Tyresös medborgarupprop på engelska

Tyresö Kommun (a municipality in the Stockholm area) has sent out invoices to the inhabitants (they are supposed to serve) for forcing the them to connect to a sewer that has not been ordered, isn’t wanted, is not the best for the environment or health.

Comments by a house owner:

The financial premise

Will they place a cap on the amount we have to pay for sewers? So far its at $100000
Per household.  

2.do,they realize this means many are forced to sell , including possibly us, because they cannot afford it.

3 is it the role of the local government. To force folks from their homes?
How can that be right? Not just legally but humanly?

4. You say get a loan. Or that you will offer a loan to be paid back in 10 years time.
As pensioners it is almost impossible to get s loan. And how do you imagine we would be able to pay more- loan and interest ten years from now without selling. How is that right?

5. Thanks to capital gains tax many who have owned their homes a long time like us will have to pay a huge amount in capital gains.  And at a time of shortage of homes In The Stockholm area where shall we move to through recent media coverage we have learned that only super expensive properties are readily available. 

6. How is it right to ask home owners to pay for infrastructure that will benefit may others for years? And to pay for infrastructure traditionally paid by the government with our taxes.. it’s part of what taxes are 

Detail Plan Roads

1. No side walks on tegelbruket
2. Street lights on tonstigen. Not every 10 meters. More spaced out
3. The four houses at the end of tonstigen not having the road fixed. Will they still have to pay?
4. Why not leave the whole of tonstigen without road fixing and cost? We do not need or want a wider road. It’s a dead end with limited traffic and cannot become a through traffic road. 
5. Do not want the rock disturbed
6.  No.blasting on tonstigen or tegelbruket too dangerous. Don’t hire experts who tell you what you want to hear. We are the ones to live with the risk and the danger. 
7. There has been a suggestion that road costs are not part of sewer cost. Roads can be fixed any time. However the road costs being takeN out now  really are sewer costs. Just witness the blast and excavation needed for the sewer pipes on  recent roads. Such  work would not be needed simply to renovate roads. 

Detail plan sewers.

1. Many neither want nor need sewers … this is primarily the interest of the sewer industry but the municipality joins in because they do not want the responsibility to over.see individual systems … if it is piped away they are OFF THE HOOK.
Waters yes some might. But it’s much simpler just to bring water than sewers. You do not have to bring sewers for that.
2 you say it’s for the environment. Wrong. You may not be aware but sewer systems are the main polluters of the seas (www.oceana.org) ) Sewers insue huge transport costs to treatment plants and sludge from the sewers are a major source of pollution to both land and sea.  Not an environmentally sound solution, and there are other better ways.  So the idea of forcing us on to sewers for environmental reasons does not stand up
3.sewer systems often break down. They are not a fail safe solution
4. At a time when water resources are running low how it is right to use this precious resource to flush toilets. When there is no need?
5. At a time of high risk for climate change or even terrorist attack or war how is it right to make us more dependent on huge centralized systems when the trend is to take care of things locally, to have systems that can handles these threats without jeopardizing people? Sewers do not handle drought, flood, power outages well. And toilets are essential. So why force a technology that  is not resilient on folks when there are other better ways, and a tenth of the cost to home owners and no cost at all to the environment,


E-postadressen publiceras inte. Obligatoriska fält är märkta *