Elliot to Address WPCA Tonight

Attorney Robert Elliot

Once again, Robert Elliot, is set to address a town board — and this time, it’s the right one.  Elliot is listed on the WPCA’s agenda for tonight’s meeting, at 7:15 at town hall.

I expect to hear Elliot state everything he did last night at the Board of Finance meeting — but this time, he’s talking to the board directly responsible for putting him on the brink of bankruptcy.

It should be interesting to hear Peter Hughes lead the WPCA’s responses, if any, to Attorney Elliot.  With Black now gone, will Hughes and this board actually reach out to a business owner whom they’re in the process of financially destroying, or will it be more of the same lack of response?

It may be too soon to tell, as the new Board of Selectmen hasn’t been sworn in yet, and hasn’t met with the WPCA.  It’s likely they WPCA will continue on their path of indifference at this juncture.  I expect that attitude to change, soon, though.

I urge the sewer district residents to go to tonight’s meeting as a show of support for our town.  Elliot may not be everybody’s favorite guy, but, if he throws in the towel, I think we’ll be able to call ourselves a ghost town.

Owner of Most of Downtown Marlborough Warns of Bankruptcy Due to Sewer

• Black vacates office without consulting his replacement
• Largest property taxpayer in Marlborough warns of possible bankruptcy due to sewer
• Selectmen elect concerned with town employees promising things they have no power to do
• Cathi Gaudinksi: “It’s a new era in town now.”

Last night’s BOF meeting was mostly Attorney Robert Elliot addressing the board.  Elliot is the largest property taxpayer in Marlborough, and owns many properties in town, including the Dunkin Donuts plaza, and the adjacent plaza where the now defunct Marlborough Tavern and Marlborough Market lie vacant.

Cathi Gaudinski’s Position on Sewer Expansion

Yesterday, after my blog posts, I received a phone call from a sewer district resident.  The resident opened the conversation by stating the s/he had read my blog and that I had made a huge mistake.   “How so,” I asked?  “By voting for Cathi.  She is pro sewer expansion to the business park and has stated it publicly several times,” was the response.  I stated, “That is not my understanding.  My understanding is that Cathi supports expansion of the sewer to the commons, but only if a developer commits to funding a large portion of the expense.  I don’t believe Cathi is in support of anything to do with the ‘business park’, other than selling it.”

“It boggles my mind that you would support her, and that more sewer district residents didn’t come out and vote,” stated the caller.  I stated, “I can only make decisions on information I have.  I have never heard Cathi state anything other than what I just told you.”

The conversation continued along these lines.  Other topics were discussed. The conversation was interesting enough. Eventually, it ended with the caller stating, “I just wanted to call because it boggled my mind that you would support her.  Time will tell which one of us is right.”

After the call, I was still confident in my decision to support Cathi… but the call, and an anonymous letter I received last month had planted the seeds of doubt.

So, to clear up the issue, I sent Cathi the following email: