More flexibility needed

To the Editor:

The following is a copy of a letter I sent to the Tisbury board of health and board of selectmen. It is a follow-up to comments I made at the public meeting on Sept. 13 to present and discuss new nitrogen regulations.

First, I want to reiterate that I and others share and endorse the goal of reducing and potentially eliminating the flow of nitrates into our ponds, specifically the Lagoon and Tashmoo. I am a resident of one of the designated districts, specifically at 68 Bellevue Avenue. The Lagoon is an important resource for my family and friends, as well as all residents. My support of your work includes the promulgation of reasonable regulations governing the multiple sources of nitrate entry to these waterways.

At the meeting I spoke to three points for discussion: that the regulations should reflect and accommodate the uncertainty that is inherent in any pilot or demonstration initiative; that the regulations should make no reference to specific costs for a subset of homeowners, but reflect the principle that costs for this experiment be based on equity and fairness for all residents; and that the regulations should either exempt all specific districts being considered for public sewers, or should not be applicable to proposed districts until after decisions have been made relative to all potential public sewer districts.

In summary, I believe that the regulations need to reflect more flexibility and better match the realities that: nitrogen is entering these waterways from multiple sources and from multiple towns; that the effectiveness of the longer-term (five to 10 years) functioning of these new technologies is untested and unknown; and that the bodies of water are used by all in Tisbury, the Island, and beyond.

While I lack the legal background to make specific changes in the proposed regulations, I urge you to consider and incorporate the following concepts into a final revised version before voting:

1. That the recommended technologies are by definition experimental, as such would hold any required installation financially harmless if its performance is not as expected when operated as instructed within a (five- or 10-?) year period.
2. That any proposed sewer district be exempted from the regulation until such final determination is made.
3. That the excess over standard cost of installation and the cost of annual maintenance of the experimental systems be equalized for all residents. (This can be accomplished practically either by a small special assessment on all property designated for this purpose; or by deducting [offsetting] these costs from the annual tax obligation of the homeowner that installs and maintains the experimental system).

Thank you for the opportunity to be heard on this important issue.

Victor Capoccia

Tisbury

The post More flexibility needed appeared first on Martha's Vineyard Times.