To the editor:
Great Barrington is one of the few Massachusetts towns that has not exercised statutory rights to acquire its independent water companies. For the sake of sustaining our water supply, we need to change the lack of public governance. That is the purpose of our two petitions that need your vote on Thursday, April 17, at the 6 p.m. Special Town Meeting (STM).
Forming a water enterprise fund will ensure that only water users will pay for the acquisition, upgrades, and usage costs for their own system. No one pays twice. This is the principle of our wastewater facility. Its expensive renovation was supported by grants, government loans, and the enterprise fund.
We can take a lesson from our neighbor, South Egremont, which reacquired its water rights from the same Mercer family in 1996. Wisely, the town had created an enterprise fund beforehand because, that way, only 200 rate payers would be billed for these water system upgrades in a town of 1,000 people. Businesses in the town center knew how critical clean water was.
Regarding Egremont’s acquisition as reported in The Berkshire Eagle, “… if the company declines the offer, voters … authorized the town to apply to the state Supreme Judicial Court to determine the appropriate price.” This sure-fire provision is contained in Egremont’s State Statute and is identical to Great Barrington’s, which we should use as a backstop. Over 100 such statutes are documented in the Department of Public Utilities’ (DPU’s) compendium of water statutes.
Funding for Egremont was accessed by grants, water users, and loans from the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF) at zero to two percent rates and 20- to 40-year terms. As an example, the State granted 50 percent or $2.4 million of Egremont’s pipe replacement costs for its Main Street renovation. Contrary to idealists, the state does not guarantee loans until the town owns the entity, so the town must take these first steps.
The projected expenses to upgrade Great Barrington Fire District’s (GBFD’s) system is on the same order as Housatonic Water Works’ (HWW’s). GBFD received approval of $5 million for its capital plan at its annual meeting (with a quorum of 15 voters). In HWW’s DPU settlement was approved for raising slightly less capital, but payback was shorter and interest rate higher (seven percent). Long term, both require 40-year pipe replacement/repair plans as documented in the DPC Engineering report. So there is no avoiding high costs for water system upgrades.
GBFD’s fear-mongering letter states, “If votes to purchase the Housatonic Water Company and the GBFD pass, customers of the Fire District and HWW and all taxpayers will be supporting twice the operating costs, along with the costs for infrastructure upgrades,” which is simply untrue. Non-users of water systems (those on wells) will not be paying any water system costs, whether under the new or old GBFD or HWW.
This year, GBFD levied $1.50 per $1,000 onto its users, that is 10 percent on top of our real estate taxes to support its $5 million capital plan without a peep from its water users. That amounts to doubling the annual cost of water for most GBFD customers. And, this is with or without an acquisition.
If acquired, HWW users would actually pay less because it would be eligible for the low-interest State Revolving Funds for water system upgrades. In the DPU filing regarding the HWW rate settlement, Stockbridge calculated the DPU settlement rates would be reduced for the average rate payer by $660 annually if financed through a low-interest, 20-year loan.
These loans are not available to private water companies in Massachusetts according to U.S. Rep. Richard Neal. GBFD was granted special privileges due to the State ensuring the early viability of its water system 100 years ago. Many early water systems had failed. GBFD is still using these town privileges for its tax billing and collection and has special access to DWSRF loans. But this should not be confused with being under town governance.
Prominent citizens have called for the abolition of GBFD for decades, calling it “obsolete.” In 2022, our town could not convince GBFD to acquire or manage HWW because it was beyond GBFD’s power and financial charter. To do so, GBFD must be acquired first by the town, the reason for the second motion.
Excess overhead: We have two fire houses, but one fire chief, two libraries, but one library director. It is high time we leverage our precious water resources to plan, oversee, and optimize our resources and costs. Our organizational fragmentation does not address a way to plan for our short or long-term water needs.
For a start, please vote “Yes” on both motions on April 17. We need a two-thirds majority to send a message to our Selectboard.
Sharon Gregory
Great Barrington
Click here to read The Berkshire Edge’s policy for submitting Letters to the Editor.
