There is a lot of misinformation floating around out there with regards to the special ballot question election held on October 13. The town council got a closer look at a flyer with misleading statements and figures at a recent council meeting. The author of the flyer and a related website was unknown as the requisite forms establishing a ballot question campaign had not been filed with the Town Clerk. Such filings create a record of who is responsible financially, and otherwise, for content and materials supporting a ballot question campaign.

Information on this flyer, handed out at public places like flu clinics and the transfer station before the special election, stated that if the ballot question passed, all property owners in Barnstable will be imposed with betterments up to $150,000. This is simply not true.

The actual question on the ballot on October 13 was specific to the second phase of the project in Hyannis around Stewart’s Creek and effects 120 houses. This is the only sewer project currently planned. An earlier plan that encompassed 1600 houses around Wequaquet Lake was VOTED DOWN by the council.

Further, my opponent and his supporters are stating that I independently suggested that there would be, or that I would support, a $150,000 betterment cost assigned to homeowners in my area. This is ridiculous and false.

This statement might have roots in a discussion about the Stewart’s Creek at a town council meeting this summer when I echoed a point that a fellow councilor made about the need to find alternative funding for sewer projects. I stated, as my fellow councilor had suggested, that by the time we get to discussions about bringing sewers to the western part of this town, a separate sewage treatment plant may well be needed; and to fund this with 100 percent betterments, the costs may reach $150,000.  I repeated this again a later meeting and it was taken out of context.

The point was; this isn’t plausible. There is no such plan, and I would never support such a plan. Further, I doubt this council as a whole would support such a plan.

There are no plans to charge the residents of Precinct 6 betterments for sewers.

We cannot rely on 100% betterments to fund future sewer service projects because the costs would drive people out of town, my own family included. The town administration and most town councilors understand this.

This 100% betterment policy for sewers was part of plan my opponent claims to have developed when he was a councilor. My opponent approved of the 100% policy as a town councilor. 

 Two projects came before the council this summer because stimulus money was available. That money provides mechanisms for 0-2% loans and 8% subsidies from the federal government for the homeowners in this project.  The town applied for these funds and had preliminary approval for the two projects, one project was voted down by the council and the other was moved to a ballot.  Consider the consequences if we had not applied for these funds; you would be reading or hearing from my opponent and his supporters that we were irresponsible for not applying for this funding.

Additionally, the same group that was working to defeat the ballot question has declared that there is currently a permitted plan to build a second sewage treatment plant somewhere in town for $160 million dollars.  This is not true.  Any such project would have been publicly discussed and reported by local newspapers and radio stations. This is not something that could, or would, ever be done “behind closed doors.”

The only sewer project in the pipeline right now is the Stewart’s Creek Project.

I have serious issues with the council imposing betterments of any kind. When residents of a private road need to make road repairs or upgrades they have an option to do this with betterments. Fifty percent of the residents involved have to respond favorably for the DPW to get involved. This means that ultimately the decision is left up to the residents who live on the road. That is how betterments should work.  I would take it a step further and say 60-75% should have to approve before any such project moves forward.

When residents came out to meetings to speak against Phase II of the Stewart’s Creek project in July, I listened and voted against imposing betterments.  When the project came before us a second time with new funding options I was prepared to vote against it until I began hearing from residents before the meeting, residents who would be paying those betterments and who wanted the item to pass. Many of these people were simply afraid to come to a town council meeting and speak in favor because the atmosphere at the public hearings had become vitriolic.

Septic systems in the Stewart’s Creek area are failing. There are residents in the affected area who were given permission to make temporary repairs to their title V systems expecting that the sewer system would soon be available to them. Without this project, many residents will ultimately have to install costly self-contained systems.

The town council and town staff have planned, since the beginning of discussion about Stewart’s Creek and the related betterment policy, to research ways to help residents who will have difficulties paying for this project. Town Council President Chirigotis has asked the town’s Comprehensive Financial Advisory Committee, (CFAC) to study the funding issue and research alternative funding for any future consideration of sewer projects.

Phase two of the Stewart’s Creek project – that involves only 120 households not the entire town – was moved to a ballot question and special election when the group who seems to oppose everything the council does gathered the requisite signatures this summer.

Unfortunately, this risks our opportunity to take advantage of federal stimulus funds because deadlines have passed. The applications for stimulus funds have already been approved, but the delay of this final vote jeopardizes our access to these funds.  If this question was placed on the ballot in November it most likely would have been too late, and we would have lost millions of dollars that will provide financial relief to the homeowners in the Stewart’s Creek project area.

We are faced with a serious waste-water problem Cape-wide and most Cape legislators understand that we need to identify alternative resources to pay for solutions. I believe that ultimately the answers are at the county level. There is a Cape-wide waste water management committee run by county government. Our water doesn’t see town lines; we should work together with other towns to solve this problem.

The recall group that worked to defeat the ballot question and is now working on another recall – the same group supporting my opponent -- clearly objects to the way the Stewart’s Creek project is funded, but hasn’t come forward with any viable options. It is unfortunate that this group who disagrees with most council decisions chooses to continuously try to incite distrust for town government rather than be a positive participant in seeking solutions.

There have been some incredible claims about me in the past few years. If you want the straight story about any issue, please give me a call. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter.

Sincerely,

Janet Joakim