Great Barrington — Residents who attended a special town meeting on Thursday, April 17, rejected an article asking for the town to purchase long-troubled utility company Housatonic Water Works (HWW).
Nearly 400 residents attended the meeting which was called by citizen’s petition.
Two separate petitions were put before voters: the first calling for the town to acquire HWW for a sum not to exceed $2.3 million and the second asking for the town to acquire the Great Barrington Fire District (GBFD) for a sum not to exceed $2 million.
Resident and HWW customer Donna Jacobs collected the petition signatures in order to call the special town meeting. “I think this [special town meeting] is a brilliant result of citizen action and a desire to collaborate with the government,” Jacobs said in an interview before the meeting. “What we want to do is come together with solutions by the end of the night to resolve water insecurity in Great Barrington. Essentially, a ‘yes’ vote will give the Selectboard permission to negotiate a sale [with HWW].”
Jacobs explained that passage of both petitions, calling for the town to acquire both water systems, would not itself be a solution for the problems facing HWW customers but instead “the beginning of a rehabilitation.” “We cannot begin the rehabilitation until we have [HWW] under municipality ownership, which would make it eligible for some of Clean Water Act funding that is available to municipally owned water services,” Jacobs said. “Whether this ends up being an advisory or binding vote, I think the message will be clear that, if there is a ‘yes’ vote on both questions, we are ready to move forward.”
Just days before the special town meeting, it was unclear whether or not the votes would be binding or simply advisory for the town.
During the Selectboard’s meeting on Monday, April 14, Chair Steve Bannon said he did not know whether or not Town Counsel David J. Doneski would rule that the agenda questions would be binding or advisory.
At the beginning of the special town meeting on Thursday, Interim Town Manager Christopher Rembold read a statement from Doneski that was dated April 14. Doneski was not present at the meeting until a few minutes before it ended due to travel issues. “In my opinion, an affirmative vote under either [meeting] articles would be advisory,” Doneski wrote. “Article one [for the town to purchase HWW] does not [specify] the appropriation of the funds to be voted, and it does not specify the public source for [fund] appropriation.”
Doneski wrote that, under the state act of 1897 which established waterworks systems, the town may purchase HWW subject to certain conditions.
He wrote that these conditions include payment of the actual cost of the franchise and its property, and the price would be subject to adjustment based on the company’s income and maintenance. “The purchase procedure under the act calls for a payment of the actual cost [of the company], and property, with a computation based on historical expenses of HWW,” Doneski wrote. “There is no other method of purchase stated in the act. [Under the article], the computation in the manner directed by the act has not been performed. A method of purchase from what is specified in the act would have to be the subject of negotiation and agreement between the town and HWW.”
Doneski wrote that article two, calling for the town’s purchase of GBFD, would be an advisory vote for similar reasons: The article does not state the exact appropriation of funds and does not identify a funding source for its potential purchase. Doneski added that state general law does not include an option for a town to acquire a fire district. “I’m not aware of any other authority in [state] general laws for such an acquisition,” Doneski wrote. “In my opinion, such an acquisition, [including merging HWW and GBFD] would require a special act of the legislature.”
Resident Sharon Gregory, who supported both petition articles, gave a PowerPoint presentation at the beginning of the meeting on behalf of the petitions’ supporters. “[While the vote is advisory] and is not binding on the Selectboard, it does not handicap the Selectboard in its negotiations, because all parties already know the appraised value,” Gregory said. “The Selectboard and [HWW Treasurer James Mercer and President Frederick Mercer] need to hear the town’s sentiment, which is why a ‘yes’ vote tonight is so important.”
James Mercer was seen in the audience at the special town meeting, but he did not speak. “The GBFD has refused repeatedly to acquire HWW, even though combining the two entities would save money for water customers,” Gregory said. “GBFD has been able to ignore our public opinion because it operates independently of the town government. None of our elected officials have any say over it. The solution is for the town to acquire GBFD and put it under the control of the town.”
After Gregory’s presentation, Selectboard member Ben Elliott made a motion to table the article for the town to purchase HWW. Elliot previously stated during the April 14 Selectboard meeting that he was against the citizen petitions. “I want to talk about impact versus intent, because I agree with the intent of this petition,” Elliott said. “I agree that [the town] should acquire [HWW] and that we should operate it with public utility, and ultimately having water utility is the equitable and efficient thing to do. That’s all good stuff. Unfortunately, the impact of this petition puts all of those goals in danger.”
Elliott said that the town “is already on a path to own HWW.” “In 2023 the Selectboard voted to explore the financial viability of operating the system as a public utility, a process that dragged on for 10 months because of the obstruction by HWW ownership,” Elliott said. “When that was complete, we voted to obtain special counsel to negotiate the purchase [of the company]. The counsel is now engaged to sit down at the table [with HWW]. We have started the negotiation process, and we are on the path to acquiring HWW and developing an affordable, sustainable way to run it as a public utility.”
Elliott added that “it’s no surprise that HWW ownership is in favor of this petition.” “It provides them with a toolbox worth of leverage,” Elliott said. “I will say this, they’re pretty good at manipulating the legal system. In fact, they might be better at doing that than running a water company.”
Jacobs argued against Elliott’s motion. “We are all here tonight, and it costs $6,000 to set up a town meeting,” Jacobs said. “[This vote] is giving our Selectboard permission and prior authorization. OK, it’s not binding, but it’s expressing a sentiment and bringing the community together.”
“As Donna [Jacobs] just mentioned, this has been going on far too long,” said resident Trevor Forbes. “I think anybody, particularly in the press, should be really impressed by the vast number of people that have turned up to this meeting. In the past 15 years, I have never seen a meeting as well attended as this. For the past 40 years, people have been discussing this particular issue. We need to get this done.”
While the petitions in question, Selectboard Vice Chair Eric Gabriel said, “I truly appreciate the conversation and the intention in this, shining a light on our town’s problem.”
“Our central issue, as most know, is clear, clean, and safe drinking water for HWW customers,” Gabriel said. “HWW needs to become a public entity, and there is zero doubt about that. Our water supply should never be controlled by a private corporation or any other form of business. It needs to be owned by the people of the town. To my fellow HWW customers, we hear you loud and clear. I ask that you give the Selectboard more time and let the negotiations play out as they are underway. This issue weighs heavily on me, and we will solve this problem, but we do not need our friends and neighbors that use GBFD to fear their situation. We want them rooting for us, not worrying about what’s going to happen to their own supply, their own management, and their own cost. I just like to point out that [Fire District Commissioner and Chair Walter “Buddy” Atwood], his salary for the GBFD for the last few years has been exactly $0.”
According to HWW’s last-issued report for fiscal 2023, both Frederick Mercer and James Mercer each received a $117,572 salary, an increase of $3,424, respectively, from fiscal 2022.
Eventually, Elliott’s motion failed by a card vote, which was determined by meeting moderator Michael Wise.
The non-binding vote for the town to acquire HWW eventually moved forward was voted down, with 140 voting in favor and 241 voting against the motion.
As for article two, the non-binding vote for the town to purchase GBFD, Atwood gave a terse statement on the motion: “The only thing I can say is that we’ll most likely see you in court. Thank you.”
“I am saddened to hear Walter Atwood threaten us with a lawsuit if this vote is passed,” Jacobs said. “I know that if citizens were to say, ‘OK, we’re not going to pay HWW anymore for our water. We’re going to put it in an escrow account,’ we could also say to Great Barrington: ‘We are not going to pay our taxes. Why should we pay our taxes when we can’t even get basic, fundamental services?’ You threaten citizens with a lawsuit for simply wanting what is our right, which is clean water? I think we can threaten the town with non-payment of taxes and non-payment of water bills. I do believe that wouldn’t be right. I think this town needs to work together. Citizens need to work with the government, and neighbors don’t need to be pitted against one another. I hope we leave tonight feeling that we’ve all come out as a big community. We all care passionately, and I hope that we feel by the time we leave that we can care about each other and respect each other and not be threatened with lawsuits or withholding payments to the government and water.”
Eventually, Atwood made a motion to table the question indefinitely.
A vote was taken by card count, and meeting moderator Wise determined that a majority of residents voted in support of Atwood’s motion.
