The cheapest option

I was lying in bed earlier, thinking about the sewer system out here ...

And it occurred to me that doing things "on the cheap" is not always the best course, as exemplified by this issue, the landfill and now possibly the wastewater treatment facility.

The vacuum system was the least expensive option, according to Brendan O'Regan - that's in a sidebar to my story, which I'm not sure is in the online version.

I'm all for saving the city money, but you really do get what you pay for, especially if you don't do your homework (and the people who recommended this system really did not do their homework).

Not that the system itself is bad, mind you - the manufacturer has been making vacuum systems since the early 1970s - it just wasn't good for here.

But it was the cheapest option.

And the landfill ... the city could have taken this to court three years ago and maybe we wouldn't be in this mess, with DEP and the AG's office slapping us down. Instead, city leaders opted to try and get the landfill owner to do the right thing.

It was the cheapest option.

Now we're looking at spending $26 mil on upgrades to the WWTF.

It would cost $90-100 mil to build a new plant somewhere other than on Water St. (not including buying the land), but it would put the city on the cutting edge of technology ... and it would sure help the sewer dept., which by the way has done a superb job making the old plant work for as long as it has.

But again ... it's the cheapest option.

I'm not advocating for one thing over the other, I'm just sayin' ...