At the Town Meeting, scheduled for May 9th, there will be two Articles requiring approval of voters regarding seemingly modest expenditures to replace and upgrade one of the water storage tanks in Weston. Focus on Weston is recommending a vote against Articles 27 and 28.

Article 27 addresses "locating, designing, and constructing" replacement of the existing water storage tank at Paine's Hill”. The article allocates an unspecified sum for the design and engineering study to replace and relocate the Paine Hill Water Tank. It does not disclose that this proposed project is a small part of a very large, lengthy, and complicated undertaking.

The engineering report that underpins both Articles recommended the replacement, expansion, and relocation of all three of Weston’s Water tanks for a sum estimated at over $12 million dollars. Replacement of one tank would not be sufficient to accomplish the goals of improving the capacity and the hydraulic pressure to the entire Town of Weston.

Article 28 seeks to change the town’s by-laws and review process so as to completely eliminate any meaningful discussion, vetting oversight, or town-wide consensus on what is really the initial step of a major reconstruction of the town water system. The engineering study describes 19 individual initiatives, plus the estimated cost and relative priority of each. The reality is that this project amounts to over $50 million. It is more significant and substantially more costly than the Town Center Improvement Project but has involved a fraction of the financial review and public discussion to date.

We believe that any public infrastructure improvement program of this magnitude should be managed with more diligence than it has to date. We would have expected the steps to be:

1. Update the previous study – which is now four years old -- to reflect current construction cost trends and confirm the relative priority of each component of the proposed capital program.

2. Present each major component of the program to residents for approval only after each has been reviewed and debated by the relevant town boards, commissions, abutters, and residents.

Maintaining public participation – and public trust -- at every stage of a project like this is vital for a successful outcome but is also good governance. Articles 27 and 28 lead the reader to believe that the Town has a $4-5 million problem to solve, that the solution is clear and that it has been agreed by all. The engineering report would suggest otherwise.

This is another example of why it is so critical for each of you to attend the Town Meeting. Please be sure your vote counts on May 9th.