I could be wrong, but i thought the dept. of health did the inspection. I can't remember now. Haven't heard anyone that thinks it's okay to let leaky sewage go unchecked. :roll:
I could be wrong, but i thought the dept. of health did the inspection. I can't remember now. Haven't heard anyone that thinks it's okay to let leaky sewage go unchecked. :roll:
The passive aggression of people making excuses as to why they can't keep a functional septic tank sounds like an endorsement to me. What expertise does the Dept. of Health have in plumbing? I suspect they can spot a dysfunctional tank from the surface, and then they would have to get a sewer company involved. Why involve a middleman? That is a waste of tax dollars.
passive aggression? Seriously?
municipal sewage is not an option for everyone on the planet.![]()
Go back to an outhouse. It seems to be what many here want. Instead of government intrusion, how about appealing to one's sense of "love thy neighbor". Also, a system of inspections set up on a specific time basis with heavy fines for those with uncorrected problems would be far superior to the "one size fits all" approach this law takes.I want off septic, what is my other choice?
Go back to an outhouse. It seems to be what many here want. Instead of government intrusion, how about appealing to one's sense of "love thy neighbor". Also, a system of inspections set up on a specific time basis with heavy fines for those with uncorrected problems would be far superior to the "one size fits all" approach this law takes.