Citizens respond

Dear Editor,

To: Member of the City Council, John Bingham, City Manager, City of McCook From: Concerned Citizens of McCook

Re: Proposed Course of Action and Implementation Schedule as it relates to the City of McCook's alterative water source study.

Gentlemen:

After reviewing the letter from the Nebraska Health and Human Services, May 17, 2002, we would like to protest the threatening penalties on the City of McCook should it violate the time table set forth by its plan submitted Why the big hurry? Things have changed since the plan was submitted on April 18, 2002, among them are the Middle Republican Natural Resources District moratorium on water well drilling, Olsson Associates contract change, and EPA's new programs.

In an article in the Omaha World Herald 6/10/02 Gov. Johanns stated that the State has entered historic and uncharted waters financially, a $61 million reduction in tax revenue through April, $75 million less in May and a estimated total of $200 million by the first of July. The nation, the state and especially McCook are in critical financial condition. The city of McCook has a $3 million debt to be paid in January 2003 .

The penalty of $5,000 is a bargain (only 10 days interest on the purchase price of the Old Army Air Field) if the city of McCook is forced into a corner to make another bad decision. Leaving the water issue solely to the professionals and experts does not always guarantee a professional solution, i.e., the Air Base proposal, which prompted a lawsuit and considerable confusion to the public. If "experts'" advice had been followed, we all might have been drinking water from a proposed Superfund Cleanup site.

In the City of McCook's proposal for test hole drilling, time is of the essence for the field work. Drilling and testing will be completed by July 31, 2002, Why? This is the local well drillers' busiest time of the year.

Some on our council seem to think frightful things would happen if the city doesn't march to the tune of the state threats. Possibly fear is the most advantageous way of influencing public opinion and action. However, we feel that positive suggestions will have a much more beneficial effect on the situation.

We would recommend the city explain to the State that the time table is unaffordable, we are financially disadvantaged and unable to afford to comply at this time. We feel the city should request an extension on the date of compliance. But, the important fact is that the city is in the process of examining and developing plans to deal with the water problem.

Our conclusion is that the city is headed for another costly and bad decision if it continues on their present "hurried" course of action.

Jim Kenny,

Jack Lytle,

Keith Arterburn, Richard Bair

McCook