Opinion: Don't sell town reservoir
When you reach out to people with letters to the editor, which I have done in regards to the following, here's what can happen.
Recently, in regards to the town of Springfield Select Board's decision to put the Weathersfield Reservoir up for sale, I have received calls from Michigan and Nebraska and a letter from Florida from former Springfield residents, as well as many residents themselves, that have all asked me, "Are you crazy?" They are all of the opinion this reservoir is one of the most valuable assets that the town owns and should be preserved as a backup water system.
We, the Committee to Save the Reservoir, all agree and are asking for your support and to vote no March 2nd on Articles 6 and 7.
In my opinion, this is a sad day for Springfield when a former water supply that furnished the whole town during the booming industrial days, is put up for sale (for the second time and was defeated by 620 votes). Also, the dam has been grossly neglected when the people voted to keep the dam in good repair, with money to do so, so as to preserve it.
For intelligent people to willfully try to sell a water supply is beyond my comprehension. Water is the most important commodity in the world. Also, to take this action shows an utter disrespect for the people of Springfield's wishes.
This reservoir has been found, after nine years of engineering studies, to be our only viable backup water supply.
Water is the most valuable resource in the world. Without water, a town would wither and die. The town of Springfield is in the process of a multimillion-dollar upgrade of its water and sewer system that has been long overdue. With the upgrading of the Springfield water system, there is one source that is being neglected, and that is the Weathersfield reservoir, capable of furnishing 56 million gallons of water and at one time provided all of Springfield's water.
I have attended several meetings regarding the Weathersfield dam and have come to the conclusion that some people have decided to destroy this valuable resource by notching the dam. One reason given is the safety issue. This issue has been extremely exaggerated. It was mandated years ago by the Select Board that the town of Springfield's public works division keep the dam clear-cut of all brush and trees, etc., so that the earthen dam would not be affected. If this were done, there would not be an issue of safety.
If the dam were notched, the state of Vermont would never allow it to be used again as a water supply. The wishes of the majority of the voters of Springfield have been entirely disregarded as to the mandate that the dam be clear-cut and also in a drawn down condition. If people in authority do not follow the mandate of previous select boards, then how can we expect results? When supposedly intelligent people decide to deliberately destroy such a valuable asset, it is time for the public to know what is happening.
Ask yourself "What if the well fields, our only source of water, became contaminated?" It has been contaminated with salt severe enough to have been notified on your water bill. As Red Dufresne, head engineer of Dufresne and Henry engineering firm, once said, "I do not like putting all my eggs in one basket." He was referring to the aquifers which, if contaminated, would take many, many years to clear themselves, if ever. After research was done, it was found there were no other viable sources of water in the town of Springfield.
Please keep this knowledge in mind when you go to the polls March 2nd.
STEVEN SYSKO
Springfield
For related news articles and photo, CLICK HERE.
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Please refrain from posting critical comments in a way that is rude, demeaning or threatening. And try to think of something constructive to include in your remarks. We reserve the right to remove any offensive or off-topic comments.