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:

Cathi,

I received a phone call from someone who told me I’ve made a huge mistake in supporting you.  This person claims that you’ve publicly stated that you are fully in support of expanding the sewer to the vacant business park.

I conveyed to this person that my impression was that you are in favor of expanding the sewer to the commons, but only with a developer commitment, which would including picking up most, if not all, of the resulting expense.  I stated that you were not in favor of expanding to a vacant business park, nor a vacant commons without firm commitment from a developer.

Can you clarify your position on this issue?

Thank you for your time!

I didn’t receive a written reply from Cathi by the end of the day.  I figured she was probably busy with preparation to take office on Monday and / or busy getting ready for the BOF meeting that night.   I knew I was going to the BOF meeting so if I didn’t get a response by email, I’d just ask her that night.  And, that’s what I did.

Cathi stated that she was not in favor of expanding the sewer to the vacant business park.  She stated that she was not in favor of doing anything with the business park, except selling it.  She also stated that she would be in favor of expansion to the commons area, but only with a developer commitment to pay for at least the new pump house.  She stated that the neighborhood across from the commons has old homes on very small lots, with bad septic systems, so it would be beneficial to them to have the sewer available.  And with them on the sewer, flow would increase, which could eliminate the odor problem and bioxide treatment expense.  But, she’s not in favor of the town expanding the sewer to that area without a developer agreeing to pay a large part of the expense.

Interestingly, Cathi also stated that she believes the commons has just put in a new septic system.  She thinks this happened right after “Phase 2″ was voted down by the BOF.  She’s not sure why they would even need the sewer at the property if they have a new septic system, and she’s not sure if the property owner even told the town they were going to replace the septic, or why (if that was their plan) they didn’t give a more firm commitment to developing the commons for “Phase 2″ to get past the BOF for a public vote.

She stated that there are a lot of unknowns right now, as she hasn’t taken office yet, and it will take some time to unravel all of these issues.

So, there you have it.  I stand by my vote.  I think Cathi’s position makes sense.  I also think that the resident who called me should volunteer for the WPCA.  There are openings right now, and that person would make a great addition.  Regulations can be changed to allow optional connection, funding changes, etc.

Advertisement