Letter to the editor: time for a change on sewer board

I should point out that at the present time we are not living within the Bigfork Water and Sewer District, and have not owned property within the district since 2003. Prior to that time, starting in the early ’80s, we had considerable experience with the system and the board, and were “rate payers” at several residences until 2003.

At the time of approval in the early ’80s, Eagle Bend built a “state of the art” wastewater system to handle the effluent from the residences within the project. In the mid ’90s the Eagle Bend system was combined with the Bigfork water and sewer system. A line was built from the project to the Bigfork plant. All of the infrastructure for both the wastewater and fresh water systems were given to the Bigfork system. A 15-year developer’s extension agreement supplied some financial recovery and the agreement expired Dec. 1, 2010.

The building boom of the early 2000s placed a growing demand on the Bigfork system and additional capacity became necessary. The board made a decision to spend around $10 million to expand the present plant located by the lake in Bigfork. It is a point discharge system where the treated water is discharged directly into the lake and therefore is required to be virtually pure. No one should or could argue against the need to keep Flathead Lake in its purest possible form and keep the ground water surrounding the lake as clean as possible. However, the decision to expand the plant at its present location is a misdirected decision and has locked the district members into a very expensive experience in future years.

Not all wastewater systems have the need to point discharge into a lake or river. The Lakeside-Somers system is an example of one that operates very efficiently with an evaporation system. It has room for expansion and has not required a huge expenditure beyond rate income to improve or expand the system. The connection fee at the present time within their district is $1,799. This number appears to be much less than the Bigfork district fee. The west shore has experienced the same growth pattern as the Bigfork area.

In recent years, new technologies have been developed throughout the world in the processing of wastewater for commercial, business and residential systems and have even shown advancement into third world countries. I would suggest that this board has done no long-range planning, no research into other technologies and no exploration into ways or methods to save the district inhabitants money.

The board and staff have stated to the press that it really does not matter if the revenue bond passes, the plant is going to be built, either from the bond issue or by raising the rates to fund the structure. Such a statement sends a clear message that they no longer feel a responsibility to the constituents and will do what they want, without any interaction, input or responsibility to those who pay the bills. It sure would be interesting if the community acquired a new, much needed high school that way.

The Bigfork Water and Sewer District board have become “self-appointed” and are responsible to no one. In my opinion, it operates with no consistency in hook-up fees, no standard rate sheet, no publishing of financial records and no communication with the monthly rate-payer or residents within the district.  

Our community has so much open communication from the school board, the Bigfork Land Use Advisory Committee, the Bigfork Stormwater Advisory Committee and all other groups and organizations that seek a betterment of the community. The community deserves the same from the water and sewer board.

There has not been an election for a member of the water and sewer board for over 20 years. Now is the opportunity for a change in thinking from members that would be progressive, provide transparency and communication with the community.

A vote for Tim Calaway and Fred Sterhan will be a start toward progressive change.

Mike Felt

Bigfork