www.newrivervalley.com

Drawing upon my years of accumulated legal knowledge (from "LA Law," "Law and Order" and one constitutional law course in which I got a C+ in 1978) and after studying the crucial documents, I make this pronouncement: The latest legal wrangling over Blacksburg's obligation to provide sewer service in Toms Creek will turn on a single judicial interpretation.

This is, in fact, a classic example of the cases we legal scholars refer to by the Latin phrase etiam, autem, translated as "yes, but." Or, in this particular case, as:

"You promised."

"No, we didn't."

"Did, too."

"Did not."

"I can prove it."

"So can I."

How do I know this? Because I went back and read the court order allowing Blacksburg to annex 15.4 square miles of Montgomery County, including the Toms Creek basin, 32 years ago. And, yes, the town indeed agreed to provide sewer service in three stages in areas clearly outlined on "Map M-11," which accompanied the order.

But, right after promising sewer service, the order also says, "In interpreting this decree insofar as water and sewer extensions are concerned, the Court is cognizant of the fact that there is no necessity of the installation of such lines simply to cover an area unless some development requires it."

And, town council passed an ordinance in 1985 declaring that it had or would provide sewer service to all the developed or about-to-be-developed land it had annexed, and Blacksburg's obligation would then be fulfilled. It also later revised the comprehensive plan and rezoned Toms Creek to limit development.

Plus, Map M-11 is gone. Blacksburg officials say it was among records destroyed by the Montgomery County Circuit Court. All that apparently exists is a version redrawn from memory some years later.

***

"... Unless some development requires it."

Bob and Geneva Davis' demand that the town provide sewer service to their home hinges, I believe, on what that clause means to a judge. No one seems to question whether they live in one of the service areas on the missing map. Or that their old septic system is shaky.

But does the clause refer to existing development? They're not in one. Officially planned development? Nope. Possible development? They have no plans, but the last might give them grounds anyway. Their land's poor suitability for septic systems might make it impossible to develop without sewer service.

A judge might consider, too, sewer assurances that Blacksburg officials have offered to Toms Creek landowners over the years. And he might decide that with the 1985 ordinance, Blacksburg unilaterally and unfairly changed the terms of the deal in its favor.

So yes, the Davises might have a case.

But they might not.

Here's what I'm pretty sure about: Town officials' original vision for developing Toms Creek got bushwacked by shifting housing demand, rising infrastructure costs and public opinion. Opposition to sewer lines and such arose quickly. That left folks like the Davises in their present bind, with old and iffy septic systems that will be expensive to replace and no prospects for the town-provided sewer service they believed -- whether misinformed or misled -- was coming.

Building on a comment by sewer opponent Mary Houskas, I suggest a compromise. Houskas said it would cost less to move the Davises' drainage field than to go to court.

Why doesn't the town do that for the Davises and others in their situation?

The annexation agreement is unclear; its map is missing. Official assurances were made and not fulfilled. A compromise, with the town picking up the tab to repair or replace septic systems, seems only fair. It also would certainly cost less than a $10 million to $20 million sewer system. The Davises and others would get peace of mind. And Toms Creek would still be spared a development surge.

***

Gratitude is gushing from the Pulaski County High School Theatre Department.

On April 30 students were around $70,000 short of the money they needed to travel to Great Britain to perform in the Fringe Festival in Edinburgh. Since then, businesses, individual donors and fundraising events have cut the deficit to around $30,000, with one big fundraiser to go.

That's an Outback Steakhouse dinner and auction on June 23.

Thirty grand, of course, is still a lot. But if the meat-eaters and auction hounds of the New River Valley turn out June 23, it could shrink significantly.

If you'd still like to help out the budding Brandos of Pulaski County but neither steak nor bidding appeals to you, send a donation to: Pulaski County High School Theater, 5414 Cougar Trail, Dublin, VA 24084.