Thursday, March 12, 2026

News and Ideas Worth Sharing

HomeViewpointsLettersIn response to...

In response to Peter Most’s recent column, and recent letter by Sharon Gregory and Holly Hardman

Determining how the potential acquisition of Housatonic Water Works should be paid for needs to be at the top of the list for the town government before placing a warrant article in front of voters.

To the editor:

Solving the Housatonic “water crisis” should be a priority for Great Barrington and our town government. The photos of the brown water running from the faucets of Housatonic residents reminds me of a scene from “Erin Brokovich,” where Julia Roberts tells the lawyer from the polluting utility company at a settlement meeting, “By the way, we had that water brought in special today for you folks. It came from a well in Hinkley,” just as she is about to take a sip of a glass of water. Predictably, she declines to drink the polluted water, as many people who live in Housatonic have done, by paying for house filters or bottled water.

No one can really argue that the problem does not need to be solved. But determining how the potential acquisition of Housatonic Water Works should be paid for needs to be at the top of the list for the town government before placing a warrant article in front of voters. Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 80 has a methodology that should be considered. This chapter allows the town to charge a “betterment assessment” to finance the acquisition.

A betterment assessment may be imposed whenever a limited and determinable area receives a benefit or advantage from a public improvement. The value or cost of the improvement is then assessed proportionately to the real estate benefited by the improvement. And rather than paying this in one payment, that can be divided into annual portions equal to the number of years that bonds are issued to finance the improvement. This procedure is often used when a sewer system or other town improvement is extended to a new area of a town.

Since the purchase of the water company only benefits a defined area, the voters in Great Barrington who do not use that water are far more likely to approve the acquisition if they do not have to bear the cost of the purchase and improvement. I believe that this procedure needs to be investigated by the town as a possible method to help solve this pressing problem.

Charles J. Ferris
Great Barrington

Click here to read The Berkshire Edge’s policy for submitting Letters to the Editor.

spot_img

The Edge Is Free To Read.

But Not To Produce.

Continue reading

Why should second-home owners in Great Barrington subsidize well-off full-time residents?

Even if they won't be receiving a reduction, primary residents of means would still benefit from a system that levies higher taxes on second-home owners but not on them.

Bard College President Botstein’s continued leadership is no longer tenable

When someone has held power for nearly half a century, it can become easy to confuse longevity with legitimacy, or position with immunity. But tenure is not a substitute for trust.

To those who attended the Lee Greener Gateway Committee’s free Repair Fair, this is why we live in the Berkshires

In these troubled times, it was refreshing to bask awhile in this generous sharing of time, talent, and good will.

The Edge Is Free To Read.

But Not To Produce.