On Monday the Select Board voted to delay the adoption of a new conservation-based water rate structure that would have financially penalized the highest residential and business water users and rewarded the lowest users of municipal water.
“I don’t think we’re there yet,” said Ann Harrison. “And we owe it to residents and businesses to be clear on this before we introduce this.”
The proposed rate structure was introduced by the Manchester Water Resources Protection Task Force as part of its final report in June and designed to curb water usage with the goal of lowering consumption to the state-recommended level of 65 gallons of water/person/day. According to the task force analysis, Manchester’s water usage exceeds that by 20 percent—78 gallons/person/day, according to Steve Gang who chaired the water task force and currently chairs the Conservation Commission—and this usage spikes wildly in the irrigation-heavy summer months, especially in Manchester’s high net worth neighborhoods.
In the weeks before Monday’s vote, SB members had already begun receiving significant pushback from residents on the proposed rates.
Gang acknowledged that Manchester’s water supplies are not currently threatened, but he warned that could easily shift as climate change progresses. He also said that like a third of other Massachusetts municipalities, Manchester faces challenges of removing contaminants like PFAS “forever chemicals” from water supplies by 2029, which the Dept. of Public Works estimates will cost $25 million.
“Rates are one piece of the puzzle,” Gang told the Select Board on Monday. But it’s a critical one. Curbing water usage is a stubborn challenge that requires information, communication, and up to three years before the needle moves on adoption.
“For something that takes this long, we need to start now,” Gang said.
John Round served as the Select Board member on the task force. He said 80 percent of Manchester homes would not be impacted by the proposed new rates. The average home would not see any change.
But over three public hearings on the subject the SB has seen pushback from residents. Last month, Phil Furse of Blossom Lane said the new rates were akin to a second tax unfairly levied on homes with large families instead of targeting or rewarding efficiency of the overall household. On Monday, Furse forwarded a petition that he said secured signatures by 111 residents at 38 addresses opposing the new structure.
“The new proposed system is a solution without a tangible problem,” Furse wrote. “With that said we are collectively against such a punitive action at this time. Please vote against implementing this proposed system.”
Jay Bothwick of Boardman Ave. is an attorney who has served on the Finance Committee and is currently the president of the Citizens Initiative for Manchester Affordable Housing (a.k.a., “CIMAH”). In a letter he strongly objected to the proposed rates, arguing that Manchester’s overall water usage is lower today than it was 30 years ago. Further, he wrote, the new structure with penalty rates for tippy top water users would make Manchester vulnerable to a charge of levying illegal municipal fees under Proposition 2½.
“Nowhere in the (Water Task Force) Report’s Summary of Findings, nor in the June 1990 Water Resources Protection Plan that contains the most extensive capacity analysis of the Town’s water resources, is there a statement or conclusion that the Town has inadequate supplies of drinking water,” Bothwick wrote.
SB Chair Ann Harrison picked up on this, asking if there is a water supply issue in Manchester.
Gang acknowledged there isn’t a supply issue, but said the urgency for conservation isn’t just about suply but also about PFAS contamination, saying communities with higher usage rates have higher contamination rates.
Harrison asked DPW director Chuck Dam, a former president of the Massachusetts Municipal Water Association, if a conservation rate structure was warranted. Dam said yes, if only to position the town well in the face of unpredictable swings of drought and excess. Also, Dam said, nearly all of the calls to his office since the new rates were proposed have come from residents who were clearly in the dark about just how much water they’d actually been using.
“We need to start somewhere, and the numbers should trend down at some point,” Dam said. The real question is how quickly to do it and how to set homeowners up for success.
The task force recommended adoption of “smart” meters that feature a cell phone app that can push usage data in real time to homeowners, along with information on how to conserve water and lower their bills.
Katerina Gates of School Street said she favored the new rates, adding that people in Manchester “don’t respect the water.” Others agreed, saying Manchester has a long way to go in embracing sensible conservation practices like using grey water for irrigation, rain barrels, drip irrigation or planting native species that require less water and can replace large chunks of emerald lawns.
Select Board member Cathy Bilotta said she favored the new rates, but said adoption is premature without a comprehensive rollout plan and effective communication to homeowners. She recommended voting in the new rates early next year.
Select Board member Brian Sollosy said the “conservation” from his perspective, is about “conserving the family wallet.” He said families need an easy interactive calculator to really understand what the new rates mean, in dollars and cents, to them personally. Bilotta agreed.
Select Board member Becky Jaques said she wasn’t inclined to support the highest tier with its dramatic increase because it’s punitive. At the same time, she said she didn’t favor the lowest either, which would actually lower water rates for some households.
Ann Harrison said she disagreed with the premise that Manchester had a water supply crisis. If conservation rates are justified it would need another argument.
In the end, the Select Board decided to continue with the across-the-board, 2.5% increase to the rate approved in July and postponed a final decision on the new structure until January when a rollout plan is final.
