To The Editor:
I agree with the concept that the Water Task Force has explained, that the operating and infrastructure cost of the water system should be shared by all the users. Since all taxpayers are indirectly the owners of some of the major real estate that directly benefits from the fire protection, there is no logical reason why any taxpayer should expect to get a free ride. I would expect that the Water Task Force will get professional advice on the proper way to apportion the cost including the Fayston share, and I think the taxpayers will then understand that even though their actual home does not gain additional fire protection, since we all share in the ownership of some of the buildings that gain fire protection, we really are users of the system and should pay.
Michael Sharkey
Watsfield
{loadnavigation}
