Wind: 0 mph
To The Editor:
The Committee for Fiscal Responsibility wrote an open letter to Charlie Hosford, the chair of the Waitsfield Select Board, regarding the water project.
The letter pointed out that the Waitsfield project is vastly more expensive than a similar project in Stowe. The letter was published by the paper under "The water is not inexpensive and not safe to drink" on September 4, 2008, with the Editor's Note which informs readers that the essential data presented in the letter are mistaken.
The editor diminishes the Committee's letter rather than trying to help the residents scrutinize the project. The Committee has been examining the details and it looks as if the project is subject to constant changes and is far from being transparent. The numbers do not add up. The financial data submitted by the Committee should be taken seriously because they reflect the true cost and do not manipulate the figures. Unfortunately, the attempt to get to the bottom of the matter has been frustrated by The Valley Reporter which answers for the select board by providing problematic figures.
More than once, the project had been presented for the bond vote. The Committee and the public have the right to demand that all the data is final and accurate. The select board, rather than editor, should answer the letter and account for a huge difference in cost.
Editor's Note: The "factual" information included in Noack and the committee's letter was factually incorrect. The Valley Reporter's unwillingness to knowingly print incorrect information regarding this project is standard journalistic practice. The Valley Reporter did not "diminish" the committee's letter, rather pointed out the factual inaccuracies that it contained. The Valley Reporter does not answer to the select board of any town, but rather to its readers.