RE-ELECT TOM CREAMER - APRIL 9, 2012

PRINCIPLE, INTEGRITY, OBJECTIVITY, TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, EQUITY

Saturday, May 30, 2009

Requesting Action on Hamant Brook

Hello everyone,

Please forward this [correspondence] to your Sturbridge neighbors, friends and family, and other Sturbridge residents. Please respond to me after reading this if you can join me:

Last Thursday evening, an informational meeting was held about dam removal and stream restoration at Hamant Brook. There was good attendance by residents who heard about and saw successful examples of dam removal projects, presented by representatives from American Rivers, Trout Unlimited, and MA Riverways Program.

The general consensus by residents was that dam removal and stream restoration was a good option - there are more pros than cons - plus the burden of cost is taken off residents' shoulders through available mitigation funds and other funding sources.

In attendance at the meeting, the Chairman of the Sturbridge Conservation Commission stated he would send an e-mail to the Selectboard the next day, to set a date to facilitate discussions; however, to my knowledge that has not happened.

RECAP: The Massachusetts Office of Dam Safety requires that Phase I inspections are completed on the Upper and Middle Pond Dams, at a cost of $7,000-$8,000 EACH; reports are due by August and October 2009. These Orders were received in the Selectboard's office on May 3rd and are the first step in the process toward bringing the dams into conformance with Dam Safety Regulations.

The town does NOT have the option of allowing the dams to naturally disintegrate -the choices are: repair, or replace, and there are deadlines and costs involved; OR, approve the Department of Fish & Game's proposal to remove the dams and restore the stream at no cost to residents.

Residents have not been made aware of the costs and deadlines involved with keeping the dams in place. To date, there has been no movement on this issue by the Conservation Commission, Selectboard, or Finance Committee. The 62-62 split vote at town meeting indicates there IS support for dam removal. **The town WILL be expected to fund costs of all inspections, permitting, design, repair or replacement, and maintenance of the dams.**

Estimates to REPAIR these two dams currently range from $487,000 to $517,000.
Estimates to REPLACE the dams go as high as $1.2 million, which does not include inspections, design, permitting or future maintenance.

Please respond to this e-mail: Can you join me in a Citizen's Forum on Monday, June 1st, 8:30 pm, at the Selectboard meeting at the Sturbridge Senior Center?
We must ask the Selectboard to face this issue. The decision to keep or remove the dams is needed soon!
--
Carol Childress
christmas59@charter.net
Posted by Thomas R. Creamer at 1:01 PM

5 comments:

  1. One correction: after sending the above letter to Mary Blanchard, she responded that she had received an e-mail, as promised, from Conservation Commission David Barnicle. This is wonderful news, because it shows movement on this issue. Thank you Mr. Barnicle.

    Residents: this is all the more reason to attend the Citizen's Forum on Monday evening! See you there.
    ReplyDelete
  2. Since first being asked to objectively review this issue back in January 2009, I have studied and reviewed all relevant material pertaining not only to Hamant Brook and the restoration plan, but dams in general, particularly non-essential dams. To date, I have found no scientific data or information that supports anything other than removal of the dams.

    Ecologically, environmentally, and economically, I have been unable to find a single element of objective criteria that supports anything other than dam removal. Certainly, should such information exist that has yet come to light one would be remiss not to consider it, but to date no objective argument for retaining/refurbishing the dams has been unearthed.

    Clearly, subjective arguments for retention of the dams abound, some manifesting from dear friends and respected neighbors. Were this not a matter of taxpayer funding or potential safety issues, one might be inclined to allocate more weight to subjectivity. The luxury of subjectivity however, should never enter the arena for an elected official when taxpayer funds or safety is involved. The needs of the many, must always bear weight above the desires of the few.

    Thus, I, as a selectman, in the face of overwhelming evidence and scientific data can take no position on this issue other than supporting the Hamant Brook Restoration plan as proposed by the Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (DFW), which warrants removal of the dams and the repatriation of Hamant Brook to its natural state. Certainly, should future evidence be provided that warrants reconsideration of my position, one can be confident that I am and will remain duty bound to objectively and carefully deliberate on such new information. Void however, of said new and convincing information, my position – based upon lengthy and calculated deliberation - clearly supports the DFW restoration plan.
    ReplyDelete
  3. Cha-Ching!I learned this morning that the Conservation Commission will be requesting $15,200 more from Sturbridge residents at the next town meeting, to pay for Phase I inspections of the dams at Hamant Brook.

    This is on top of the $12,000 already spent by taxpayers for a second opinion to repair two dams at Hamant Brook. The 2nd opinion was basically the same as the first estimate: the first said it will cost $487,000; the 2nd opinion said it will cost $517,000 to repair both dams. Cha-Ching!

    If Phase I inspections state the dams are in "poor" or "unsafe" condition, then Phase II inspections will be required. Phase II inspections are more expensive because they require drilling, stabilization, and other tests. Cha-Ching!

    The Conservation Agent is currently overwhelmed with her workload and in a couple weeks will be asking the Selectboard for a budget increase to pay for an additional person to help out in that office. Dam repair and maintenance require time-sensitive forms and personnel to stay on top of it. Cha-Ching!

    The purse strings are opening, folks. Keep in mind that these Phase I inspections are required by August, and October, 2009.

    Residents may want to give deeper thought to the proposal by Fish & Game to remove the dams and restore the stream at no cost to taxpayers.

    Don't bother sending a letter to the Selectboard because it will not be read. Instead, attend the Conservation Commission this Thursday, June 4th at 9pm, and let the Conservation Commission know you do not want to pay for these repairs or inspections!
    ReplyDelete
  4. The $15,200 will NOT be requested at the upcoming town meeting. On June 1, 2009, Jim Malloy said:

    "The Conservation Agent was recently provided copies of the Orders from the DCR Office of Dam Safety requiring a Phase I dam inpsection of the upper and middle dams by the end of August (upper) and October (middle) of this year. Even if a decision to remove the dams is made by the Conservation Commission, it doesn't relieve the Town of meeting the conditions of these orders. Erin Jacque, our Conservation Agent obtained quotes from CME to conduct Phase I dam inspections and received a cost estimate of $7,600 per dam ($15,200 for both dams), which is consistent with the last inspection they conducted for the Town for the dam at Cedar Lake. I received this information today (dated June 1) with a request of how to increase the Conservation Commission budget to cover these costs. It would not come from free cash, but would need to come from either a reserve fund transfer or from a transfer from other available funds with the approval of the Board of Selectmen or Finance Committee. The other alternative would be to review whether a transfer from the waterways improvement account or other accounts would be a possibility."

    The Orders from the Office of Dam Safety were received on May 3rd - they're already one month old. Be that as it may, I hope this e-mail shows people that the costs associated with keeping these dams is inching closer to our purses with each day that passes and there isn't the option for taxpayers to vote on that spending.

    However, the town can meet its obligations by requesting extensions to these Phase I inspections. This option has not yet been explored by the town; but doing so will push back the Phase I deadlines, saving the town this $15,200, while allowing DFG to line up its funding sources for dam removal.
    ReplyDelete
  5. Hello everyone,

    UPDATE: About 7 supporters turned out last night's Conservation Commission meeting, so first off, thanks to all of you for coming
    out and making your statements to the Conservation Comissioners. For those who couldn't make it, thanks for your well wishes.

    The five Commissioners voted as follows: 3 yays: Bonja, Hanson, and Grehl; 2 nays: Goodwin
    and Barnicle. The vote was in support of sending a letter to Dept of Fish & Game (DFG) in SUPPORT of the project. DFG will now obtain a letter of support from Old Sturbridge Village, and once those two pieces are packaged with the application for funding, it becomes a waiting game. Although not mentioned at the ConsCom meeting, three Selectpeople supported this proposal as well: Creamer, Garieri, and White.

    I will be back in touch when I have more news about the Phase I inspections (whether extension requests were granted, or not) and funding for the proposal.
    For now, pat yourselves on the back for a job well done!

    Special thanks to Al Basile; Beth Lambert of Riverways Program; Peter Schilling of Trout Unlimited; and Brian Graber of American Rivers.

    Thanks all!

    Carol
    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)