Rochester’s Water Commission hosted a further airing of the dispute with the Buzzards Bay Coalition that’s kept the town’s Conservation Commission from signing on to a multitown Conservation Restriction that includes Rochester land without a clear resolution.
The CR discussed during the commission’s June 14 public meeting would protect 241 acres of aquifer land from Acushnet to Mattapoisett that includes 13 acres at Red Brick Farms on the east side of Long Plain Road and the north side of Wolf Island Road.
The sticking point that’s led the town ConCom to refuse to sign the agreement came two weeks ago when Buzzards Bay Coalition Director of Land Protection Allen Decker explained that the regional agreement will give Mattapoisett the water rights to the Rochester parcel, including possibly digging up to four new wells, under a coownership agreement with the Mattapoisett Water and Sewer Authority.
Commission members complained that Rochester has lost the right to use its own water resources too many times over the decades and were united in their refusal to sign the CR without more information, especially as to whether the CR can be rewritten to give Rochester rights to some of that water.
On June 14, the debate started after Water Commission Chairman Fred Underhill noted his board has no authority to act on this issue but has agreed to host the discussion.
Buzzards Bay Coalition representative Brendan Annett said the purpose of the CR is to permanently protect the aquifer that is the water supply residents of the entire region depend on. There is no immediate plan to drill four new wells, he said. This would only be Mattapoisett’s plan of action if additional water was critically needed.
Conservation Commission Ben Bailey responded, “It’s not that simple.” He noted that Rochester will have to pay the money in the matching grant that is making the project possible. Yet Mattapoisett alone will benefit from the water resource on Rochester land, he said. If a future well is dug from any of this acquired land, Bailey said, “Rochester should be able to participate, be part of the agreement.”
He and other commission members emphasized that the town should have some right to the well water produced as a result of this CR agreement.
Water Commission member Richard Charon added that the four wells can be drilled anywhere within the 241 acres the CR encompasses, not just in Rochester. But he also noted that other agreements with other towns, such as Marion, specify that Rochester has a right to 50% of that water. That could be the case with this agreement too, he said.
Conservation Commission Chairman Christopher Gerrior said that before this agreement was settled, all interested parties should have been at the table to review it. “We should’ve had more of a say,” Gerrior said.
Underhill said the town has not only lost the rights to its own water over the years but also the related tax revenue. The City of New Bedford does not pay taxes on the waterworks system building that processes Rochester water, he pointed out.
Town Administrator Glenn Cannon asked about one possible solution. He queried whether the CR could stay in the possession of Rochester so it could have more control of that water resource. Gerrior said this provision would still mean the land and the water resources would be protected.
Annett provided no sense that the issue would be resolved easily. He said the deal is too close to needing to be finalized for such a change. He said he had a conversation about Rochester’s concerns with Mattapoisett Water and Sewer Department Superintendent Henri Renauld, who according to Annett answered with a blanket reassurance that Rochester has been a part of the regional effort to protect its water resources for a long time and that would continue to be the case.
The Conservation Commission will discuss the issue further at its June 20 meeting.
The Rochester Water Commission scheduled its next meeting for Wednesday, August 9, at 4:00 pm at Town Hall, 1 Constitution Way.
Rochester Water Commission
By Michael J. DeCicco