Updated May 24 2023   This post at Brown County Matters

Preliminary Engineering Reports (PER).  Identifies the information required to receive funding.

Brown County Wastewater Strategic Plan and Watershed Study – the “foundation”  for the PERs. Includes video presentations of the plan and study, respectively.  The Helmsburg PERs also available at the HRSD Facebook Page

• • The Watershed Study is in Appendix B

The Brown County Regional Sewer District (BCRSD) collects the wastewater. The Helmsburg RSD will expand its wastewater treatment plant to accommodate Phase 1 customers. The HRSD will have a second PER as a backup plan to make the needed repairs and upgrades to serve their current customer base if one or more sections of the Phase I project are not funded.

Phase I of expanding sewers includes a western corridor (Helmsburg to Lake Lemon and an Eastern Corridor – Helmsburg to Bean Blossom and Woodland Lake.

BCRSD PER

Complete Report – 315 pages  2023.3.31 Initial Submittal – Brown County RSD Preliminary Engineering Report

Report by Sections:

2023.3.31 Initial Submittal – Brown County RSD Preliminary Engineering Report

• • APX A Study Area Maps
  • APX B Project Need Documentation plus Letters of Support (over 140 – ALL from Lake Lemon property owners)
  • APX C Phase I Collection System Cost Estimates 
  • APX D WWTO Alternative Cost Estimates  and APX E Soils Map
  •  APX F  Interim Report and Historic Sites  
  • APX G Wetland Map
  • APX H Hydrology and Floodplain Maps 
  • APX I Prime Farmland Determination p250
  • APX J Draft Financial Report and Capital Improvement Plan and Rate Structure
    • APX J Summary of Project, Expenses, and Rates
  • APX K Acceptance Resolution p294
  • APX L Signatory Authorization –p296-297
  • APC M SRF Project Financing Form p298
  • APX N Public Participation p302
  • APX O Clean Water Checklist p303
  • APX P Preliminary Design Summary p310
• Additional Documentation
  • 2023.3.30 AMP Certification Executed
  • 2023.3.30 CWSRF_application-SFY-2024-WORD-form-rev
  • 2023.3.30 DAC Memo – Brown County RSD
  • 2023.3.30 Ltr SRF PER Transmittal

PER – Helmsburg RSD WWTP Expansion

• • 122-5017 Preliminary Engineering Report Phase 1 
  • Expansion PER submittal to SRF cover letter
  • Figure1_2 Census Map
  • HRSD Census Tract Memo
  • Transmittal To SRF (download)
  • WWSRF_application-SFY-2021-form2 2023.03.29
  • HRSD Asset Management Plan (AMP)

PER – HRSD WWTP Replacement 2023_03_31

• • 122-5019-01W-Preliminary Engineering Report-03-28-2023
  • Figure1_2 Census Map (1)
  • HRSD Census Tract Memo (1)
  • Replacememnt PER submittal to SRF cover letter
  • Transmittal To SRF (1)
  • WWSRF_application-SFY-2021-form2

Commissioner Meeting Notes, Wed Apr 5, 2023. 2:00 p.m.   Audio of the meeting (1:13:06 minutes).  Question and Discussion on the Indian Hill RR Crossing at 1:07.

Meeting Agenda 2023_04_05

This post with any comments at the Facebook group – Brown County Matters.

Courthouse Additions – Sally Port and Security Entrance.   Commissioners, with the support of their financial advisor from Baker -Tilley, identified funds under their control to support these projects.  Council just needs to approve transfers between accounts.

Initially, the commissioners thought they would have to borrow money. The next option included using funds that needed the approval of the council. Given an estimated  1.4 million dollar shortfall in health benefit funding, the council suggested the commissioners find available funds in the accounts the commissioners controlled.  The overall situation identified the opportunity for improved financial management.  The Commissioners develop a Financial Plan and the Council manages the budget.

The county routinely has not provided a status on the budget during the year at a public meeting. This would include a review of planned vs actual costs to identify project fund balances and any issues. During the budget hearings, it was suggested that the council members be assigned accounts that they could monitor and update the council on the status. Jim Kemp has done this for the health benefit funds.

Indian Hill Railroad Crossing.  No current updates. Commissioners acknowledged that a public hearing was required. This has not been disputed by the county’s legal counsel.

Commissioners support opening up the crossing to pedestrians but not vehicles.  The highway superintendent is reviewing the adequacy of the “slab.”  that is used to cross the creek.  Estimates for changes to the crossing to current standards are estimated at 1.5 to 2 million.  See Audio: 1:07 – 1:11

Note:  Without a public hearing, the decision to close the crossing was not valid.  Consequently, the county can re-claim the right-of-way and allow for a pedestrian crossing. They could then hold a public hearing to help determine if the crossing should remain closed to vehicles.  There have been no facts presented regarding safety-related incidences at the crossing.

History on the closing:  https://independentvotersofbrowncountyin.com/2022/07/23/part-3-closure-rr-xing-indian-hill-rd/Part 3. Closure RR Xing, Indian Hill Rd: Public Hearings

Highway Department – Road Paving Plan – 2026.  The plan was developed last October and includes recent updates. It is not yet posted on the Highway Dept Website – Road Improvement Plan

Elkinsville Rd.  Commissioner Pittman drove the road and was complimentary of the work that has been done. Some of the paved sections in disrepair were replaced with gravel.

Property owners could ‘supersede’ Indiana health officials over septic systems under House bill by Casey Smith, Indiana Capital Chronicle, Mar 29, 2023

Post of the article and comments at Brown County Matters

Updated Mar 27, 2023

Joint Meeting Commissioners and Council Mar 24, 2023 6:00 – 8:00 p.m.

This post at Brown County Matters

Purpose: Funding – Courthouse additions.

Good Meeting. An informative, productive, congenial, and at times humorous, meeting.  A wide variety of options and their pros and cons were discussed. (I wish this was more the norm on major investments like wastewater management/sewer expansions.)

• • The Redevelopment Commission (RDC) was tasked with looking at the economic impacts of the Wastewater Strategic Plan (sewers) and Watershed Study.

  • County Wastewater Strategic Plan and Water Quality Study. 

Good Argument. Judge Wertz, the Sheriff, and the Baliff have made a good case for the additions with the priority for funding to be the Sally Port.  The Judge got a grant to fund the design/plan (70K). She has gotten other grants to fund the renovations.

Planning. The meeting reinforced the critical need for capital improvement planning and budgeting. This consists of identifying our assets (buildings) and the projected repair, replacement, and maintenance costs. Purpose is to prevent “surprise expenses” and budget the costs

Jim Kemp who has a finance background is also leading needed process improvements and longer-term planning that should help prevent future “fires.”   I am looking forward to the 2024 budget hearings that should reflect “lessons being learned.”

Courthouse Additions – Sally Port and Security Entrance.  Commissions may have the money to fund the project without the need for the council to approve.  In addition to the 500k that was budgeted, 254K can be used from the remaining balance in the capital improvement loan. Funds from the capital improvement loan may have been erroneously used to pay operating expenses associated with the ambulance contracts and may need to be reimbursed from other funds (300K or more).  If excess funds from existing accounts cannot be found, the commissioners will take out a loan.  The State Board of Accounts is providing a review of the capital improvement loan and expenditures.

Capital Improvement vs Operating Costs.

• • The council was aware that the commissioners were paying operating expenses with funds from the 3 million capital improvement loan. I questioned this practice and the former commissioners stated it was allowed. The county attorney was likely present on the phone.
  • Note the common practice at the time of the loan was for the commissioners to identify spending and the council operated under the principle that their job was to “approve” without question.  Consequently, any issues and lack of knowledge of the “total costs” in many cases led to “surprises.”

Courthouse Options. Everyone agreed the additions were needed. Previous major additions to the courthouse were rejected by the public via a remonstrance. The plan for a new “Justice Center” at 8-10 million was not well received.  Grant money was used to make some recent renovations and these new additions should meet the county’s needs in the foreseeable future.

• • 2017/2018 Proposed Justice Center and Historic Courthouse – For the Record. Includes  links to previous Courthouse Studies and Proposals from 2012/13.

Next Meeting. There will be a working meeting next Friday at 1:00 to work through the exact details and options regarding courthouse project funding. Council members, commissioners, the auditor, consultant from Baker-Tilly, and any interested members of the public.  A plan for how the county may be able to address the 1.3 million or more deficit in health benefits costs will also be discussed.

Updated June 20, 2023

Summary:  County elected officials are expected to join the Nashville Town Council and the mayors of Bloomington and Columbus in signing a  Resolution in support of the United Nations’ strategy for fighting climate change.

June 19, 2023. Project 46 on Council Meeting Agenda. No action taken

Apr 4, 2023.‘Opportunity to rebuild’: Local community leaders unveil climate change alliance

Mar 24, 2023,  Audio – Climate Change Presentations

The Resolution includes a pledge from the county to provide funding of 50 cents per capita or $7,500 for Brown County, per year over the next three years.

Per the presenters, although the county’s contribution to reducing greenhouse gases may be small, Brown County can be part of a regional and global (U.N) initiative to prevent “the catastrophic effects of global warming.”   U.N Report:

• • “Climate change is a threat to human well-being and planetary health ( very high confidence ). There is a rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all (very high confidence ). ”  U.N Report
  • “Emissions should be decreasing by now and will need to be cut by almost half by 2030, if warming is to be limited to 1.5°C. ” U.N. Report

Among the benefits of the alliance are the expectations of federal funding for various projects.

• Mar 24, 2023. This post and comments at the Facebook Group – Brown County Matters

Mar 24, 2023. Project 46 – Southern Indiana Regional Climate Alliance Kick-off  Meeting- Nashville Town Hall (PDF of the announcement)  

• • Audio – Part 1 Climate Change Presentations by Anna Hoostetter (Nashville Town Council), Columbus Mayor Jim Lienhoop, Nashville Town Manager Sandie Jones, and Bloomington Mayor John Hamilton
  • Audio – Part 2 Questions and Answers

United Nations Climate Change Report – Climate Changes 2023. © Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2023.

• • Press Release IPCC_AR6_SYR_PressRelease_en
  • Summary for Policymakers. IPCC_AR6_SYR_SPM

Mar 16, 2023. Opposing Perspective:  TUCKER CARLSON: Climate change experts’ bullying is not about helping the Earth, it is about controlling us.  Tucker shreds climate change ‘experts’ and their predictions, which have not held up well over time

• • Includes link to an interview with Jordan Peterson

Oct 6, 2022. Bloomington, IN.   First Regional Climate Convening Assembled To Discuss and Address Climate Change

• • PDF of the Announcement First Regional Climate Convening Assembled To Discuss and Address Climate Change _ City of Bloomington, Indiana
  • Video – Presentations

March 20, 2023 County Council Agenda

County Council Meeting Notes – Mar 20, 2023. 6:00 – 9:00.  A long meeting and unnecessarily contentious at times.  Council and commissioner recognized that a more amicable working relationship would be helpful.  Commissioners are the executives of the county and the council is responsible for managing the budget.

Capability. County finance and budgeting represent a system. The capability of a system can be assessed on a scale of 1-5.  The county system is about a 2 – “it works ” which includes  surprises and frustrations which can lead to contention. Little changes can be made to smooth things out.

Next Meeting – Friday March 24, 2023 6:00, Salmon Room.  Joint meeting of the council and commissioners to work through funding challenges and options that may include borrowing money.

Funding shortfall. Estimated deficit projected for June of -1, 350,145.00.  Jim Kemp completed an analysis on the state of the Health Fund. The recent changes to the benefit package prevented the deficit from being even higher. PDF – Kemp health fund deficit

A recurring problem. This (large deficit) happened a few years ago and the county borrowed an extra million to cover the over-budget operating expenses.  The ambulance contract was an example. The federal funding received over the past couple of years also helped pay for spending. The standing/recurring loan was increased from 2 to 3 million and the low interest on the loan kept the taxes about the same. Renewing the next loan will likely have a much higher interest rate and inflation will also have an impact leading to more cost for less service.

Courthouse Additions – Sally Port and Security Entrance. The commissioner’s financial consultant identified where $560,000 could be used from three accounts. This combined with the budgeted 500K would fund the projects. Gary Huett identified that it may be possible that design changes may help reduce the cost of construction.  A decision to approve the funding is needed by April 15.

Clerk’s Office. Info Technology Costs Increase. The clerk identified her need for more funding to support converting manual records to a digital format and transitioning to a new system. Council will create a committee to work through how these costs can be funded.

Operating Practices. The county has worked on a year-to-year basis in terms of budgeting. At least a 3-5 year plan is considered a better practice. The commissioners contract for a Financial Plan that typically is not referenced in meetings.  Updates on the planned costs vs actual can help prevent surprises and trends in revenue and expenses.

Anticipating Expenses. Significant expenses associated with health benefits, capital improvements, repairs, replacements, recurring leases, cars, IT, contracts, elections, et.al., too often come as a surprise and can range in the hundreds of thousands. (AC units for the jail for example).  Many of these expenses can be expected and identified in a capital improvement plan and budget that fall under the responsibility of the commissioners.   Each department can also identify their unfunded requirements to help prevent surprises and identify these during the budget hearings.

Updated Mar 20, 2023

This post and comments at Brown County Matters.

I encourage concerned citizens to view the Water Quality Study presentation. It is only 23 minutes.

The study itself is available in the appendix.

Unless county elected officials direct otherwise, no public meeting that would allow citizens to ask questions regarding the plan and study is scheduled. However, elected and appointed state and federal officials will respond to questions. Documentation regarding their respective project review and approval processes on the applications for funding, are subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and can also be obtained by citizens.

BLUF. The scope of the proposed projects for the Bean Blossom Area is not supported by all the facts and other available information relevant to the issues.

Created Mar 20, 2023

This post and comments at Brown County Matters.

I encourage concerned citizens to view the Water Quality Study presentation. It is only 23 minutes.

The study itself is available in the appendix.

Unless county elected officials direct otherwise, no public meeting that would allow citizens to ask questions regarding the plan and study is scheduled. However, elected and appointed state and federal officials will respond to questions. Documentation regarding their respective project review and approval processes on the applications for funding, are subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and can also be obtained by citizens.

BLUF. The scope of the proposed projects for the Bean Blossom Area is not supported by all the facts and other available information relevant to the issues.

Key Points 

Response to my comments provided below by Todd Trinkle, Project Manager / Regulatory Specialist, Lochmueller Group, Apr 14, 2023. LM – Response to Questions – Watershed Study
Water Quality and The Major source of E-coli. Despite claims to the contrary in the strategic plan, the water study identifies that E-coli from pastureland, “AND NOT” failing septic systems (the prevailing BCRSD narrative), is recognized as the major source of E-coli.

Not So!  Claim  (below) identified in the Wastewater Strategic Plan, April 2022, Executive Summary, pg iv.

Conflicting position – Watershed Study:

• • There were 22 total samples. Of the five (5) samples that tested high for human-caused E.coli, only two BB10, BB12, exceeded the state standard. (Figure 28, pg. 64.)
  • It was stated that samples detected pharmaceutical and hair care products indicating human contamination. However ….
    • Regarding the detection of pharmaceuticals in the water, this topic was covered in the Brown County Democrat – STREAM SAMPLING: Where’s the contamination coming from? By Sara Clifford – 1/28/20. The information included in the article states: “The highest detections in surface waters are often associated with municipal wastewater treatment plant outfalls.” Would this be true for functioning septic systems as well, e.g., an effective septic system will not treat pharmaceuticals?
  • Figure 33 details that pastureland loads more E.coli to Brown County streams than other sources under all modeled septic failure modeling scenarios. Only if 100% of documented septic system failures are failing do they contribute a significant volume of E.colito the entirety of Brown County.”
    • Note: There are no documented failures and a “significant volume” is not the majority (see graph below).

Watershed Study – Model
Sources of E-Coli: Yellow Pasteurland; Green – septic systems

This conclusion has been a consistent finding in studies from throughout the State. Only “5” water samples in the targeted area identified the majority of E-coli as being human-caused. No additional analysis was provided as to how many septic systems may be contributing to the problem in these areas. Per the Pareto principle, 80% of the problems could be due to 20% of the causes supporting more cost-effective solutions.

• • Lake Monroe Watershed
    • E-coli levels in all the 2020 Lake Monroe samples were well below the state standard of 235 CFU/100 ml (CFU = colony forming units of bacteria). …. The South Fork (Jackson County) sub-watershed appears to be the largest contributor of E. coli.
  • Indiana Water Quality 
    • In a recent report, “the major cause” of E-coli IS NOT due to the possibility of failed septic system – it’s agricultural runoff from industries that are in compliance with federal and state laws and regulations. “IDEM said combined sewer overflows, untreated stormwater and wastewater that discharges to nearby streams, rivers and other water bodies were the largest sources of E. coli bacteria, one of the impairments cited to the EPA.”
    • Mar 31, 2022. Indiana ranks highest in nation for miles of polluted waterways, report finds
    • “According to the report, a major contributor to water pollution is manure and fertilizer runoff from farms. This causes the concentration of E. coli and nutrients that promote bacterial growth in waterways. “
    • Watershed Coordinator Maggie Sullivan, who works at the nonprofit Friends of Lake Monroe, said Lake Monroe suffers from nutrient contamination. Lake Monroe also has streams that feed into the lake which have elevated levels of E. coli, but levels in the lake are well below state standards. “Our biggest concern right now is harmful algal blooms,” Sullivan said. 

• Records and Useful Life of a Septic System. The video also identifies what is “speculated”  to be an “average useful life” of a septic system along with the lack of records in the Health Department, to conclude that an “estimated” 76% (2,200 systems) need repair or replacement. No documentation of inspections by the Health Department of the suspected properties was referenced to support the claim as to inadequate systems.
  • Was the “estimated” not documented failure rate overstated to influence the modeling (see above graph)?
  • Sweetwater Lake. (Watershed Study, pg. 26). “There are 550 homes around Sweetwater Lake, which represent the largest concentration of residential septic systems in the watershed.  “Failures”  were identified as being caused by “abuse, lack of maintenance, or grandfathered installations.”  No evidence of any “significant threats to water quality resulting from septic systems.”
  • Note that “potential” for problems was identified but nothing to indicate existing septic management practices would not continue to be effective.
  • Of the 550 homes, what would the BCRSD estimate to be the failure rate given “available records” and “useful life.”

Indefinite Useful Life. Conventional septic systems are designed to operate indefinitely if properly maintained.” (EPA 932-F-99-075). Presby Systems has also identified that a well-designed and maintained system can have an indefinite life. The county is flexible in approving Presby systems to accommodate site-related challenges that support repairs/replacements for existing homes. Pump and Haul is another approved option in some circumstances. A non-statistically valid survey with 113 responses was referenced as supporting the need for repairs/replacements of the existing system. It is unknown if needed actions may have already been completed.

Soils. The water study also identifies that county soils are “very limited in their ability to drain and treat the wastewater produced by a septic system. The State of Indiana has identified the criteria for soils and requires soil testing before a septic permit is granted by the county. I assume the county is in compliance with State guidance and statutes. This fact as to indefinite life is not referenced in the study.   Presby Systems (approved by the State and County), identify that their septic systems “treat wastewater before it is released into the ground and claim their “technology removes up to 98% of wastewater contaminants, recycling clean water into the environment and recharging natural water supplies.”

Economic RISK to Residents. It is unknown at this time if the BCRSD can identify (now or at a future date) a  higher standard for approving septic permits than what is allowed by the State and county. Given the relative power of an RSD that includes making decisions independent of elected officials, the allegations by the BCRSD regarding soils and the useful life of a septic system should be clearly documented and posted on the main page of the county website. The purpose is to prevent/mitigate any possible class-action lawsuits so that existing and prospective new residents can be aware of the potential risks posed by the BCRSD associated with owning property in Brown County.

Additional Comments

https://browncountyregionalsewerdistrict.wordpress.com/strategic-plan/

Helmsburg and Lake Lemon Corridor. The justification of sewer service in Helmsburg west to Lake Lemon is supported with valid justifications to include community support.

Bean Blossom Corridor. I continue to question the assumptions, data, and level of analysis used to support the scope of “solutions” identified for the Helmsburg and east to Bean Blossom and Woodland Lake corridor.

Economic Development. The intent for providing sewer service in the Bean Blossom area has always included the desire by a few for economic development. This has been reinforced by elected officials and the current BCRSD Board president, who has acknowledged his commercial interests in the area. Economic development-related analysis to include any adverse effects on the low to moderate-income level residents was not covered within the scope of the current projects.

 Key Points 

Response to key points provied by Todd Trinkle, Project Manager / Regulatory Specialist, Lochmueller Group, April 14, 2023.LM – Response to Questions – Watershed Study

Water Quality and The Major source of E-coli. Despite claims to the contrary in the strategic plan, the water study identifies that E-coli from pastureland, “AND NOT” failing septic systems (the prevailing BCRSD narrative), is recognized as the major source of E-coli.

Not So!  Claim  (below) identified in the Wastewater Strategic Plan, April 2022, Executive Summary, pg iv.

Conflicting position – Watershed Study:

• • There were 22 total samples. Of the five (5) samples that tested high for human-caused E.coli, only two BB10, BB12, exceeded the state standard. (Figure 28, pg. 64.)
  • It was stated that samples detected pharmaceutical and hair care products indicating human contamination. However ….
    • Regarding the detection of pharmaceuticals in the water, this topic was covered in the Brown County Democrat – STREAM SAMPLING: Where’s the contamination coming from? By Sara Clifford – 1/28/20. The information included in the article states: “The highest detections in surface waters are often associated with municipal wastewater treatment plant outfalls.” Would this be true for functioning septic systems as well, e.g., an effective septic system will not treat pharmaceuticals?
  • Figure 33 details that pastureland loads more E.coli to Brown County streams than other sources under all modeled septic failure modeling scenarios. Only if 100% of documented septic system failures are failing do they contribute a significant volume of E.colito the entirety of Brown County.”
    • Note: There are no documented failures and a “significant volume” is not the majority (see graph below).

Watershed Study – Model
Sources of E-Coli: Yellow Pasteurland; Green – septic systems

This conclusion has been a consistent finding in studies from throughout the State. Only “5” water samples in the targeted area identified the majority of E-coli as being human-caused. No additional analysis was provided as to how many septic systems may be contributing to the problem in these areas. Per the Pareto principle, 80% of the problems could be due to 20% of the causes supporting more cost-effective solutions.

• • Lake Monroe Watershed
    • E-coli levels in all the 2020 Lake Monroe samples were well below the state standard of 235 CFU/100 ml (CFU = colony forming units of bacteria). …. The South Fork (Jackson County) sub-watershed appears to be the largest contributor of E. coli.
  • Indiana Water Quality 
    • In a recent report, “the major cause” of E-coli IS NOT due to the possibility of failed septic system – it’s agricultural runoff from industries that are in compliance with federal and state laws and regulations. “IDEM said combined sewer overflows, untreated stormwater and wastewater that discharges to nearby streams, rivers and other water bodies were the largest sources of E. coli bacteria, one of the impairments cited to the EPA.”
    • Mar 31, 2022. Indiana ranks highest in nation for miles of polluted waterways, report finds
    • “According to the report, a major contributor to water pollution is manure and fertilizer runoff from farms. This causes the concentration of E. coli and nutrients that promote bacterial growth in waterways. “
    • Watershed Coordinator Maggie Sullivan, who works at the nonprofit Friends of Lake Monroe, said Lake Monroe suffers from nutrient contamination. Lake Monroe also has streams that feed into the lake which have elevated levels of E. coli, but levels in the lake are well below state standards. “Our biggest concern right now is harmful algal blooms,” Sullivan said. 

• Records and Useful Life of a Septic System. The video also identifies what is “speculated”  to be an “average useful life” of a septic system along with the lack of records in the Health Department, to conclude that an “estimated” 76% (2,200 systems) need repair or replacement. No documentation of inspections by the Health Department of the suspected properties was referenced to support the claim as to inadequate systems.
  • Was the “estimated” not documented failure rate overstated to influence the modeling (see above graph)?
  • Sweetwater Lake. (Watershed Study, pg. 26). “There are 550 homes around Sweetwater Lake, which represent the largest concentration of residential septic systems in the watershed.  “Failures”  were identified as being caused by “abuse, lack of maintenance, or grandfathered installations.”  No evidence of any “significant threats to water quality resulting from septic systems.”
  • Note that “potential” for problems was identified but nothing to indicate existing septic management practices would not continue to be effective.
  • Of the 550 homes, what would the BCRSD estimate to be the failure rate given “available records” and “useful life.”

Indefinite Useful Life. Conventional septic systems are designed to operate indefinitely if properly maintained.” (EPA 932-F-99-075). Presby Systems has also identified that a well-designed and maintained system can have an indefinite life. The county is flexible in approving Presby systems to accommodate site-related challenges that support repairs/replacements for existing homes. Pump and Haul is another approved option in some circumstances. A non-statistically valid survey with 113 responses was referenced as supporting the need for repairs/replacements of the existing system. It is unknown if needed actions may have already been completed.

Soils. The water study also identifies that county soils are “very limited in their ability to drain and treat the wastewater produced by a septic system. The State of Indiana has identified the criteria for soils and requires soil testing before a septic permit is granted by the county. I assume the county is in compliance with State guidance and statutes. This fact as to indefinite life is not referenced in the study.   Presby Systems (approved by the State and County), identify that their septic systems “treat wastewater before it is released into the ground and claim their “technology removes up to 98% of wastewater contaminants, recycling clean water into the environment and recharging natural water supplies.”

Economic RISK to Residents. It is unknown at this time if the BCRSD can identify (now or at a future date) a  higher standard for approving septic permits than what is allowed by the State and county. Given the relative power of an RSD that includes making decisions independent of elected officials, the allegations by the BCRSD regarding soils and the useful life of a septic system should be clearly documented and posted on the main page of the county website. The purpose is to prevent/mitigate any possible class-action lawsuits so that existing and prospective new residents can be aware of the potential risks posed by the BCRSD associated with owning property in Brown County.

Additional Comments

https://browncountyregionalsewerdistrict.wordpress.com/strategic-plan/

Helmsburg and Lake Lemon Corridor. The justification of sewer service in Helmsburg west to Lake Lemon is supported with valid justifications to include community support.

Bean Blossom Corridor. I continue to question the assumptions, data, and level of analysis used to support the scope of “solutions” identified for the Helmsburg and east to Bean Blossom and Woodland Lake corridor.

Economic Development. The intent for providing sewer service in the Bean Blossom area has always included the desire by a few for economic development. This has been reinforced by elected officials and the current BCRSD Board president, who has acknowledged his commercial interests in the area. Economic development-related analysis to include any adverse effects on the low to moderate-income level residents was not covered within the scope of the current projects.

Conclusion.  I would encourage concerned citizens to review the videos. The published plan and study provide the supporting detail. A public hearing is required before the applications for project funding are submitted. The RSDs have to allow for citizen input at the hearings. Input can be ignored. The Hearing is recorded which will provide more testimony to be considered by state and federal officials.

Updated Mar 16, 2023

Commissioner Meeting Notes, Wed Mar 15, 2023. 6:00 p.m.  Audio of the meeting (25 minutes).

This post with any comments at the Facebook group –  Brown County Matters.

Courthouse Additions – Sally Port and Security Entra.m.nce.  The commissioner’s financial advisor from Baker -Tilley identified the additional funds needed (550K) to support these projects. The county previously budgeted 500K.  More details on the source of funds will be presented at next week’s County Council Meeting on Monday, March 20,  6:30 p.m., Salmon Room, County Office Building, 201 Locust Lane.

Indian Hill Railroad Crossing.  Matt Pierce, Indiana House of Representatives, reinforced his statement and correspondence provided last year that legislators would provide the support – needed (including legislation), to re-open the crossing to pedestrian traffic.  This provides access to the Tecumseh Trail. He stated that any claims as to 140K or more in costs for signage/signals were overstated. Commissioners directed the county legal council to contact Representative Pierce to discuss options.

• • History on the “closing.” Part 1: Closure – Railroad Crossing – Indian Hill Rd
  • Commissioners have acknowledged that they made a mistake, were not aware that the closing would impact access to the Tecumseh Trail, and that a public hearing should have been conducted. There is no history of accidents at the crossing.
  • Commissioners have expressed no interest in re-opening the crossing to include vehicle traffic. This option may require legal action by citizens. Commissioner Pittman acknowledged (in the presence of legal counsel), that a public hearing was required, so the scope and cost of any legal action by citizens, may be feasible through crowd-funding efforts. If the decision was illegal and ruled as such, I assume the commissioners would have to have a new public hearing to keep the crossing closed. Legal action, if this includes depositions,  may lead to the source of the motivation for the closing of the crossing.

Audio – Remarks by Matt Pierce begin at 16:00 https://independentvotersofbrowncountyin.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/03/commissioners-march-15.m4a

Peaceful Valley Heritage.  Vivian Wolf of the PVH asked for commissioner support the posting of signs with QR Codes to promote our history.  Signs would include locations at the overlooks and covered bridge to promote our history supported with self-guided driving tours.

Highway Department – Road Paving Plan – 2026.  Commissioners to post on the county website.  The plan was first presented last October and has recently been updated.

Updated Mar 15, 2023

Meeting Announcement and comments – posted at Brown County Matters

Audio of the meeting

Brown County Regional Sewer District (BCRSD) Board Meeting Notes, Tues Mar 14, 2023. Location Jackson VFD – Helmsburg.

Next Joint Meeting with Helmsburg RSD –  28 March  2023, 6:00 p.m. Brown County Community Foundation – lower level.

Applications for Funding (Preliminary Engineering Reports (PERs). Both boards are expecting that their PERs will be completed by the Mar 28 meeting and be ready to submit for review to approval authorities.  Funding sources include the State Revolving Fund and USDA. The PERs provide include the “documented justification” for the projects.  May also include Letters of Support.  Another source of funds may be the Bilateral Infrastructure Funds.

• • A Public Hearing is required to present the PERs are required.  Dates TBD.  The foundation for the PERs is provided in the Brown County Wastewater Strategic Plan and Water Study that the BCRSD has refused to present at a public meeting.  These plans are available on their website.  Any questions can be asked at the public hearing on the PERs.
  • This BCRSD PER should include the documentation supporting the allegations and speculation regarding septic system failures, water quality, and adequacy of soils.
  • The SRF may not question the evidence that supports the justification of need but this may not be the case at the federal level.

Attendees. About 9 people from Lake Lemon attended the meeting.   Lake Lemon residents have been the most supportive of obtaining sewer service.

Community Awareness. BCRSD expects to place ads in the Democrat to raise awareness of their plans and website.

Needed Shift in Priorities.  The number one priority for the BCRSD was building a new sewer plant in Bean Blossom.  The PER for this project was submitted in 2018 and approved by the SRF. The project was considered a high priority.  The BCRSD requested that this project be kept on the priority list.

When the BCRSD failed to acquire land for a plant in Bean Blossom (the purpose for the 2018 PER), the scope of the project changed significantly. In addition to the Bean Blossom area, Helmsburg and areas west to Lake Lemon are now (not in 2018) included in the scope of this first phase.  The Helmsburg and the Lake Lemon areas have valid needs and the support of current and new customers.

Timeline.  Review by funding sources generally takes 30-90 days.  Feedback is expected around mid-summer and a formal commitment later in the year.   Construction cannot begin until 85% of needed easements are acquired (Per BLN contractor).  Not sure if this 85% is a state and/or federal standard.