County Outlines Village Utility Projects
- Print print this page
- Discuss 7 comments, Blog about
Advertisement
Much of the discussion at a joint meeting between the Pinehurst Village Council and Moore County Board of Commissioners Thursday was dedicated to the county's current and future water and sewer projects in the village.
County Manager Cary McSwain and County Public Works Director Dennis Brobst walked the council through the projects that are currently under way and others that are on the docket.
The construction of five sewer lift stations around Lake Pinehurst generated a lot of questions from the council, which indicated residents living near the sites have expressed concerns about the projects. Many have complained about noise and appearance of the construction sites.
County officials maintained that the lift station projects are difficult, and asked residents to bear with it as it moved forward.
Mayor Ginsey Fallon said communication with the residents is key, and she encouraged the county to keep in contact with them. The county indicated staff has done so, and the commissioners made site visits to see the -construction firsthand.
"There is a tremendous amount of contact going on right now to make sure that these questions are being responded to," Board Chairman Tim Lea said.
McSwain said the stations are to be "substantially completed" by Sept. 8, with everything to be finished in October.
Construction of a 500,000-gallon elevated water tank on Monticello Road is progressing and is expected to be completed in September, McSwain said. The tank will replace two tanks near the Carolina Hotel and is designed to relieve pressure -fluctuations within the system, which have caused water main breaks.
"This tank represents a significant improvement to our water system," McSwain said.
The county is expecting wells 5A and 9, located on Pinehurst No. 2, to be online by December. It expects to begin the replacement of 35 old fire hydrants in Old Town on July 12.
In the future, the county will make a hydraulic model of the village's water system in order to identify and prioritize problem spots that need to be fixed.The county estimates the total cost of all water system improvements will cost between $6 and $8 million.
It will also rehabilitate or replace about 11.2 miles of sewer line in Old Town for about $5.5 million.
The project includes the addition of about 78 manholes and the rehabilitation of 132. It is also planning to complete slip-lining around Lake Pinehurst for $1.2 million.
Other questions from the council were more general, related to water supply and demand and management of the projects.
Wagram Facilities
Near the end of the meeting, Fallon asked why the county wasn't interested in pursuing the possible utilization of water and wastewater treatment plants that formerly served a Westpoint-Pepperell mill near Wagram in Scotland County.
The village made a bid to purchase the facilities for $5.5 million on its own last year. Recently, the county declined to contribute $2,500 for a regional feasibility study on the plants. That matter was not discussed.
Lea explained that based on information that the county had received, it would have to pay $6 to $8 per 1,000 gallons of water from Wagram, much higher than other contracts it currently has in place.
He said the commissioners -didn't believe that was a good business decision, and added that the board was unanimous on that.
"It got down to us making a good business decision or making a political decision," he said. "The board decided to make a good business decision. We're not going to play politics on this issue."
Commissioner Larry Caddell added that a lot of options for water are on the table, but he believes the Robbins treatment plant is still the best solution for the West End/Seven Lakes area.
"I think before we do anything major, we need to make sure that we've exhausted the options at Robbins," he said, adding that the county is waiting on Robbins' decision. Lea said that the county remains active in conversations with other providers in the meantime.
Resolving Legal Conflict
Thursday's meeting followed both parties signing a "memorandum of understanding" that outlines a "framework for further discussions and negotiations" between them to address and resolve legal and operational issues regarding utility projects in the village.
The memo acknowledges a -disagreement between the -village and county over whether the county is subject to provisions of the Pinehurst Development Ordinance and Engineering Standards Manual. The memo calls for the two parties to find a mutually agreeable set of standards to resolve that conflict.
According to the memo, in further discussions between the village staff and the county's engineering staff, a neutral engineer will be present to determine whether the two parties "can reach an agreement on a streamlined process and standards to be applied to the construction of utility projects by the county within the village's municipal boundaries and its extraterritorial jurisdiction." It calls for that process to be collaborative and include village input.
They will also work on developing a new encroachment agreement with respect to county utility projects located within a village right of way.
According to Village Manager Andy Wilkison, the current encroachment agreement, signed in the 1990s, is between the village and the now-defunct Moore Water and Sewer Authority, which operated county utilities at the time.
The ultimate goal of the memo is to resolve "all current and future utility issues" between the two parties. Both pledge "to develop and maintain a good-faith and open dialogue."
The county board approved the memo on June 21, while the council followed suit on July 6.
Contact John Krahnert III by e-mail at jkrahnert@thepilot.com.
More like this story
Advertisement
Comments
None 2 years, 10 months ago
"Mayor Ginsey Fallon said communication with the residents is key, and she encouraged the county to keep in contact with them. The county indicated staff has done so, and the commissioners made site visits to see the -construction firsthand."
It's comforting to know that the county staff and CBC made such an effort to notify Pinehurst residents of on-going projects. What happened to the rest of Moore County Taxpayers who are so uninformed other than the fact we cannot vote on a the Limited Obligation Bonds providing the $10,000,000.00 for the work that has already begun.
It's no wonder why Caddell, Picerno and Melton stepped back from a previous commitment for total transparency for citizens of this county. But we must understand that a hugh voting block exists in Pinehurst, and the reason Caddell and Picerno changed political party's from Democrate to Republican to get elected! How does RINO compare to "Fence Railers."
Yes folks ~ this has whole deceptive hoodwink has been going on for some time. Only those of us who pay the bills were left in the dark, and wasn't given the courtesy to vote on how they spend our money. Here you go folks:
Follow up to my post on [July 8, 2010 at 10:42 a.m.] My "investigation" has taken another day to provide readers with additional facts regarding the transparent vote based on a majority vote by all five commissioners for transparency. Only Tim Lea and Cindy Morgan followed through on their pledge.
OUT OF SIGHT OUT OF MIND: Could be a reason Larry Caddell has defended his, Nick and Jimmie's vote to vote on all bond issues at once. Let’s see what ALL of the taxpayers in Moore County will pay for Pinehurst water and sewer systems: 1. 5.5 Million for sewer rehabilitation. OK 2. 1.2 Million for Slip-Lining Lake Pinehurst. OK 3. 1.227 Million for a Water Tower on Monticello. OK 4. 2.073 Million for Remote Radio Read Meters. OK
TOTAL: $10,000,000.00
Transparency in County Government ~ if you search long and hard enough or live in an area where there is a hugh voting block.
None 2 years, 10 months ago
Caddell and Picerno changed their party registration from Democrat to Republican so they would get the Pinehurst vote.
Look at the links on this page about water issues: More like this story.
Pinehurst was moving on without Moore County - the Wagram deal. Then all of a sudden CBC power-of-three started seeing opportunities lost by alienating the Pinehurst crowd. Now they go over with hat in hand to try to make everything alright since elections are coming up in November. Doesn't anyone find it interesting that Pinehurst residents were pandered to and those of us who are on the hook for a whooping 200 million had to resort to blogs to get information?
I had a Pinehurst resident who lives on the lake, sign my petition this morning after church. You can't ignor people too long and then think your relationship is just hunky-dory! A lot of P'hurst residents are not happy with the county CBC.
Honestly I see where the residents of P'hurst are coming from ~ if you are jerked around enough by Larry and Nicky, it leaves a bad taste in your mouth like unfiltered sewage.
None 2 years, 10 months ago
It's a part of the CBC's motion for total transparency, except the people who live outside Pinehurst. HUGE voting block....
CBC started the projects with the cost still in the RED on Moore County's debt ~ no wonder we can't vote on the bonds. They have already spent the money!!! Our Money!!!!
None 2 years, 10 months ago
Thanks bigDog ~ If they can't run with the BIG DOGS then they need to stay on the porch....Neighbor I'll need all the votes I can get! If there isn't a change in the Mafia, we'll all pay for decades to come.
ohreally 2 years, 10 months ago
Sadly, the majority of the residents in the county have no idea what is going on. They just pay their tax bill every year and hope for the best. And, oh yeah, complain when it goes up. Unfortunately by then it is too late. The money is spent, the commissioners are out, new ones are in, and all they can do is scratch their head at the budget that shows much going out and little coming in. The new round of commissioners will have no choice but to raise property taxes to pay for the decisions of the previous ones.
signed taxpayer
SoPinesNo1 2 years, 10 months ago
Its nice to see Moore Public Utilities maintaining their system. Moore Public Utilities is an enterprise fund which is intended to be self-supporting, that is, operation, capital improvements, and maintenance costs are covered by user fees.
I would like to see MPU expand its customer base by extending lines into new areas and adding to its customer base. Then you have more customers retiring the debt, and more customers to defray costs. As long as Pinehurst is 80% on the customer base, they will always be paying 80% of operation and maintenance costs. Why not expand the system into other areas, so that Pinehurst residents are paying less than 80% of all costs?
None 2 years, 10 months ago
SoPinesNo1 ~ that's another 50 million or so...I have my infrastructure using two wells and a septic system that works just fine. Question on the floor? why are we paying for the 10 million dollar bond that is linked to the DC? U see?
SANDHILLSK9 2 years, 10 months ago
SoPinesNo1: I'm here with TODA! 6 years ago i paid $7000.00 for my well and $3500.00 for my septic, both in best working order and good water, even in the last Drought!
Why in the world is my tax money used for Pinehurst Water? The County did not gave me any support for my water system!
Why should I even sign up for county water, just so the county can tell me to save water in the summer, by not washing my car or watering my lawn. As happen a cpl. years ago where even restaurants could not wash the dishes, but the golf courses got watered every Day. Just because we live and prefer the county living we are not citizen 2. class! It should not matter how many million Gallon the customer buys from the village or county, rules should apply for all the same way! The 10 mill. bond should be carried only by the village and the county water customers, Public Works is paid by Tax payers Dollars because it is run by the county.. get the Point???
FaithinUSA 2 years, 10 months ago
if you knew what they put in that water you wouldnt drink it
FaithinUSA 2 years, 10 months ago
check out this website http://www.mercola.com/Downloads/bonus/chlorine/default.aspx
ncsnafu1 2 years, 10 months ago
All MC residents are not paying for the Pinehurst infrastructure work, as some mistakenly believe, regardless of what they might say or incorretly argue. The MCU customer base is paying the bond tab through their respective water/sewer rates. Given that PH makes up about 80% of the customer base means that PH residents will in deed be paying about $8M out of the total $10M bonded. The bonded total is currently broken down between PH receiving approximately $9M in project work with the other $1M in work going to other parts of the county.
Keep in mind that the $10M would never have been bonded in the first place had MCU's revenues not gone in the crapper along with the economy a couple of years go. With the economy going South the Commissioners pay-as-you-go strategy for financing utility work collasped thereby leaving them with the following question. Do we bond projects or do we say forget maintenance and live with the ugly results. In this case, the Commissiponers are doing absolutely the correct thing by bonding the projects and moving forward with work that has been delayed for many years.
SoPinesNo1 2 years, 10 months ago
TODA and SandhillsK9... Both of you don't seem to understand. MPU is an enterprise fund. It's supported by user fees, not for your tax dollars. Take a look at the department's budget. The expenses are user supported not supported by the tax dollars of those that don't have the services.
None 2 years, 10 months ago
SoPinesNo1 ~ theoretically you are correct. Then can you explain why the 42.5 Million for the DC and the 10 million were voted on in one motion? Why wasn't the 1 million for Carthage, 10 Million for Pinehurst, and the overpriced DC voted on as independent issues? Is it not easier to bundle the financial package, so voters are kept in the dark as to what and how their money is being spent? I think that is the case ~ until subliminal debt is brought to the light of day.
When a new homeowner makes a land purchase, applies for a mortgage, and purchases appliances, does the new homeowner make one monthly payment? Or three separate payments. Isn’t interest on the loan applied to the unpaid balance? The same accounting principles are applicable to utilities, infrastructure, and capital improvements in one swipe of the taxpayer credit card….
Prior to The Pilot venturing into the world of responsive dialogue via web site discussion boards, an editorial in support of CBC decisions were the word of the day, and continues with editorials in support of CBC tax and spend policies. Opposition letters like Jamie Clark’s second letter wasn't published. With support of the only local newspaper for big spending, those of us who support total transparency will experience more opposition in overcoming proponents’ arguments for spending without alternative solutions.
SoPinesNo1 2 years, 10 months ago
I have been involved in projects elsewhere with enterprise funds, such as MPU. A form referred to as a 108C is completed by the applicant, MPU in this case, and is submitted to the Local Government Commission, (LGC), for approval in incurring debt. If the submitted 108C form does not show that the debt can be retired through user fees, then it is typically rejected by the LGC, and not approved.
I am also aware that MPU received funding of the pump station replacement project around Pinehurst Lake, at least partially, through a Loan/Forgiveness Loan from President Obama's stimulus package. With the stimulus loan, 50% of the amount received is forgiven and not paid back, and 50% is paid back over a 20 year period at 2% interest rate upon project completion. Again, the LGC had to approve the project prior to allowing MPU to incur the debt. So there is someone overlooking the actions of MPU to insure that all debt incurred is retired through user fees not tax revenues.
The detention center is different entirely, in that it does not generate user fees, as the provision of water and sewer service does. Perhaps, the County needs to charge its detention center occupants a user fee, and use those fees to retire the debt incurred?