BOSTON — The temperature in western and north central Massachusetts is “red hot” when it comes to the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority’s request to transfer 20 million more gallons of water per day from the Quabbin and Wachusett system, according to a lawmaker who is asking the agency to withdraw its request.
Northampton Sen. Jo Comerford is one of four regional lawmakers who sent a letter to the MWRA asking it to withdraw its transfer application, a step further than lawmakers have gone before to oppose the controversial request. The agency says it’s still mulling it over.
“The stakes are so high, we wanted to do every single human thing we could to try to prevent this from happening. And asking the MWRA to withdraw its proposal in the face of so much public opposition was one more action we could take as legislators concerned about this,” Comerford said Monday. “I think it’s red hot out here in western and north central Massachusetts.”
“The Water Resources Commission should have heard the public outrage and understood that, in fact, there’s no one harmed from withdrawing this or rejecting it,” Comerford added. “There isn’t a named party, a city or town waiting on this water as part of this application.”
Comerford, Sen. Jake Oliveira of Ludlow and Reps. Aaron Saunders of Belchertown and Susannah Whipps of Athol reiterated public concern in the Oct. 21 letter that the MWRA proposal is inconsistent with the 1983 Interbasin Transfer Act, a law critics say requires there to be a distinct receiving community before a transfer is approved. The proposal as it stands would approve a large amount of transferable water before being matched with proposed transfer locations.
Comerford, Oliveira, Saunders and Sen. Peter Durant were among nearly 200 community members who urged the Water Resources Commission to reject the MWRA’s proposal at a heated hearing in Belchertown on Sept. 30.
“MWRA should simply withdraw this application now, and finally grapple honestly with its obligation to the communities that steward the water on which so many depend,” lawmakers wrote to MWRA Interim Executive Director Stephen Estes-Smargiassi, incoming executive director Jonathan Gulliver, and the MWRA Board of Directors.
Lawmakers wrote that “the statutory basis for this application is questionable.”
“That concern is compounded by MWRA’s failure to substantiate the need for this specific additional volume,” they continued. “Your analysis addresses whether the system can accommodate the proposed increase. It does not establish why an additional 20 million gallons per day is necessary or why that amount should be authorized before receiving communities and their actual water needs have been identified.”
MWRA Director of Intergovernmental Affairs Sean Navin wrote in a statement that the “MWRA appreciates the Delegation’s engagement on this important issue. We are reviewing the letter and look forward to continuing this conversation.”
Lawmakers have not heard from the MWRA since sending the letter, per the offices of Comerford and Oliveira. The Water Resources Commission extended the public comment period until Oct. 28. The commission is still receiving public comment. Public comments submitted to date were not available on Monday.
Plans call for a draft decision to be issued in the fall or early winter, and a public hearing on that decision before the commission vote. The WRC plans to meet next on Nov. 12.
“I haven’t heard an indication that it’s going to go through, but extending comment for me wasn’t a positive sign, because there was such a clear outpouring, and such clear concern both from municipalities and constituents, that I had hoped the Water Resources Commission would simply understand that this was not a viable idea,” Comerford said.
EEA Secretary Rebecca Tepper chairs the MWRA Board, and WRC Executive Director Vandana Rao, who is EEA’s director of water policy, is Tepper’s designee on the WRC. Asked if she thinks that structure could create a conflict of interest in the transfer decision, Comerford said, “I can’t say whether that’s at play right now, but I do think we must look at that going forward.”
“The structures have to be looked at,” she added, echoing Saunders’ and Oliveira’s suggestions. “I think it’s just important to have the checks and balances that we need in place.”
The letter asks the MWRA to also “commit to a meaningful process with Quabbin communities and their representatives to address longstanding concerns about regional representation, stewardship costs, economic restrictions, and appropriate financial benefits for the communities that protect this resource.” It calls on the MWRA to work with the state and regional stakeholders “on a durable, equitable water policy.”
“Withdrawing this application would not end the conversation about water needs in eastern Massachusetts. It would simply create the conditions for a more responsible and productive one — one grounded in demonstrated need, a sound legal basis, transparent decision-making, and a fair accounting of regional obligations,” they wrote.