web1_DUNN.jpg

Man accused of abusing children refiles complaint against caseworker

web1_Commonwealth-Health.jpg

$80 million project will unify Moses Taylor, Regional hospitals in Scranton

<p>Luzerne County Councilman Harry Haas wants the Susquehanna River cleaned up, but not through an unfunded state and federal mandate.</p><p>&#8220;So often you see these things pop up, and the cost of them falls upon the local government, the local taxpayer,&#8221; Haas complained during this week&#8217;s council meeting.</p><p>Haas was referring to an estimated $36 to $54 that may be paid annually by property owners in 36 Wyoming Valley municipalities to comply with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency&#8217;s Chesapeake Bay plan. It requires states to reduce the amount of nutrients and sediment in waterways that feed into the bay, including the Susquehanna River.</p><p>In response to the directive, the state Department of Environmental Protection is requiring municipalities that drain water into the Susquehanna to submit stormwater permit plans by September showing how they will reduce sediment by 10 percent, phosphorus by 5 percent and nitrogen by 3 percent over the next five years.</p><p>The Wyoming Valley Sanitary Authority is proposing a <a href="https://www.timesleader.com/news/local/652996/taxpayers-face-expense-to-reduce-susquehanna-river-pollutants" target="_blank">regional approach</a> that would cost property owners an estimated $3 to $4.50 per month in the 36 municipalities it services for wastewater treatment.</p><p>Another fee of up to $1 per month may be proposed to fund half the cost of additional pollution-reduction projects that municipalities want to complete within their borders, the authority said. The fee for each property would be based on the estimated percentage of stormwater runoff it generates.</p><p>Authority representatives say municipalities would spend much more developing and implementing these required plans on their own.</p><p>Haas, who chairs council&#8217;s legislative committee, plans to raise the issue at an upcoming roundtable discussion his committee is trying to schedule with area federal legislators. He wants to find out if they can alter the mandate or provide funding to comply.</p><p>He stressed he&#8217;s not &#8220;throwing stones&#8221; at the sanitary authority because it took the initiative to provide a compliance option.</p><p>Instead of a mandate, the state and federal government should reduce pollution through a cooperative effort, he said.</p><p>&#8220;When we look at more adversarial and mandatory form of governing, I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s going to be as effective,&#8221; Haas said.</p><p>But Councilman Rick Williams said requesting compliance without enforcement may not yield results.</p><p>&#8220;I sense that having a regional approach is a wise choice. It&#8217;s too bad it&#8217;s as costly as it is,&#8221; Williams said.</p><p>Authority Solicitor Bill Finnegan said Wednesday that municipalities were first required to start addressing river pollutant reduction about a decade ago through efforts such as mapping and public education on stormwater management.</p><p>The next mandate phase will cost significantly more because it involves infrastructure construction, he said.</p><p><strong>&#8216;Heads in the sand&#8217;</strong></p><p>The lion&#8217;s share of the authority&#8217;s proposed $33 million pollution-reduction plan would change the water pathway and add deep-rooted shrubs on the floor of the Toby Creek impounding basin off Division Street in Pringle to reduce sediment and soak up nitrogen and phosphorus.</p><p>This basin holds water that drains from 30 square miles in the Back Mountain to prevent flooding in Pringle, Kingston and other municipalities on lower ground.</p><p>The authority plan also includes stream restoration along Solomon Creek on the east side of the river and work at a Plymouth detention basin, Abrahams Creek near the county recreational complex in Forty Fort, and another water collection area in Hanover Township.</p><p>Before tackling a regional plan, authority officials consulted with state officials and legislators to verify the requirements would proceed, Finnegan said</p><p>&#8220;We don&#8217;t see where the mandate will be repealed or relaxed,&#8221; said Finnegan. &#8220;We can&#8217;t put our heads in the sand and pretend that the mandate does not exist.&#8221;</p><p>The authority is meeting with municipal representatives to provide documents that must be adopted and submitted in the next month or two to lock in their participation.</p><style>
.neFileBlock {
	margin-bottom: 20px;
}
.neFileBlock p {
	margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px;
}
.neFileBlock .neFile {
	border-bottom: 1px dotted #aaa;
	padding-bottom: 5px;
	padding-top: 10px;
}
.neFileBlock .neCaption {
	font-size: 85%;
}
</style>
<div class='neFileBlock'>
<div class="neFile"><img class="neImage" src="https://www.timesleader.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/web1_haasuse.jpg">
<div class="neCaption">Haas </div></div><div class="metaInfo"><photo0>https://www.timesleader.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/web1_haasuse.jpg</photo0><caption0>Haas </caption0><photoCredit0></photoCredit0></div></div>
<div class="metaInfo"><bylineMeta><p>By Jennifer Learn-Andes</p><p>jandes@www.timesleader.com</p></bylineMeta></div><div class="metaInfo"><shirttailMeta><p>Reach Jennifer Learn-Andes at 570-991-6388 or on Twitter @TLJenLearnAndes.</p></shirttailMeta></div>

Local burden to reduce Susquehanna River pollutants critiqued by Luzerne County officials