(Letter to the Editor - Photo Illustration - MetroCreativeConnection)

It appears that my focus of my speech to the City Council on Dec. 16 was too subtle and went over the heads of many of the council representatives. I know that Mayor Joyce heard my message, from his response in the Message from the Executive. He actually boosted the point I was trying to make.

The City of Parkersburg has spent millions of dollars upgrading and building City properties. These include upgrades to the City and Southwood parks, from the pools and splash pond to new sidewalks, and now a proposed upgrade to what is known as Pappas corner of the City Park, and the adjacent pond. These are worthwhile improvements, but they only provide indirect benefits to the community who use these amenities. He did not mention, but I will, the new fire department buildings and the new police equipment, which provide services to city residents, when needed. Most of us pay the associated fees and pray silently that we never have to utilize those services. Again, an example of indirect benefits to the residents of Parkersburg.

My question is when does the needs of Parkersburg citizens become a direct priority for city funding? This summer, many of our residents experienced severe flooding, with a minimum of five events, in June, July and August. Some were back-to-back events. These were not minor nuisance floods in yards and basements, they required removal of several gallons of water from their homes, requiring several hours of cleanup each time it happened. It also included moving items such as furniture, electronics, boxes, including many important records and photos, etc. out of the path of the incoming water. Event after event. All because the stormwater drainage system is inadequate or completely missing. The mayor spoke at the finance committee meeting about how messy it would get cleaning the muck out of the pond. Does the administration not realize that citizens have to face similar situations when reclaiming their basements from these stormwater floods?

I am curious how the mayor came up with hundreds of residents who would benefit from the project at Pappas corner? As a teenager, I spent many days in City Park, as did my classmates and friends. I am quite sure that no one is spending their days and nights in Pappas Corner, especially in light of the ban on camping on City property and no one person there would benefit from this renovation. I am absolutely sure that the occupants of Mt. Olive Cemetery across the street will not see any benefit either. That leaves the houses on the left side of 23rd Street, which rises upward from the intersection, and the houses on Park Avenue directly across from the corner of 23rd Street and Park Avenue. How does that possibly total “hundreds of residents?”

I know that these flooding events happened in Districts 1,2,3 and 4. It is easy to surmise that the rest of the districts were similarly affected. I remember that in one of the Tuesday meetings, the mayor said that all the money allocated to stormwater pipes had been spent. Yet, the proposal was to move $250,000 from the stormwater funding to draining, removing the muck, cleaning out debris, and deepening the pond at City Park. I believe he also said that if that were not enough, they could probably move some more money into the project. Another project that only is an indirect benefit to most citizens. Why not move additional funding into the stormwater pipe program, directly benefiting residents, their streets, and their neighborhoods? If these repairs continue to be postponed, it is only going to cost more when they are done. And in the meantime, not only residences are affected, it also is undermining the stability of the city streets, or completely destroying them, such as the example of 18th Avenue in Southside. If we have money to fund projects on city-owned property, we have money to help ordinary citizens in these situations by fixing these stormwater issues.

The mayor mentioned that in 2003 the cost to repair our aging stormwater system was estimated to cost $250 million. That cost has probably tripled, as the problem has continued to grow. How do we move forward to address this issue? Just like how you eat an elephant, one bite at a time. Make a list of all areas needing stormwater repair and prioritize those needing immediate remediation. Move some of the current year’s surpluses into funding that will directly fund stormwater projects that will benefit the citizens of Parkersburg when the weather permits. During the upcoming city budget meetings for the next fiscal year, allocate a higher percentage of funding to stormwater projects, and keep funding these projects! The residents of Parkersburg deserve the same consideration as projects located on city properties.

Sue Ellen Waybright

Parkersburg