One anonymous writer made some great comments regarding the Cardinal Hill Waste
Water Facility located on Steven Rd, and we will try to bring these to the forefront with some additional information. He is one of the residents on Steven Dr. who objected to this project being built in his backyard. His request to the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) was for everyone affected to receive notification in the status change of the facility.
Since the permit expiration date is 2/26/2012, it is necessary for Polk City to submit a new application for a permit renewal or expansion if they plan to keep this facility operational past the expiration date. A communication from Jeff Hilton, P.E., Manager of the Domestic Wastewater Program, stated that at this time, they have not received any applications for a permit renewal or expansion from Polk City.
To receive notification of any permit applications, anyone can sign up for a free subscription to receive e-mail alerts when permit applications are submitted to DEP. The DEP e-mail address is http://pass.dep.state.fl.us/DepPub/welcome.do/ This is a great way to stay informed as to any updates in Polk City’s permit status in regards to this treatment facility.
We did some further research, and discovered that Swift Mud and the DCA refer to the Cardinal Hill facility as “Polk City Interim ID#FLA489093”. In their documents it shows that a permit for a temporary facility was issued on 2/27/2007 and this permit expires on 2/26/2012
The DEP is the lead agency in the state government for environmental management and stewardship and is one of the more diverse agencies in the state government, protecting our air, water and land. The department is divided into 3 primary areas: Regulatory Programs, Land & Recreation, and Planning and Management. Florida’s environmental priorities include restoring America’s Everglades, improving air quality, restoring and protecting the water quality in our springs, lakes, rivers & coastal waters, conserving environmentally-sensitive lands and providing citizens & visitor with recreational opportunities, now and in the future. Additionally, the DEP does not have any direct regulatory authority over residential wells, nor do they have any information or knowledge in regard to the abandonment of residential wells.
I urge those in the Deer Trails North Subdivision, and those in the City to contact both Jeff Hilton @Jeff.Hilton@dep.state.fl.us, 813-363-1394, 813-632-7600 x443 and Tim Banks 850-245-8358 timothy.banks@dep.state.fl.us Question these men about the feasibility of a five year lease for a "temporary" facility and the DEP's recommendations for the City's utility needs. It is shocking how some of the prior administration did not heed the recommendations of the DEP and citizens of Polk City. Millions of taxpayer dollars have been squandered at the personal whim of the prior "dynamic duo" with no regard to the economic impact to the City or taxpayers. It is my understanding the DEP and the City have discussed a number of options available to the City that could bring swift economic relief to the the taxpayers in the City. please don't take my word for it, contact these individuals listen to what they have to say then contact your City officials.
ReplyDeleteDid the City comply with the following prior to building the Interium Facility?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=wastewater&URL=0400-0499/0489/Sections/0489.145.html
This makes fro intrestering reading in reguards to the disfuctional Mount Olive Plant:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu=1&App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=wastewater&URL=0100-0199/0125/Sections/0125.3401.html
Does anyone recall this being done prior to purchasing the Mount Olive or installing the TEMPORARY WWT plant on Steven Drive?
ReplyDeleteFS 180.03 Resolution or ordinance proposing construction or extension of utility; objections to same.
—
(1)When it is proposed to exercise the powers granted by this chapter, a resolution or ordinance shall be passed by the city council, or the legislative body of the municipality, by whatever name known, reciting the utility to be constructed or extended and its purpose, the proposed territory to be included, what mortgage revenue certificates or debentures if any are to be issued to finance the project, the cost thereof, and such other provisions as may be deemed necessary.
(2)Any objections to any of the provisions of said resolution or ordinance shall be in writing and filed with the governing body of the municipality, and hearing thereupon shall be held within 30 days after the passage of the resolution by the legislative body of said municipality.
(3)For the construction of a new proposed sewerage system or the extension of an existing sewerage system that was not previously approved, the report shall include a study that includes the available information from the Department of Health on the history of onsite sewage treatment and disposal systems currently in use in the area and a comparison of the projected costs to the owner of a typical lot or parcel of connecting to and using the proposed sewerage system versus installing, operating, and properly maintaining an onsite sewage treatment system that is approved by the Department of Health and that provides for the comparable level of environmental and health protection as the proposed central sewerage system; consideration of the local authority’s obligations or reasonably anticipated obligations for water body cleanup and protection under state or federal programs, including requirements for water bodies listed under s. 303(d) of the Clean Water Act, Pub. L. No. 92-500, 33 U.S.C. ss. 1251 et seq.; and other factors deemed relevant by the local authority. The results of such a study shall be included in the resolution or ordinance required under subsection (1).
History.—s. 1, ch. 17118, 1935; CGL 1936 Supp. 3100(6); s. 4, ch. 2006-252.
More reading for the taxpayers of Polk City,
ReplyDeleteF S 180.04Ordinance or resolution authorizing construction or extension of utility; election.
—If after the passage of said resolution the said city council or other legislative body, by whatever name known, shall determine to proceed toward the construction of said utility, but not earlier than 40 days after the passage of said ordinance or resolution, the said city council or other legislative body, by whatever name known, shall pass an ordinance or resolution authorizing the construction of the utility or any extension thereof, reciting the purpose and the territory to be included, correcting any errors, remedying any sustained objections, authorizing the issuance of mortgage revenue certificates or debentures to pay for the construction and all other costs of the said utility, and containing all other necessary provisions. All other legislative and administrative functions and proceedings shall be the same as provided for the government of the municipality. The city council or other legislative body, by whatever name known, of the municipality, may adopt and provide for the enforcement of all resolutions and ordinances that may be required for the accomplishment of the purposes of this chapter, and its decision shall be final in determining to construct the utility, or any extension thereof as and where proposed, to promote the public health, safety, and welfare by the accomplishment of the purposes of this chapter; provided, that where any mortgage revenue certificates, debentures, or other evidences of indebtedness shall come within the purview of s. 12, Art. VII of the State Constitution, the same shall be issued only after having been approved by a majority of the votes cast in an election in which a majority of the owners of freeholds not wholly exempt from taxation who are qualified electors residing in such municipality shall participate, pursuant to the provisions of ss. 100.201-100.221, 100.241, 100.261-100.341, and 100.351.
History.—s. 1, ch. 17118, 1935; CGL 1936 Supp. 3100(6); s. 15, ch. 69-216; s. 64, ch. 77-175.
Copyright © 1995-2010 The Florida Legislature • Privacy Statement • Contact Us
Facts on Uncodified Ordinance 1235
ReplyDelete1. The City increased the aggreate principal amount from $1,500,000 to $3,500,000 : page 1 Uncodified Ordinance 1235.
2. The monies were to be utilized for a new waste water treatment plant : Exibit C-1 Uncodified Ordinance 1235,
3. This brings up even more questions:
A. Was the funds to be utilized on the Mount Olive Plant? I assume this would be no, as it was not a new facility.
B. Were these funds to be used on the proposed facility on Smith Road? Ground was never broken on the facility, with this being said where did the $ 2,000,000 in borrowed funds go?
C. Where the funds utilized on the Interim waste water facility on Steven Drive? If so, in my opinion this is in direct violation of Florida Statute 108.08 http://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=0100-0199/0180/Sections/0180.08.html as it states " that such mortgage revenue certificates or debentures shall not impose any tax liability upon any real or personal property in such municipality nor constitute a debt against the municipality issuing the same, but shall be a lien only against or upon the property and revenues of such utility," The City did not own nor does it own the property in which this facility is located. Therefore how could it incumber property it did not, nor have any intention of owning?
4. Gray Robinson P.A. is the law firm on record for the "Bank" and was paid $2,500 in Bank Council Fees see Exhibit C-1Uncodified Ordinance 1235. With this being said it is my opinion Mr. Cloud cannot represent the City in the Petition to desolve nor any deannxation process, as this is clearly a conflict of intrest for Mr. Colud, as well as, Gray Robinson as both have a fiduciary duty to Suntrust.
J W McElwee