Kamela Chouinard, who serves on Williamstown’s finance committee, has requested documentation on an interfund loan made by the town.

She requested that the town manager provide her with a copy of the loan agreement, the amortization schedule, and some indication of who actually authorized the use of general fund money to finance a water line project.

The loan being questioned was to finance approximately 4,000 linear feet of water line on Graniteville Road about four years ago.

Town Manager Garrett Earls has stated that he doesn't have any of the documents Ms. Chouinard is asking for.

The records are apparently long gone. At the time the water line was installed, the town manager was Ed Magee and he is no longer in the area.

Treasurer Bob Cleaves hasn’t responded to Ms. Chouinard’s request and the selectboard doesn’t know what happened.

"Nobody knows who authorized this," Mr. Earls said.

He said he "won't swear" to any of the numbers, it appears the town loaned its water fund $300,000 with the understanding the money would be repaid by water users at 3 per cent interest over a period of 10 years.

To date, Mr. Earls said that two installment payments have been made and the third is due this year along with $7,200 in interest.

He also said that at least a portion of the money appears to have come from a restricted highway fund balance.

If true, that could potentially be a violation of state law.

"At this point I'm just speculating, but that's what it looks like," he said.

As a result of turnovers both in the office of town manager and the selectboard, piecing together what happened has been unusually difficult without the assistance of the town treasurer.

“I'll take them to court if I have to,” Ms. Chouinard said.

In 2007, town voters were asked to pay for the project which at the time was estimated to be $344,000. The money was to be repaid by a bond issue and would be repaid over a period of 20 years

The request was approved by a voice vote at town meeting and construction was completed the following summer.

Then, in 2008, voters were asked to refund the previously funded indebtedness. This happened because the bond issue by state law had to be by Australian ballot and the voice vote had not been effective.

The voters approved the new bond in 2008 by a vote of 650 to 173. However, the bond had to be repaid in 10 years rather than the 20 year period which had been proposed in 2007.

However, the town never actually floated the bond and instead opted to loan excess general fund revenue to cover the cost of the project.

At the time, Mr. Cleaves explained that by doing this, the town would be able to earn the interest rather than bondholders.

Why the water line was funded from the general fund rather than by a bond issue remains up in the air and no one seems to know what exactly happened.