TO THE EDITOR:

We are writing to you in regard to the recent articles covering the wastewater and drinking water problems in the city of Harris. I am appalled and astonished at the commentary in your paper from the city mayor and actions of the council in applying for a $5.3 million loan to build very large water/wastewater treatment facilities at city taxpayer expense.

We wonder how much thought has been given to the financial impact on the city of Harris, property owners and current users of the system. Very little information on cost has been shared with the public except what city officials and city consultant engineer and his employer want us to hear.

It doesnít take a genius to figure out that the loan request approved by the city council and signed by the mayor is a General Obligation Loan, committing every taxpaying property owner (totaling 425 using 2004 county census data and new home permits in the city) to this major debt over the next 20 years.

Using a straight line amortization schedule at the stated 2.5 percent interest rate, Harris city officials have obligated every current property owner to a tax levy of approximately $893 per year for the next 20 years.

Even worse is the annual operating and maintenance costs for the new facility, estimated at approximately $150,000 plus annually which will be paid for by current users. With only 134 current user hookups, this will cost each of them approximately $1,119 per year in water and sewer charges to use the system in addition to repayment of the construction loan. How will this outrageous cost be paid for by many of our current residents who are on fixed incomes.

We ask that you check your own newspaper articles in late 2004. Mayor Smissonís campaign pledge to voters stated, ìSmisson sets tax relief as goal,î he further stated in the same article, and I quote, ìCity government should constantly be looking for ways to do things better at a lower cost. Business leaders think that way every day. Governments on the other hand tend to think that everything they do is a justification to raise more taxes.î

I would also check campaign statements made by the new 2005 council members, assuring residents that they will maintain our rural life style and control city expenses, which is not being done.

We ask you, are the mayor and city officials not fulfilling their commitment to the voters and taxpaying residents of Harris?

There are obviously a few residents, city consultants and council members who support this approach who have sold property for development at huge financial gain or see lucrative business for themselves. The others will wonder what in the world happened when they get their future tax bills.

Louise M. and
John T. Perron