Paradise sewer board rejects county offer

Thanks, but no thanks.

That was the message the Paradise Sewer Board delivered to county officials who had hoped to assume control of the controversial and beleaguered sewer construction project that may grind to a long term halt given the Board’s latest response to an offer two weeks ago to take over the multi-million project and provide funding to bail the Board out of financial distress.

The meeting, which had been moved back to the “Clubhouse”, an outbuilding at a town church and which drew another packed house crowd, opened with just four of the five commissioners in attendance.

Following a recent election that put one new member on the Board and returned another for a second term, the first order of business was accepting the immediate resignation of now former Paradise resident Don Stamm, who sold his house and moved away from the unincorporated town last week.

Stamm, who had in recent months been a defiant supporter of the proposed sewer system project, was no longer eligible to be on the Board as a non-Paradise property owner and resident upon closure of his house sale.

Two weeks ago, Sanders County Commissioner Tony Cox had addressed a large crowd that gathered for a special Board meeting at the Paradise Community Center, saying among other things that the County was ready to take over the project and stabilize the funding woes it has endured for the last several years.

Among Cox’s proposals at that time was a financial deal to eliminate $770,000 in bond money that was to be used to help pay for the system, which would include development of several acres of land on the town’s northern edge into as many as 40 residential housing units and at least two small businesses.

Also proposed by the County was creation of a three-member panel to assume control of the project. That panel, which included Cox, Plains Mayor and County Commissioner candidate Dan Rowan and Sewer Board member Terry Caldwell, had met earlier in the week to discuss the matter.

But the proposal that was put forth did not get past Caldwell and the Board who insisted relinquishing control over the project would be at odds with the establishment of the Sewer Board to retain resident control over the project, a land purchase from developer and local property owner Bridger Bischoff and the will of the Paradise people.

After voting 4-0 to accept the Stamm’s resignation and move directly into the new business as put forth by the panel, Caldwell said the new proposal had several fatal flaws, topped by the relinquishment of local control over the controversial sewer and what residents say has been an illegal lack of transparency when it comes to keeping local citizens informed on what was going on with their money.

“I don’t like the idea that three members were chosen for this panel, including just one from the current Board,” Caldwell said. “The whole Board should be involved in this issue, that’s what we have been elected to do”.

Caldwell said the make up of the new Sewer Board and the fact they intend to be extremely transparent makes having a three-person panel unnecessary.

“We (the new Sewer Board members) have been working very well together and we feel we can expedite this procedure without losing control of our rights to represent all the people. That’s what we have been elected to do”.

Those thoughts were echoed by Sewer Board President Janie McFadgen, who along with new Board member Pernel Chapman were elected last month.

“We are the representatives the people voted for”, McFadgen said. “Doing this (giving up control of the project) is of great concern to me”.

Board members were also unwilling to accept the County’s proposal as it concerns to paying only $550,000 of the $770,000 Cox said would be covered when the county’s proposal was first made.

Caldwell and Board member Dewey Arnold, the group’s Treasurer, said they also had concerns about the stalemate in negotiations with Bischoff, despite the developer saying he would potentially consider a deal to let the Sewer Board by outright a six-acre plot of land on which a sewage system facility would be built.

Opponents of the project have long contended the system at it’s original price of $4.5 million would be a give-away to Bischoff, who they say would be getting a free system on the backs of local taxpayers.

They also noted that those costs have now risen to more than $6 million due to inflation and other factors.

Opponents have also suggested other costs involved with the project as originally proposed would be too much of a financial burden for residents on limited, retirement incomes.

Cox and supporters of the project contend the time is now to get these matters solved and move forward with the planning and execution of the project. Supporters contend the lack of a proper sewage system puts local ground water at risk of contamination.

Cox said a big concern as the stalemate continues is the risk of losing grant money funds that have already been approved for the project, which was supposed to begin construction last Spring.

“We feel it is important to move forward,” Cox said. “Bridger wants to do this. Time is of the essence”.

Some in the crowd who support the system have said and continue to say the town of Paradise is dying in large part because it has no sewer. One supporter likened it to the lack of ability to sell Paradise property because there is no sewer.

That argument was shouted down by opponents, who say every house that has gone on the market in Paradise in the last several months has sold very quickly as the national housing demand spreads to small rural communities like Paradise.

By the end of the meeting, the Sewer Board had put forth a proposal to go back to the negotiating table with Bridger. That proposal passed 4-0 with Caldwell saying certain aspects of the county’s proposal are “off the table”.

McFadgen then said just before adjournment that the county could “accept our conditions now and we could vote on it right now”.

“I don’t think we can”, was Cox’s ominous reply.

With that, the Sewer Board agreed to meet again on Monday, June 13th. That date, supporters of the project pointed out, would be beyond the June 8th deadline for coming up with a solution or losing approved grant money.