The cost of moral hazard

To the editor:

A moral hazard is created when people are able to make decisions and take action, or fail to take action, for which they believe that they will not be punished if they are in error. Typically such hazard exists when their failure will not be recognized, will be compensated by insurance and/or corrected by external authorities, and the costs of failure will be borne by others.

The recent flood is an excellent example of just this problem. Everyone appears to know who created the flood conditions, particularly the surge in the river level and force that caused such damage to property and the local environment along the Delaware River.

PPL has a huge impoundment of Lake Wallenpaupack and no real responsibility beyond generating its own power and keeping the boaters happy. Many fingers are pointing in its direction as a major contributing factor to the recent flooding.

Through their action, inaction, incompetence or stupidity we are doomed to be flooded whenever they fail to manage their function responsibly. The resulting millions of dollars of costs to homeowners, local and state authorities and the federal government, through FEMA, is not their problem. As they do not accept any responsibility and no one is forcing them to do so, a moral hazard is created.

What is surprising is the lack of any action by the authorities to resolve the situation. As taxpayers, we all wind up paying for it in the end, but our representatives appear powerless or indifferent. It is only a matter of time and further floods until flood insurance will no longer be affordable or possibly available on the Delaware River bank.

Until these people are made responsible for their actions, we are going to continue to be subject to the results of their collective failure.

Mill Rift, PA

Letter to PPL Commissioner Sheehan

To the editor:

Well you’ve brought me to my knees with this flood. I wanted to attend your meeting for affected area residents, but knew I was too bruised and exhausted. How many times will you unleash your “weapon of mass destruction” on my home and property?

I read the FERC report. Nice you were concerned about notifying the 12 Hawley families, but what about those of us along the Lackawaxen between Kimbles and through Rowland. Did we not matter? The towpath was flooded and damaged by the time word was transmitted to our emergency personnel, who were desperately seeking information, and could only find out when the river would crest at Wilkes-Barre on their radios. They tried to safeguard us with only a visual picture of the wild rising river.

We read your contact log reports about effects on the Delaware, Port Jervis and Matamoras. Nowhere in the report is the impact on the towpath area. And then I read further, that one of your priorities after your release was getting the rafters back on the Lackawaxen for the holiday weekend. That anyone would want to put children into a river that had two sewage plants discharge into it and heaven knows what debris submerged under the surface was unbelievable.

And what do you think we and our families and neighbors on the towpath were doing during our holiday weekend? We might have suffered some flooding with the storm system that we knew was stalled in the area beginning June 23 and expected to drop eight inches or more in our watershed, but you chose to retain water and then compound the damage by sending four feet or more of destruction through my kitchen and living room, sending many of my outdoor structures and parts of my driveway down the river.

You are an extremely frightening neighbor. I thank God that I live in a wonderful caring neighborhood here on the towpath. With little to no information, everyone tried to protect and care for each others’ lives and property throughout this disaster. PPL’s absence of concern for this community is evident throughout the report to FERC.

Joan Searle

Stop discharging sewage

To the editor:

The State of New York is setting a dangerous and damaging precedent upstream on the Delaware River by allowing the discharge of pollution into the river system. On behalf of the communities (human and nonhuman) that rely upon the Delaware River and on behalf of the members of the Delaware Riverkeeper Network, I urge Commissioner Sheehan to take action to stop this illegal and harmful discharge and to require alternative action to protect the river, its users and ecosystems.

The Village of Deposit must be brought into compliance with its permit and the law and be subject to fines for the harm it is inflicting on our Delaware River system. In the short term, it must be required to capture and transport its sewage offsite for treatment at an alternative sewage treatment facility. And a longer-term solution must be identified and implemented that does not result in any discharge of partially treated sewage from Deposit sewage treatment plant (STP).

Reports are that this discharge will continue for nearly two months, taking us through July, August and September, peak vacation and recreational months, and a time of year when flows are often at their lowest and aquatic life is more vulnerable. In addition, the upper reaches of the Delaware system are economically vital to the region. The river is used by hundreds of thousands of individuals every year, with use highest in the summer. Tourism businesses are dependent upon the public’s perception of the river’s health. Hearing that chlorinated raw sewage and/or partially treated sewage is being dumped upstream could have a harmful impact on these businesses, particularly those supporting contact recreation.

The receiving waters of the main stem Upper Delaware River are designated as both Wild and Scenic and Special Protection Waters. The high quality waters and exceptional resources of this part of the watershed are entitled to a higher level of protection. Moreover, the Delaware River is an important drinking water supply for many. The Delaware is a shared resource; it is important we all use it in a way that is respectful of others.

Dr. Suess replies to Sandler

To the editor:

And Sandler was hot,

So like a whistling kettle he cried,

“Black is the pot!

And I wish that they all would just go away.

I’ve seen clandestine meetings, I’ve sat in a few,

Like the one about Derry’s raise in the last week of June.

“Get a second opinion about the millions our lawyers have been paid?

Can’t they see that our deal with the devil’s already been made?

We operated on true principles. BOCES and SED affirmed:

If you build it they will come, The casinos will arrive,

Free swamp land is where this vision will thrive.

Try to stir up the public to search for what’s true?

But input from the public, we would always eschew.

After all what does the public know anyhow?

They voted for change, I’m a spectator now.”

Forfeiting our credibility

To the editor:

Last week Amy Goodman, of Democracy Now radio on NPR, interviewed Edward Peck, former U.S. Chief of Mission in Iraq and former Deputy Director of the Task Force on Terrorism in the Reagan Administration. She asked him about how we, as Americans, are perceived elsewhere, given our recent posture on the Middle East—the Iraq war, Palestine, Hezbollah bombing, and Israeli retaliation and invasion of Lebanon. This is what he said:

“And the perceptions, in the minds of an awful lot of people in the Arab world and Europe and elsewhere, reflect the loss of American prestige, credibility, respect, as we go on doing things, which seem in the eyes of others to be irrational and unjustifiable… And then the United States says, ‘No, no. No ceasefire. Let’s let them go on bombing and killing.’ I think that the damage to us is not only vital, I think it is going to have a lasting effect on our relations with the rest of the world commercially, socially, culturally and in every way imaginable.”

Well expressed, Mr. Peck. I’m forwarding your words to President Bush, in hopes that he will reflect on them and revise his Middle East policies. Won’t you, the reader, join me in requesting action on this issue? (If you don’t, who will?)

John Miller