To The Editor:
In response to Sal Spinosa's letter to the editor in the February 15, 2024, issue of The Valley Reporter, it seems elementary to me, but I see opinions getting mistaken for facts more and more these days. After reading Spinosa's letter to the editor, I found it frustrating to see the same small group of folks roll out the same old tactics in their opposition to a game-changing project in Waitsfield. The approach adheres to a classic methodology: when you are looking for a particular outcome or verdict, the best approach is to cast doubt and confusion around the facts.
The best way to counter fear, doubt, and confusion is to present facts.
The facts are:
- As proposed, the municipal wastewater system will have no impact on town tax rates; -- it will be funded entirely by users, as is the case with the successful municipal water system. In fact, as infill occurs, it could even lower taxes by increasing the Grand List.
- The system will make more housing possible within traditional settlement patterns (i.e., the village and Irasville).
- Sixty-three percent of the aging septic systems in the villages are “lot constrained.” This means that they can’t meet today’s state rules for wastewater. A municipal system solves this problem.
- The wastewater system would improve water quality in the Mad River and protect drinking water from our wells.
My motivation for writing this reply to Spinosa's letter boils down to my concern for the future of the town of Waitsfield and the quality of the water in the river. We owe it to our kids and our downstream and lot-constrained neighbors to take advantage of this unique opportunity to join every other community of our size in Vermont and adopt a concept that's been around as long as the Romans. Please join me in waiting for the facts and our opportunity to participate in the process as the town task force shares the details of the project in the coming months.
Jon Jamieson
Waitsfield
