Great Barrington — In a letter to customers dated October 1, Housatonic Water Works Treasurer James Mercer states that the Zoom-based informational meeting organized by the company on Wednesday, October 16, would be “an important opportunity for all residents to engage in the process, ask questions, and help shape the future of our town’s water management.”
Instead, during the meeting, Mercer often cut off residents’ comments that were critical of HWW, and he insulted them on several occasions.
“We’ve always had a good relationship with the community,” Mercer said 45 minutes into the 90-minute meeting. “There is certainly a group now that thinks that social media is the way to get things done, and there’s a lot of misinformation out there. I’m hearing tonight that a lot of people drank the Kool-Aid.”
“No Jim, we haven’t drunk the Kool-Aid, but some of us have drunk the water,” resident Debra Herman told Mercer. “Complaining about social media is just crap. People here use Facebook and social media to communicate. Without that, we would have no way of knowing what our neighbors are facing. Saying that the company has a good relationship with its customers is a complete, flat-out lie.”
Herman went on to defend HWW customers using social media to communicate with each other. “If you think people are saying things that are mistaken [and not true], you should be more open and [find ways to] better communicate with us so we can know the difference between which are your lies and which are the things you are saying that are true,” Herman said. “I’m sorry to have to say these things, but it’s what I believe.”
“I think you actually enjoy saying those things,” Mercer told Herman.
“You don’t know whether I enjoy it,” Herman responded before she was muted by Mercer. “I don’t enjoy having Housatonic Water.”
This was just one of many instances in which dialogue between Mercer and HWW customers became heated during the October 16 meeting.
In the ensuing two weeks after Mercer sent his letter to customers regarding the meeting, on October 8, the long-troubled company was cited by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) for withholding poor manganese test results for July.
Earlier in the day on October 16, company officials attended a hearing in Berkshire Superior Court in Pittsfield contesting the Board of Health’s Order to Correct issued against HWW on August 22. Enforcement of the order has been delayed due to HWW filing a preliminary injunction against the town and board.
After his presentation on October 16, which included several potential scenarios for the town to purchase the company, Mercer said he expected that Berkshire Superior Court would rule on the Order to Correct on Monday, October 21.
“While these two items [since the October 1 letter] are important, they are footnotes to tonight’s presentation,” Mercer told the audience. “Therefore, we kindly ask that you limit your questions to the topic of sustainability and affordable water.”
During his presentation, Mercer provided several options for the purchase of the company, including a “charter formula” that would follow an acquisition process established by the provisions of the company’s 1897 charter, direct negotiations between the town and the company, and the town acquiring the company through eminent domain.
When he was asked several times throughout the meeting how much he thought the company was worth and what the potential sale price would be if the company were sold to the town, however, Mercer would not answer. “I don’t have a number to discuss really at this point,” Mercer told Peter Most, who asked how much the company is worth. “I’m not looking to discuss the value of the company. I’m looking to discuss big-picture items. At this point, we don’t know [whether] the town has any interest in acquiring it. We’re suggesting that this would be a viable option given the circumstances, but we don’t know where the town stands on that.”
Resident Kate Van Olst pressed Mercer on the company’s lack of reporting of water-quality issues and what she said was a lack of transparency when it came to not stating the value of his company. “I’m the mother of an infant who is under the age of one and dependent for medical reasons on formula, and I’m someone who you neglected to properly test and inform for a dangerously high level of manganese in the drinking water recently,” Van Olst told Mercer. “My question is whether you plan to cooperate transparently with the town of Great Barrington in the process of assessing a valuation of the company.”
“I don’t understand your question,” Mercer said in response.
“I don’t understand how a business owner doesn’t have a value for his company,” Van Olst said. “I don’t understand how someone who was proposing that a town should either take by eminent domain or purchase his company has not done the preparatory steps of figuring out the value of your asset. The town has spent money in the last several years trying to do an assessment of the valuation of the company, and [Town Manager Mark Pruhenski] has reported that you and the company did not cooperate with the assessment company.”
Van Olst was referring to a financial study being conducted by DPC Engineering from Longmeadow and Harwich Port, Mass., that was commissioned by the town back in January. At a meeting in July, Town Manager Pruhenski said that the report would be completed in late October due to multiple delays with HWW not providing data requested by DPC Engineering.
“Are you planning to cooperate and to share transparently with the town and the Select Board the assets and the valuation of the company?” Van Olst asked Mercer.
“We have provided all the information that we could provide to the town of Great Barrington,” Mercer told Van Olst in response. “They were looking for updated financials. Those are in our annual return, which is public information. When the town mentioned that we were not cooperative, what they were referring to is the fact that we will not provide personal information on customers, their individual names, addresses, and usage. We provide the total usage, the total revenues, and those are in our annual return. The MassDEP annual statistical report shows the number of gallons that are pumped every year, so they have all the information they need.”
Mercer added, “I’m not looking to get into a fight on anything, but I think it’s important to acknowledge that there’s a lot of misinformation out there, and I’m just gonna leave it at that.”
“I’m asking you to clarify one piece of information: What is the dollar value of Housatonic Water Works company?” Van Olst asked Mercer.
“As I already mentioned earlier, this is the first meeting that we’re having regarding this,” Mercer said. “We’re trying to get the conversation started. That is something that will come along much later, much later.”
The criticism continued to pile on throughout the meeting, including from Ian Evans. “The only reason that you’re still able to walk around in this community is because the people of Housatonic are kind and gentle,” Evans said. “The way that you’re running this meeting is disrespectful to them. It’s an absolute outrage.”
“I’m sorry that you feel that way,” Mercer told Evans. “Do you have any questions for us tonight?”
“When are you going to fix the water in our town so that it’s acceptable for children to bathe, for people to drink, and for human beings to use without charging us an arm and a leg for something that should have been fixed decades ago?” Evans asked Mercer.
Mercer thanked Evans for his question but did not answer it.
At one point, when asked about the levels of manganese in HWW’s water, Mercer states that “[t]he overall levels [of manganese] have been under the minimum requirements by the state” and that “the discoloration is off-putting, but it’s not harmful.”
“I think the bellwether for this is really the DEP and the EPA [Environmental Protection Agency],” Mercer said. “If there were concerns that the water was unsafe to drink, they would be in here in a heartbeat. I know that there’s a lot of very special people with special interests and extensive knowledge in different areas, but I think that there’s a lot of misinformation out there that’s scaring people, and I encourage them to reach out to us or to the DEP if they don’t they want further explanation on the manganese issue and its health effects.”
According to the July 24 test results of the HWW water supply on 314 North Plain Road, at the time, the manganese level was at a concentration of 0.74 milligrams per liter, which exceeds state guidelines of 0.3 milligrams per liter. In early October, the company was cited by MassDEP for withholding those test results.
The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection’s website states, “At elevated levels, manganese could produce neurological effects with some variation in sensitivity between individuals.”
A July 2023 article from Boston University, “Massachusetts Drinking Water May Contain Unsafe Levels of Manganese,” quotes a study by School of Public Health author Alexa Friedman, stating, “Some level of manganese is needed for health, but growing evidence suggests that excess levels of manganese can harm children’s brains.”
Towards the end of the meeting, Mercer told the audience that he was not sure if the town was interested in buying the company. “Tonight we have close to 70 attendees at this meeting, and that’s not even close to 10 percent of the voters of Great Barrington,” Mercer said. “I’m not even sure if there is a consensus when it comes to buying the company. We have a wonderful community that is really split when it comes to this issue. People in Housatonic feel like they are second-rate citizens and that we are taking advantage of them. There are all these different notions out there. We have to take the emotion out of this and look at the facts.”
