FingerLakes1.com Forums
Topic Options
#1447338 - 05/12/14 07:01 PM POOP SUIT
helpme Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/13
Posts: 53
Loc: dresden
Last week the town of Jerusalem filed a lawsuit against the village of Penn Yan and several developers who want to built hotels in the village, and the owner of the best Western hotel and the boat company developer. The lawsuit claims that the village's sewer plant can't hold the much fecal waste and that the town of Jerusalem would be prevented from sending more crap to the village that they are already being charged for. The supervisor of the town of Jerusalem has been bombarded with complaints from county officials and the village claiming that the newly proposed hotels will not be able to obtain financial assistance if the lawsuit isn't dropped. Last month the village was cited by the DEC for discharging too much waste into the outlet that runs into Seneca lake. The town of Jerusalem is holding a special meeting to discuss this matter, I hope they stick to their guns and continue their righteous lawsuit.


Edited by helpme (05/12/14 07:02 PM)

Top
FingerLakes1.com
#1447340 - 05/12/14 07:15 PM Re: POOP SUIT [Re: helpme]
TheKing Offline
Member

Registered: 07/22/08
Posts: 117
Loc: Finger Lakes
Solution: Build your own dang water/sewer plant.

Top
#1447347 - 05/12/14 08:07 PM Re: POOP SUIT [Re: helpme]
Mean Gene Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/10/09
Posts: 2345
Loc: Yates County
I think the Village already has started the process for a new or expanded sewage treatment plant. The amount of sewage contracted for is ancient history, The Town signed up for that deal years ago. I understand their lawyer (years ago) wanted to increase the maximum amount of sewage the Village would handle so nothing would come back to bite them in the butt when Jerusalem expanded. A deal is a deal, they are not using the "max" because they intentionally plugged in an artificially high figure.

I think it is RE DIC U LOS to pursue this avenue. If they were successful for some strange reason the contractors will back out. Sit down and talk about it!!!!
_________________________
"Rational arguments based upon ample evidence will not change the minds of irrational people"

Top
#1447353 - 05/12/14 08:25 PM Re: POOP SUIT [Re: Mean Gene]
helpme Offline
Member

Registered: 11/15/13
Posts: 53
Loc: dresden
Good let them back out, it will save the village taxpayers money.

Top
#1447621 - 05/14/14 08:26 AM Re: POOP SUIT [Re: helpme]
laxman Offline
Member

Registered: 08/25/08
Posts: 100
Loc: new york
i wish that would happen why should we have to subsidize a developer anyways, let him spend his own money. are taxes are already too high!!

Top
#1447817 - 05/16/14 07:59 AM Re: POOP SUIT [Re: Mean Gene]
pk65 Offline
Junior Member

Registered: 07/12/12
Posts: 2
Loc: Branchport, NY
Gene,
It is often hard to read your comments when you so frequently know absolutely nothing about what you comment on. Since there is such a lack of knowledge about this matter and why we sued, I will post the questions that Gwen at the Chronicle asked me and my response. Many of the facts didn't make the article.
1. Given the lengthy, litigious, and very expensive history of disputes on this issue between the Village of Penn Yan and the Town of Jerusalem, why has TOJ decided to escalate matters by involving the third parties named in the suit?

The Town of Jerusalem has tried for years to talk with the Village of Penn Yan and negotiate a fair and equitable resolution of what we view as an overcharging for sewage treatment. Let me give you an example to illustrate: in fiscal year 2012-2013, Town of Jerusalem used 9.2% of Penn Yan's treatment (average use was 89,000 gpd). We contract and pay for 265,000 gallons per day maximum flow rate, which equates to 19.3%. Yet we paid 36.7% ($330, 556, plus $61,015) of Penn Yan’s Sewage treatment budget. If we paid 20% of Penn Yan's budget this year, which is the maximum amount we are allowed under the contract, we would have paid $176, 000 less.

We have contracted for 265,000 gpd. Discharge flow rates from the Village of Penn Yan are capped at 1.8 million gallons per day under their NYS permit. In April, 2014, the average daily rate of discharge was 1.86 million gallons per day. They have exceeded their permit and sold at least 60,000 gallons of our paid capacity to other customers. In addition, Penn Yan has many new large proposed developments which will use more of their capacity under their SPDES permit. Penn Yan is essentially selling capacity that we pay for under this contract twice.

2. In the last suit by PY against TOJ, the legal fees incurred by the village were paid out of the Sewage Treatment Plant budget. This means Jerusalem ratepayers had to contribute tens of thousands of dollars in PY's suit against their own town. It is likely this will again be the
case. How do you respond to Jerusalem ratepayers who are paying legal fees for both sides of this suit?

If we continue paying the Village of Penn Yan at a four times the rate we use sewage capacity, and almost double the maximum we contract for, while they sell it to new customers, how is that being fiscally responsible to the taxpayers of the Town of Jerusalem? If you take the overage amount we paid this year, $176,000 and multiply that times 21 more years, we are looking at overpaying $3,676,000. How can we not try to make this right?

3. What does TOJ hope to achieve from this suit? If it is a renegotiated contract with PY, what changes does TOJ want in the new contract?

Our primary goal is to achieve a fair and reasonable rate for the Town of Jerusalem, and a long term solution to the regional sewage infrastructure challenges. Town of Jerusalem pays on the gross costs with no recognition of revenue. The current situation where, for example trucks which are purchased by Penn Yan Village with 37% of Jerusalem money, and resold 2 years later with funds returning only to Penn Yan coffers, cannot continue.


4. Mayor MacKerchar says while he is not ready to reopen negotiations at this moment, he was anticipating hearing from you and Ray Stewart with your concerns and questions regarding the contract. MacKerchar says he did not hear from either of you, and was surprised by the suit. Why did TOJ decide to take this path?

I have spoken with Mayor Mackerchar, and appreciate his reaching out to the Town of Jerusalem. I would like to discuss our concerns. However mere talk is not a resolution. I would point out that we have tried for years to resolve this, always with Penn Yan stating at the outset they will not reopen or renegotiate the contract. That is telling us they will listen to our concerns yet not address them.


5. If the third party developers decide not to pursue their plans, it will have an impact on the entire county. Is TOJ willing to cause these consequences to resolve this issue?

Gwen & John, your question displays a bias. We know of no legitimate developer who would not be willing to pay for their fair share of capacity, and they certainly cannot expect the Town of Jerusalem taxpayers to continue subsidizing them. Yes we initiated an action, but in response to nearly a decade of attempts to correct what we see as a tremendous overpayment, that if unchanged will cost Town of Jerusalem taxpayers millions of dollars. Why have Penn Yan Village Board and Municipal Board not taken some action to make this contract and the calculation of payment fair?

6. What was the roll call vote of the TOJ board members to pursue the suit?

Support for the decision to go forward with the litigation was unanimous. There was however one board member who was absent the day of the vote. As I recollect it was Killen-Aye, Dinehart-Aye, Jones-Aye and Parson-Aye.

Top
#1447835 - 05/16/14 10:02 AM Re: POOP SUIT [Re: pk65]
Mean Gene Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 08/10/09
Posts: 2345
Loc: Yates County
Hi Pat! Hope you are doing well. First of all please share with me some of the comments that I make on this blog that "I frequently comment on with absolutely no knowledge of".

You obviously read FL1 and know its an "opinion" blog. You have yours and I have mine. I have been glad over the years to make an argument in support of my opinions.

You feel you are representing the best interests of the T/Jerusalem residents in regard to this issue. I would remind you I am one of those residents that pays quarterly for the water/sewer service you speak of. My opinion of this situation does differ from yours. I would not comment on this if I knew "absolutely nothing" about the issue.

I do know that the T/Jerusalem has filed a previous lawsuit regarding this issue and lost. A court has ruled that you have a valid contract with the Village. I also know that whoever represented the Town as legal counsel, when negotiating this contract "upped" the maximum amount of sewage that Jerusalem was allowed to assure there would not be a future problem with extensions of the sewer district.

The Village has kept their end of the deal, they have disposed of your sewage as agreed upon. It appears that buyers remorse on the contract came into play many years ago regarding this issue.

I do not know how long your current contract is, it must be long or you would attempt to fix this issue when negotiating a future contract with the Village.

My point was, and is that this appears to be a backdoor way of coercing the Village into changing the contract. You don't mention the enormous capital cost of Penn Yan maintaining a viable sewage treatment plant now and in the future.

Village taxpayers probably don't like maintaining the Village Lakefront parks and ball parks that T/Jerusalem residents use without paying a fee. Or The Village providing services and maintaining the infrastructure around the tax exempt hospital county buildings and churches that some T/Jerusalem residents use in the village. Although I like them, I really don't enjoy paying tax dollars to support the "Keuka Park Fire Department" when I am serviced by Penn Yan where I live.

I am trying to picture the outcome of you being successful in your lawsuit. You win and the developers back out, not good for Penn Yan or County taxpayers and businesses. Perhaps the Village can renegotiate their contracts with the developers to get to the magic number? Perhaps the Village will expand its capacity in the future making it a moot issue.

Hopefully you can settle this issue without doing damage to our area economy. smile
_________________________
"Rational arguments based upon ample evidence will not change the minds of irrational people"

Top