A few good reasons to vote NO on Rockport’s Question 3 — the $51 million sewer bond:

Camden cannot simply turn off the valve; DEP requires a viable alternative.  Despite misinformation, Camden’s rates for Rockport have remained relatively flat. (View Wastewater Budgets online.) A stand-alone system in Rockport would cost BOTH Camden and Rockport dearly.

Rockport’s increased costs stem from over $100,000 in litigation resulting from Woodard & Curran‘s (W&C) math error, prompting Rockport’s SB to stop paying (you wonder why Camden’s not talking?), “consulting fees” and (ahem!) 50-76% annual increases by W&C.

The “SMALLER INCREASES” promised (not lower costs) depend on 300 imaginary “equivalent users” (EUs) on Route 90 before the system is built. Does that strike you as remotely realistic? If the sewer line passes your property, you will be billed.

Even if 300 Route 90 EUs paid in, the projections still require a dozen new houses annually. Would you want that?  Imagine the impact, as our schools exceed capacity. Might not the resultant increased taxes counteract any imaginary sewer savings?

The whole town will vote on $51 million that, at most, half our property owners will pay. Would you like to be in that half?

Does it bother you that these financial projections come from W&C, who benefit from the new project? This bond starts the spending and closes the doors to better solutions. Talk about waste!

I hope common sense prevails and Rockport votes overwhelmingly NO on 3.

Martha White lives in Rockport