February 20, 2018

Tomorrow (Wednesday) night, City Council will consider extension of sewer to the south side of Hamby Road.  As many readers know, extension of sewer has been a contentious issue in Milton.  All sitting Council members have vowed at one time or another not to extend sewer.  And yet sewer has been extended 4 times in the last 4 years, most recently with the approval of a rezoning on Hopewell Road just south of the Vickery Crest subdivision.

Milton’s sewer map governs where sewer can and cannot go.  There should be no exceptions made.  The confinement of sewer to a small area of Milton has spared Milton the uncontrolled, high density development that we observe in neighboring cities.  Milton’s lower density development is a key driver of Milton’s rural character and charm.  Please consider attending tomorrow night’s City Council meeting and speaking against the extension of sewer in Milton.  Following is a letter that I sent to City Council  this afternoon that provides a more in-depth perspective on this Hamby Road sewer extension.

Following is a link to a previous blog post on sewer creep in Milton:

Sewer Creep = Higher Density = Higher Developer Profits

Thanks for your continuing engagement on civic matters in Milton.  Your voice matters!

**********************************************************************************

Dear Mayor and City Council:

I am writing to express my concerns about the extension of sewer to the south side of Hamby Road.  This issue needs to be divided into two parts:

1. Extension of sewer to lots that are wholly within the footprint of original Manor parcel.
2. Extension of sewer to lots that are partly or wholly outside of the footprint of the original Manor parcel.

With regards to the first part of this issue, in 2008, our City Council was quite clear in its decision not to allow extension of sewer to the south side of Hamby:

Sewer service shall be prohibited for any new lots that are platted or acquired as a part of an expansion of the Manor subdivision within the City of Milton occurring after the date this motion is approved.

Accordingly, the only question that must be answered is whether there are other decisions, agreements, etc. that conflict with this City Council decision.  And if they conflict with the 2008 decision, do they supersede the 2008 Council decision?  This requires an opinion from our City Attorney, who (I assume) advised the City in 2008 and (I assume) would have steered Council away from a decision that was superseded by other agreements.

(As a side note, I am not completely comfortable with Jarrard and Davis advising the City of Milton on this issue.  Jarrard and Davis’s representation of both Forsyth County and Milton represents a real and substantive conflict of interest.  And it is this substantive conflict of interest that originally prompted us to seek outside counsel in this matter.  I have supported previous waivers of conflict of interest for J&D because the waivers involved relatively minor matters and the described conflicts of interest struck me as tenuous.)

With regards to the second part of this issue (extending sewer to lots partly or wholly outside of the footprint of the original Manor parcel), no legal issues are involved; extension of sewer would be purely at the discretion of Council.  Council should deny this request for any or all of the following reasons:

• Citizens have been very clear in their opposition to any and all extensions of sewer.  Over 1900 voters signed a petition against such extensions, pledging to vote against any City Council member that votes for such extensions.  This citizen opposition has been expressed in countless letters to Council and comments before Council.  In the most recent election, the anti-sewer candidate garnered 71+% of the vote against her pro-sewer opponent.
• Higher density housing and further sewer extension inevitably follow in the wake of these decisions to extend sewer.
• Each extension of sewer sets a precedent for further sewer extension.  The four sewer extensions that have been approved over the past 4 years have weakened the city’s position in future lawsuits that might filed against the City by developers.
• The Manor sewer system has a checkered past—both technically and financially.  Why would we allow it to service any more homes?  The Manor sewer’s issues prompted Forsyth County to assume ownership and operation of the system.  The former HOA manager of this system has testified before Council to the many technical issues he experienced.  Forsyth County has banned such private sewer systems, partly citing technical issues.  In a May 2017 incident, over 9000 gallons of raw sewage were released from the Manor sewer system into Chicken Creek, causing issues downstream (e.g., algae blooms in King Lake).
• My opinion is that this request for sewer is little more than a profit maximization scheme.  The developer clearly has purchased (at a significant discount) a clearly marginal tract of land with many restrictions placed upon it—token recompense for the many sins committed in the development of the Manor.  He is now coming to Council with a scheme to mitigate those restrictions and thereby increase his profits.

Thank you for considering my perspectives.

Respectfully,

Tim Becker

Postscript:  Former City Councilman Bill Lusk has been lobbying City Council to approve the Hamby Road sewer extension.  Mr. Lusk (along with current Councilman Matt Kunz) voted for every previous sewer extension (and also every residential rezoning to higher density that has passed in Council).  Mr. Lusk’s overwhelming defeat in the 2017 election is already paying dividends to the citizens of Milton.