The Tisbury board of health last Thursday held the first of three scheduled public hearings on its proposal to impose new regulations and fees on any new construction in the Lake Tashmoo and Lagoon Pond watersheds. The goal is to reduce the amount of nitrogen flowing into town waterways.
Michael Loberg, board of health chairman, vice chairman Malcolm Boyd, and health agent Maura Valley addressed a group of about 40 people assembled in the Emergency Services Facility in Tisbury.
Many of those who spoke raised issues of fairness. Under the proposed new wastewater regulations, hefty fees would be imposed on any new development, including additions and renovations. Under a “no new net nitrogen” policy, property owners in the Tashmoo and Lagoon watersheds would be financially responsible for mitigating the effects of wastewater-based nitrogen that enters the groundwater through an annual fee, based on metered water usage and an estimate that it costs the town $300 to remove a pound of nitrogen from wastewater.
For example, based on average water usage and use of a Title 5 septic system, the owner of a new three-bedroom home in either watershed would pay a fee of $3,200. Under the proposed fee schedule, the charge could be reduced to $2,100 with the installation and use of an enhanced denitrification system, designed to remove nitrogen from the wastewater. The use of denitrifying toilets in combination with advanced systems could reduce the annual fee to $320.
Application of the fee will be triggered by the filing of a building permit, and would cease either after 20 years, when the development is connected to the town sewer system, or when the town successfully removes enough nitrogen to certify water quality standards. The fee is assessed semi-annually and included in the homeowner’s water bill.
The regulations stipulate that the collected fees could not be used for general purposes: “Mitigation Fees collected shall be used solely to remediate, mitigate, reduce, or eliminate nitrogen pollution in Lagoon Pond and Lake Tashmoo and in the portions of Lake Tashmoo and Lagoon Pond Districts that lie within Tisbury town borders.”
“The biggest problem I have,” Doug Dowling said, “is why are all the current polluters not getting in on paying for this?”
Many members of the audience agreed with Mr. Dowling, a civil engineer. He said that people outside the watershed zones use the ponds. Mr. Dowling also pointed out that people who don’t live on the Island use the ponds, too.
Speakers repeatedly questioned why only new developments were being held responsible to reduce the amount of nitrogen entering the watersheds through wastewater.
“Eighty percent is developed. Why not target a bigger audience?” Chris Priore asked.
There was also discussion about where the majority of the nitrogen is coming from. Several people in the audience asked for more data, they questioned what the source of the board of health’s information was, and they also asked that those who use the ponds be responsible for the health of the ponds and for the fees associated with them.
Melinda Loberg, chairman of the Tisbury wastewater committee and the board of selectmen, said Tisbury can challenge the rest of the Island towns to take action. “I agree that everybody is part of the problem,” Ms. Loberg said. “Everybody uses it, and everybody should pay.”
Donald Muckerheide of Oak Bluffs said that he believed the nitrate problem was not in the groundwater, and that the septic issues made up a very small percentage of the nitrate problem. He attributed it largely to rainwater, saying septic waste causes less than 10 percent of the actual nitrogen in the ponds.
“To me, the Massachusetts Estuaries Project [MEP] is the largest fraud ever perpetrated on the population of the state of Massachusetts,” Mr. Muckerheide said. Mr. Muckerheide referred to the National Atmospheric Deposition Program, which, according to the program’s website, monitors precipitation chemistry.
“What you have to do is clean your ponds,” Mr. Muckerheide said. “For some reason, the Northeast is the only part of the country that is totally ignorant of aeration. Everybody else is doing it. I talked to six engineers all across the country, and they’re having a good chuckle about this. But we can probably clean the Lagoon for the same amount of money they’re going to waste on that permeable reactive barrier — $600,000 in Oak Bluffs — which will do nothing in the big picture for the Lagoon. Nothing.”
The new regulations are based in part on the Massachusetts Estuaries Project reports for Tashmoo and the Lagoon. The MEP studies, a joint project between the University of Massachusetts School of Marine Science and Technology and the state Department of Environmental Protection, studied coastal salt ponds across the state and set limits for nitrogen loading in each pond.
According to the MEP reports, for Lake Tashmoo and Lagoon Pond, 6,435 and 13,016 pounds, respectively, of the current nitrogen load must be removed in order to maintain sustainable water resources, based on the assumption that no new nitrogen will enter the waters as a result of new development. The MEP reports that human wastewater accounts for 80 and 76 percent of the overall controllable nutrient loading in Tashmoo and the Lagoon.
Ms. Loberg said the state of Massachusetts has accepted the MEP’s model as one that they can rely on. But both Mr. Priore and Mr. Muckerheide said that they tried to access the yearly water tests, or what the town calls raw water tests, which are supposed to be open to the public; however, both men said they were unable to obtain them.
Ms. Loberg said the tests were there, but there aren’t enough of them.
“I don’t think anybody disputes the need for cleaning up the Lagoon,” developer Paul Adler of Chilmark said. “That’s not on the table. The question is sharing the cost, sharing the burden.”
“My general feeling is the burden is for everybody, not just for us,” Barbara Ronchetti said.
“Everybody that flushes a toilet,” Mr. Priore said. “Bottom line.”
Mr. Priore suggested taxing vacation rentals, where he said water usage can often be abused or not taken into account, and the price for a rental near his home can sometimes be as expensive as $9,000 a week. He also suggested offering water conservation incentives for Islanders.
In a follow-up conversation, Mr. Loberg said that there was no effective start date for the regulations at this time. He said because it’s a public health issue, it requires a majority vote of the health commissioners in Tisbury to enact the regulations. Mr. Loberg said it did not need to go to town meeting. However, voters would have an opportunity to decide how mitigation fees, which must be allocated only for the removal of nitrogen from the watersheds from which they came, are used within the watersheds.
The next hearing is scheduled for Monday, June 27, at 6:30 pm at the Emergency Services Facility in Tisbury.