from: joel anderson firstname.lastname@example.org
to: Carl Fortuna
date: Sat, Dec 24, 2011 at 5:22 PM
subject: Re: Old Saybrook's Wastewater (WWMD) implementation
violates CT's Constitution, Article First, Sections 1, 7, 11 and
20. The WWMD is a solution for pollution from individual
properties: the Town doesn't even allege pollution from any
On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 1:27 PM, Carl Fortuna
CF> Mr. Anderson,
Thanks for your prompt response.
CF> 1. The other two selectman's emails are
Noted. Their email addresses weren't on the town's website.
oldsaybrookct.org is not responding as of this writing.
CF> 2. I suggest you contact the WPCA about a MOU between the two
entities you cite.
The WPCA has a record of advertising that they'll answer
questions. In practice, they don't. See oswpca.com for
their history. That's why I asked you for the MOU.
CF> 3. The attorney referenced in the minutes is Richard Goldstein.
He bills at $375.00/hour and was engaged by Michael Pace when a member of
the Police Commission questioned whether he, Mr. Pace, had the authority to
use legal funds identified in the Police Department budget for Town
negotiations with the PD union. Whether there was $17000.00 worth of
value in said legal opinion is not a question I can answer.
So now the Town now KNOWS that the Police budget must include money
for the Town's legal fees in negotiation with the PD union? Or not?
CF> 4. As to your other inquiries, I do not know that I fully
understand what you are asking.
Subject: Old Saybrook's Wastewater (WWMD) implementation violates
CT's Constitution, Article First, Sections 1, 7, 11 and 20. The WWMD is a
solution for pollution from individual properties: the Town
doesn't even allege pollution from any property.
There's no logic to the town WPCA's pursuit of property owners
residing within the wastewater management district (WWMD) to redress
pollution at property owner's expense, absent even an allegation
that the properties are polluting.
"Sentence first -- verdict afterwards," is Alice in Wonderland, not
Only the town has been found guilty of polluting, not individual
Because pollution can travel in the ground water for up to two
miles, it isn't possible for the town, CRAHD, DEEP or any other entity to
prove that any given property is polluting. Property owners can't be
forced to upgrade their septic systems to satisfy a mere speculation
on the part of the WPCA that the property could be polluting. If we
fined or put people in prison on mere speculation, everyone would be
broke and inside.
The WPCA's head-in-the-sand regarding the legal fragility of their
WWMD implementation is sure to embroil the town in lawsuits that the
town can only lose.
Were it not for Mike Pace listening to the voices in his head giving
him "marching orders," the town would have sewers. Sewers would
increase property values in neighborhoods served by sewers,
resulting in higher property tax yields from those neighborhoods. The WWMD
scheme of replacing septics with septics is a destruction of wealth.
The WWMD is offered without warrantee that it will reduce pollution.
This is forcing property owners to buy a pig in a poke without a
warantee that there is a pig in the poke. This is what passes for
'government?' This is absurd.
The only way the town can forestall sewers is by never testing the
groundwater again. Pace's political agenda win is net loss for the
town. As hard as this nettle may be to grasp politically, stopping
the WWMD for being unconstitutional is the right thing. No government
can take my property without paying for it.
If Shipman & Goodman LLP has provided the town an opinion that the
WWMD is constitutional, I would like to see how they manage the
magic. If S&G hasn't, maybe the town out of caution should ask for an
opinion from other lawyers, not S&G whose self-interest is apparent and
prejudicial. Lawyers are best consulted before problems arise.
13 George Dr.
Old Saybrook CT 06475
oswpca.com / govtwork.org