No Pump-Out Boat For Tiverton
A motion to fund a pump-out boat for boaters in Tiverton waters failed in a 3-3 vote in Monday's town council meeting.
There will be no pump-out boat in Tiverton, the Town Council decided in a 3-3 vote during its Monday meeting.
Tiverton's Harbor Management Commission says the boat is needed to retain the town's mooring fees.
Without the boat, Tiverton cannot guarantee water quality, a component that is necessary to garner the approval of the Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC) on the town's harbor management plan. Without this approval, Harbormaster David E. Vannier said the town could lose its rights to collect mooring fees.
"We do not have an active harbor management plan right now," said Vannier. "We are running on our 1993 plan. We are supposed to do our plan over every five years and we are in danger of losing our ability to collect fees."
Annually fees from the moorings collect about $55,000 - all from the harbor department, which costs about $21,000 to run.
To fund the pump-out boat, the town needed to come up 25 percent of the boat's cost, or $13,416, to match a state grant. The total cost of the pump-out boat was estimated at $53,665. In accepting the state grant, the town would have had to operate the marine pump-out for 10 years - a program that is not self-sustainable and would operate at a net loss annually.
Without the pump-out boat, Vannier and Harbor Commission Chairman Bruce Cox said the CRMC can step in an deprive Tiverton of its mooring fees
"The bottom of the water is owned by the state, so there is always that risk that rights can be taken away," said Cox.
Fogland beach was shut down to swimming and shellfish this summer due to an abundance of E. Coli bacteria. While it is impossible to decipher whether this pollution was caused by animals or boats dumping waste water into the Sakonnet River, Cox told the council that a pump-out boat could show the town's good-faith effort to improve water quality and gain CRMC approval on its harbor management plan.
"A marine pump-out is the most cost effective way to provide this service," said Cox.
The pump-out boat, which would have charged customers $5 per 30 gallons of waste water, would have operated at a net loss over the 10-year contract necessitated by accepting the grant to pay for the boat. Cox argued the net loss was absorbed by the Harbor Department's revenues.
"To explain to you the importance of this document, you have in your income to the town mooring fees of about $55,000 on operational budget or about $21,000 and in order to retain this income stream, you need an approved harbor management plan."
Councilman Brett N. Pelletier agreed.
"With the second longest coastline in the state of Rhode Island we have a resource and an obligation to our taxpayers to protect it and restore it," said Pelletier.
Councilman James Arruda, who voted against the proposition, disagreed.
"Is it worth spending that money," asked Arruda. "The people that are going to dump, are still going to dump."
The decision comes in the wake of months of backlash from taxpayers who did not approve the funds at the 2012 financial town referendum and who resented the council's ability to pay out.
"This really boils me over because I feel as though the council is making a public expenditure without public approval," said Joseph Sousa, resident, as the council discussed the item at Monday's meeting.
Another resident, Barbara Pelletier, thought the discussion was missing the bigger picture. She worried property values along the shoreline could suffer if Tiverton waters continue to show high levels of pollutants.
"[The water] is one of the attractions that we do have in town and I think we would be awfully short sighted not to give that little assurance to people who pay prime property taxes and who depend very little on the town."
In an even split, the decision goes to the opposition in a council motion. councilors William Gerlach, James Arruda and Joan Chabot voted against funding the pump-out boat. Vice President Denise M. DeMedeiros was absent.
Renee Cwiek
6:03 am on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
This is the last paragraph::
Other residents and council members, however, agreed that
Is there more to it?
Joe Sousa.
6:25 am on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
There are 3 pump out facilities in operation now . Kid and Brewer marine on the Portsmouth side. Standish on the Tiverton side. A fifteen thousand dollar grant has been awarded to Quality Yacht Services of Tiverton for a new pump-out facility to service Tiverton and the Sakonnet River, That's four privately run facilities .They employ people and pay taxes to the towns .
The Town has acquitted availability for boaters to pump out.
While I don't like to call volunteers out in this manner I have to say the information given to the council on this issue was exaggerated and misleading. Blaming boaters for the beach closer last year was wrong . Most likely it was bird and animal waste that ran off the open fields after heavy rains . DEM never said it was human waste.
Tiverton has over $5 million dollars in Capitol needs . That's equipment and repairs to buildings that the town dept. use . It doesn't include the several million in road repairs that are needed. We can't afford to expand Gov services when we are millions behind now.
Joe Sousa.
6:39 am on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
DEM AWARDS $183,985 IN FEDERAL FUNDS TO ADD SEVEN ...
www.dem.ri.gov › News
Pumpout Facilities - Visit Rhode Island
www.visitrhodeisland.com/what-to-do/jewels.../pumpout-facilities/
Joe Sousa.
6:28 am on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Thank you to the 3 councilors who voted against the pump out boat. If it passed my blood pressure would be so high my head would pop. Really !
Voting yes Roderick Lambert Pelletier
Voting no Arruda Gerlach Chabot
Absent DeMedeiros
MEM
6:29 am on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Why should the town buy a boat to pump out private boats. Isn't there facilities around to do the job. The town sure won't buy a truck to pump out my camper. I take take it to a private facility and pay to dump my tanks.
Brain Mederble
7:20 am on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
It's always ironic when the teabaggers come looking for government intervention to solve their (real or percieved) problems. This was tainted by the TCC's usual backdoor efforts from the start by trying to circumvent the taxpayers.
Art Tips
9:15 am on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
If the Town of Tiverton already has Three Land Based Pump-out stations within a relatively narrow radius, (Standish, Brewers, Pirates Cove), and a fourth pending (Quality Yachts), why can't the CRMC consider these as part of the Harbor Management Plan? While having a pump-out boat available, may be a convenience, in addition to the cost, there is the risk that accidental contamination or spill-over might occur when water conditions are more turbulent due to changing currents and weather that might kick up more choppy seas. Boats can be more securely stabilized at a dock and therefore risk of spillage and accidental contamination would likely be less. In short, I don't see why the CRMC wouldn't accept the dockside pump-out stations as part of the Harbor Mgmt. Plan. Does anyone know whether CRMC considers Dockside Pump-Out Stations or not? If not, what is their rationale for favoring Boat based or floating pump-out stations?
Just Another Taxpayer
12:27 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
The TCCer's in town who own boats did not want to lower themselves by having to take their boats to one of three facilities that have been mentioned. This is about entitlement, no more no less. Thankfully this proposal was rejected. This is also same crowd that want sewers connected to their homes but they want the Town to pay for it.
T Bone
3:35 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
It's sad that the town doesn't see how much a asset the pump out boat would have bin for tiverton. Tiverton has so much water ways to take care of and a pump out boat would have bin a good thing for this town. Maybe if the town understood that we need a pump out boat and what help it would do theyd understand. Its sad that only the non boaters had a say in this. If boaters had a say in this theyd understand. The harbor commision makes enough money to be able to run a pump out boat and there only limited to a 1/4 of that money to maintian and run marine 2. Doesn't make sense how they could be so blind to what the water ways are for this town.
This town has its prioterys all screwed up
Renee Cwiek
4:05 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
I think there are other things that are more of a priority at the moment. There are plenty of places to get your boat pumped, and yes, I am a boater. Having a pump out would be great, but personally, I don't feel it's a necessity. Especially, since it was not put into the budget but instead it was done by a former council that tried to sneak it in.
Joe Sousa.
5:17 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
T bone The boat is more like a liability. The fees collected don't even cover the costs. There are labor, fuel, maintenance, and disposal costs . No testimony was given to the council as too the cost for disposal of the waste. Where and how much will it cost to pump out the pump out boat. The waste has to be trucked to the sewer treatment plant. Since the town can only charge $ 5 dollars for the pump out where will the difference be made up. There were far too many unanswered question . The three councilors who voted for this really didn't understand all the implications involved. I don't know what they were thinking with this ill conceived idea.
T Bone
7:54 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Joe i understand all of what your saying but for what the harbor commision makes the new boat could be afford. The harbor commision makes roughly 55k a year. 21thousand is being used for marine 2. Lets say the pump out boat will take 9k to run for the season that 30k out of the 55k that is being made. plenty of money still coming in. Also what ever money what will be made off the pump out boat. The pump out boat could easly work out a deal with one of the marinas around and for a fair price get pumped out there. For labor what are you worried about, Its not like the boat would be out in working every day or even every hour on the weekends it would be a minimal cost to run and pay a person to captain it. And for the unanswered question you ask and find out before turing something thing down. The town will be suprised when the dem takes away the towns right to charge for the moorings, then you will loose the 55k a year by and turning down the pump out,would be dumbest thing done when dem takes over. And what the harbor commision was thinking was that its manatory to have a pump out boat for over 300 moorings which tiverton has. If a town has over 300 moorings you must have a pump out boat for that water way. Learn your water laws.
Joe Sousa.
8:27 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Why should the town take away business from the private businesses that provide these services ? They have invested thousands into these facilities, and they pay taxes to the town for them . As far as the extra revenue from mooring fees. The future cost for marine 2 being a used boat will eat up much of that extra money . Engines only last so long in salt water. The Town is not turning a profit on mooring fees. The Town Council should seek relief from the unfunded mandates imposed on us. This Town just cant afford to expand public services. I say we leave it to the private marina's .
Renee Cwiek
6:19 am on Wednesday, January 16, 2013
TBone...if it's a law and required by the DEM, why didn't the Harbormaster let anyone know this? How many moorings are owned by the town? How many by the marinas? Why would the town be required to provide this service to privately owned moorings?
Art Tips
6:22 pm on Wednesday, January 16, 2013
T-Bone, I am a boater and have a mooring permit. Looking at the availability of Pump-out stations throughout the state, Tiverton & Portsmouth are both in the unique position of having 3 and soon to be 4 dockside pump-out stations within a very short radius, all within less than a 1-2 mile radius!!! Why on earth would the CRMC want to stop the town from collecting mooring permit fees when there is so much availability of dock-side pump-out stations? Furthermore, has anyone considered run-off and sewage discharge up-river, Fall River and Somerset for example as a possible, and perhaps likely source of contamination in the Sakonnet River area? Focusing on the Pump-out boat as a solution seems to be a very limited and costly solution to a problem that seems to encompass many more variables than the availability of local pump-out stations be they stationary at dockside or portable.
Richard Joslin
4:05 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Brain MederbleJust Another Taxpayer, Try reading the article.
Voting yes Roderick Lambert Pelletier
You sound like an idiot as usual.
Renee Cwiek
4:10 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Do you have a point you're trying to make?
Brain Mederble
6:24 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
Joe, for your next stint as an "anonymous poster" might I suggest "Just Another Hypocritical Teabagger" as your name?
bigmanny
7:00 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
JoeJay we all remember your stint as Jethro,crime boss, biker hd and all those other names. You did it a few years ago and you still do it today. Stop with the foolish lies.
Richard Joslin
7:42 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
I think Big Manny has lost it Joe Just saying
RU Serious?
7:47 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
He has nothing better to do while peddling those cheap smokes and enjoying watered down bud lights than come up with stupid alter egos.
bigmanny
9:42 pm on Tuesday, January 15, 2013
"The City of Fall River is now trucking all its yard waste and all its single stream recycling materials to Site Ready, located at 322 Eagleville Road.
This news comes at a time when the Tiverton Planning Board is considering a Master Plan Application from Site Ready “to increase the recycling capabilities” of the existing Site Ready operation on Eagleville Road."
Why isn't the patch covering this story? east bay is.
RU Serious?
7:20 am on Friday, January 18, 2013
Joe you are so wrong.
I'm just one guy who doesn't like most of you.
And who is a hell of a lot smarter than you too.
I don't need alter egos to get my points across.