Sen. McKinney’s Conflict

To the Editor:

Why is the state senator who represents Newtown, Easton, Weston, and Fairfield making decisions that directly affect Westport?

Last week in Hartford, the Environment Committee recommended a bill that would place a one-year statewide moratorium on alternative septic systems that promise to pretreat effluent and permit development of environmentally sensitive lands. The reason for this well-regarded legislation is to allow time for the DEP to further investigate the questionable efficacy of these systems before more come on-line.

Senator John McKinney supported an amendment designed specifically to exclude from this moratorium the onsite septic system the Westport YMCA is proposing for 34,000 gallons of effluent a day on the banks of the Saugatuck River. So while all the other systems being proposed in the state will be halted, Westport’s won’t.

Easton has two of these septic systems on steroids pending for high-density developments and they would be covered by the moratorium. Why should Westport have to deal with this potential pollution and Easton not?

It has to be noted that Senator McKinney is on the Board of Trustees of the Westport YMCA. One would assume that such a conflict of interest would have had the Senator recuse himself from the proceedings. In fact, Mr McKinney never disclosed this publicly to his fellow legislators.

The Y’s proposed abandonment of Westport’s downtown is a hot button issue in Westport. A 72 percent majority of Westporters polled don’t want the YMCA to move to their day camp property in a residential zone in the northwestern section of the town. Planning and environmental groups have denounced it. The first selectman has said he wants the Y to stay downtown, and recently the Representative Town Meeting backed him with a vote to investigate town-owned properties for possible siting in exchange for some of the camp property.

The issue at hand is fairness and equity. If the state legislature believes that these oversized alternative septic systems have a questionable record and need further investigation, why should any be built until we know they are safe? Westport should not be singled out because the system is for the YMCA and not some housing development. The potential sprawl and environmental impacts are the same regardless.

All towns need to work together to protect our communities. It is very discouraging when ethics seem to have been set aside in favor of one organization at the expense of the environment. Hopefully, this amendment will be removed, and the playing field leveled, before the full legislature votes.

Sincerely,

Amy Ancel

330 Wilton Road, Westport                                          March 26, 2007