administrative staff presented and recommended a purchase
contract for the 5.8 acre marina land in order to continue treatment operations
on the island. In fact, other options were not included in the meeting agenda
(see May 1st administrative agenda item 6A online at leegov.com).
Granted, building on an expanded version of the present site has apparent
advantages. Even so, the plan to displace a marina and build a sewer plant on a
waterfront site is not something we generally accept to be appropriate today,
especially in light of the condition of the Caloosahatchee Estuary.
This choice was also at odds with the long anticipated use of this site.
Replacing the water dependent use with a wastewater treatment plant contradicts
the goals of our comprehensive land use plan (Lee Plan). Yet this was the single
solution presented for public decision by the Board.
In order to preserve access to the water for residents, when the Lee Plan was
developed, a few sites which were well suited for water oriented uses were
identified. The Lee Plan establishes as a goal the retention of those uses. The
marina site, which the expansion of this treatment site would displace, is yet
one more water oriented use that the public will loose. As a result, approval of
the on-site expansion would not only abandon the continuation of the public
interest in the water oriented use, it would initiate that abandonment.
What about the other alternatives?
What should the Board of County Commissioners consider?
Cooperate with the City of Cape Coral:
The possibility of an inter-local agreement with the City to provide wastewater
treatment services is a useful opportunity to explore the beginning of a
cooperative relationship with Cape Coral and ultimately all of the cities in Lee
County. In addition to sewage treatment, there are several issues that call out
for a combined and cooperative effort (i.e. Zemel lands annexation).
At times, local governments in this county have cooperated to their advantage.
An example is the inter-local agreements under which the City of Fort Myers has
provided wastewater treatment services at their two plants to serve parts of
unincorporated Lee County. In fact, since the 1980’s Lee County has held
options to purchase approximately 50% of the capacity in these plants.
At other times, interlocal cooperation has been difficult. Often there has been
a mutual attitude of going alone even when cooperation was possible and
advantageous. Even so, there is an ever increasing need to act cooperatively in
more and more areas including growth management activities and the provision of
services and infrastructure at less cost to citizens.
If the advantages of cooperation in local government services are to be realized
every opportunity to share the burden should be explored fully when it arises.
Whether or not this opportunity should be pursued is a policy decision for the
Board of Commissioners to make.
Public/private Partnership with North Fort Myers Utilities:
A large part of North Fort Myers east of U.S. 41 is served by a private
wastewater treatment utility. Recently, the owners of that utility have
submitted a proposal to treat the wastewater collected in the area served by Lee
County's Waterway Estates treatment plant. According to the NFMU proposal,
discussions of this alternative were curtailed early by the administrative staff
in favor of going it alone. Yet there appears to be considerable promise for
cost savings both in the short term and the long run by this public/private
partnership.
At one time, the policy of Lee County was to meet the wastewater treatment needs
of unincorporated Lee County through privately owned providers. This policy was
referred to as “privatization,” a concept favored by some “small
government” advocates. More recently the privatization approach was abandoned
in favor of wholesale governmental ownership of these utilities. Without second
guessing the overall decision to abandon privatization of the utilities, there
remains the possibility of cost savings through public/private partnerships.
Public/private partnerships can take many forms. They are neither inherently
good nor bad. But, neither is there anything inherently “right” about public
ownership of an entire utility system.
The objective for Lee County should always be to provide good service at the
least cost to our residents. In this instance it may be through a combination of
public vs private ownership of the physical assets. Unless the goal is
ownership, the potential cost savings should be the deciding factor.
The residents of the Waterway Estates service area should reasonably expect a
careful analysis of that potential before this alternative is disregarded.
Unintended Consequences – Legal Hang-up:
Aside from the planning policy implications of abandoning the water orientated
use, rezoning of the 5.8 acre property is surely problematic. Parties, including
the Waterways Estates residents having an interest in the future use of this
property have the right to a quasi-judicial public hearing. One of the features
of such a hearing is that the decision be made by a neutral party (e.g. BoCC
sitting as Zoning Board).
To the extent that any one of the board members has publicly expressed a
conclusion about an alternative use such as a sewage plant, their participation
may be grounds for legal challenge because the neutrality of the decision maker
may have been undone meaning the residents may not be assured that a fair and
impartial decision can be assured.
Pull the Gun Away — Enjoy a Margarita:
Commissioner Mann has likened the haste to make the decision we made on May 1st
to “having a gun held to my head."
For all the reasons stated above, the Board of County Commissioners should
carefully consider whether a means to back out of the contract to purchase
should be negotiated or the closing delayed while other alternatives are fully
contemplated and evaluated.
Clearly, potential cost savings are possible. But, even if this is not so, the
need to consider county policy issues merits that all alternatives be considered
and all policy issues addressed directly.
A delay in going through with the contract should be reasonable to the sellers.
After all, there are odiferous advantages if the county abandons the current
location and a marina is one day built on an island that does not also occupy a
sewage treatment plant. After all, Margaritas at pool side or under a Tiki-hut
are far more enjoyable without foul winds present.
— Brian Bigelow is a Lee County commissioner, representing District 2.