Questions for Giles, Spehar on TRSD project


EDITOR: Thank you for publishing the article titled “Public concerned about legitimacy of TRSD protest,” (Dec. 26, 2018).

The article focuses in general on protests to the proposed three-phase Tri-City Regional Sanitary District (TRSD) wastewater collection, transmission and treatment project.

My comments are directed not at the project, which I support in its proposed scope and form, but on two protests directed at the project.

The first protest “of note” was from Globe City Councilmember Charlene Giles, who provided two reasons for her protest vote. Her first reason for protest — lack of protest notices and instructions — is inaccurate but not of concern here. It is her second reason which has piqued my interest.

In the article, she is quoted as saying “Globe and Miami are both at half capacity and could easily take the effluent and it would cost one-third the money.”

The TRSD Project is not about treating effluent, it is about collecting, transmitting, and treating domestic wastewater. So I suggest Ms. Giles fully inform herself as to the extent of the TRSD project and then publicly substantiate her claim that “... it would cost one-third the money.”

The second protest was from Mr. Jay Spehar who is reported to have served on the Miami Wastewater Advisory Board for more than 10 years. Mr. Spehar stated in the article, “the entities should sit down and work this out.”

I am informed that Mr. Spehar attended some of the more than 60 meetings held between the Town of Miami and TRSD to form a joint wastewater management system and take advantages of “economic synergies available to us.”

However, even after three years of meetings the Town of Miami appears to have been non-responsive and TRSD was directed to go in a “different direction” (i.e., develop a standalone project). Perhaps, after Phase I of the project is cornpleted and operating, “sitting down and working this out” wilI become viable for Phases II and III.

Mr. Spehar also stated he was on the Industrial Development Board and worked with others to prepare a wastewater study similar to one proposed by Gila County in December 2018. When and why was the study conducted? Who was involved in the preparation of the study and what was the level of investigation? Were the results made available to the public and TRSD for consideration and evaluation? If the study was not available, of what purpose is this revelation now?

As stated at the outset, of this letter, I am in favor, of the TRSD project as proposed. It addresses a significant and long-term local problem — the controlled management of domestic wastewater generated in a currently unserved rural/urban area of Gila County.

I am guardedly optimistic the resolution of intent wilI be accepted by the majority of property owners in the TRSD and that Phase I of the project will finally come to fruition.

And, I am of the opinion Phases II and III of the project could be revisited if interested willing groups have revisions that are technically sound and offer economic and logistic synergies.

R. Jacques

Claypool

Property Owner, TRSD

Advertisement

More In Viewpoints