image description
Residents in Hutchinson Acres say they've been hit with a water rate increase but their system isn't being maintained.

Cheshire Neighborhood Opposes Water Rate Hikes

By Jack GuerinoiBerkshires Staff
Print Story | Email Story

Residents of Hutchinson Acres meet with Selectwoman Carol Francesconi about their water woes. 
CHESHIRE, Mass. — Users on the Hutchinson Water Co. system are opposing a proposed 65.4 percent rate increase until they get some answers. 
 
"We wanted to reach out to you guys because we need some help," Hutchinson Acres resident Bill Rech told Selectwoman Carol Francesconi last week. "They have legal representation and they are filing motions and we don't have enough time."
 
Rech was joined by neighbors to tell officials that the abrupt rate hike had blindsided the 118 households in the housing subdivision off Route 8.
 
The privately owned water system was established more than 50 years ago supply water to Hutchinson Acres.
 
Rech said the current quarterly base rate is $62.50, which comes out to $250 annually.
 
Adding on excessive charges, supposedly read from the meters, the average water bill is $360. The highest bill is $979.23.
 
Rech said this new increase would drive the highest rate to more than $1,600.
 
He admitted a lot of this is speculation because the cryptic water rate report, created by a Florida-based company, did not clearly state how this increase would be applied and read more like an investment portfolio.
 
"It was not clearly stated to us," he said. "There were things in it I was flabbergasted to see, like $29,000 for transportation. What does that even mean?"
 
Rech said he and his neighbors had major concerns with the system and service and that currently there is no one on call for emergencies. They often have to wait days for some kind of response, he said.
 
He added that the fire hydrants have never been operational and the meter readings are not accurate. One resident noted that he was told that because the meter reader did not have time to read the meters in one cycle, his bill was estimated. 
 
A larger concern the group had was if the system even met state requirements and was regularly tested.
 
Cheshire Water Department Supervisor Travis Delratez somewhat alleviated the residents' concerns.
 
"I know that someone was doing the testing but he just retired two weeks ago," he said. "I don't know who they have now."
 
He added that each user should receive an annual consumer confidence report.
 
No one could recall ever receiving one. 
 
Delratez said he knew there are some issues within the system but cannot do much about it.
 
"I know you guys have had issues up there but I can't physically do anything because it is not our system," he said. "I have answered calls and given help to people that do not know what to do when they can't get a hold of someone because I feel bad but my hands are tied."
 
Rech said the water-rate report they just received showed the owners have been making a profit every year and added that there hasn't been an increase since 1999.
 
The resident would consider an increase but would need to see some of their concerns addressed.
 
"We could agree to a 30 percent increase if that meant the hydrants were maintained and we could agree to 5 percent if the meters were read accurately," Rech said. "We understand that we haven't had a rate increase in a while but the system is in shambles. We need the basic needs we are asking for now."
 
Rech said this "incentive" option was one of the solutions the group came up with. The other option was to have the town take over the system.
 
"We do understand our rates would increase, that is a given, but that being said we know several things would happen," Rech said. "We would have proper service with a local person on site."
 
Francesconi dispelled the rumor that the company offered to give the system to the town and said they only offered to sell.
 
"They did offer it but not for free," she said. "We didn't go any further than that."
 
Last year, the Hutchinson Water Co. sent the town a letter stating that the family no longer lives in the area and no longer wants the responsibility of running the system.
 
The Water Department had no interest in taking over the system and Robert Ciskowski was the lone selectman who considered the takeover, believing the water system could be an asset to the town.  
 
There were some inconsistencies among town officials and employees about what would happen if the system was abandoned. 
 
Francesconi and the Board of Health had the understanding that the town would be forced to take it over while Delratez said there would be no mandate.  
 
"I talked to the [Department of Environmental Protection] about it and they can't make us take on debt," he said. "Not that we don't want to take it over but there is a lot to be done there. They would have a private company come in."
 
Time was the other concern and Rech said the residents received the letter March 6 and their time to respond has come and gone.
 
"We are 118 houses and to get 118 houses together to hire an attorney is almost impossible," he said. "We need help."
 
Francesconi compared the increase to rent control and noted that there is typically a calculation used to determine what an acceptable increase is.
 
Delratez agreed and urged the residents to undergo a rate study.
 
"There is so much it can go up over so many years but there is a formula," he said. "I recommend you get a rate study. That tells you where you have to be for new mains, new upgrades and how much you have to increase over how many years."
 
Francesconi said the state may not approve this increase and noted the Selectmen will have a better idea of what to do after the March 28 meeting between the system owners, residents, and the state.
 
"I don't think we can make any decisions until we hear what they have to say," she said. "I want to hear their response and what the state thinks. So we will go from there."

Tags: drinking water,   water district,   

If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Lanesborough Planners Bring STR, ADU, Signage Bylaws for Town Vote

By Breanna SteeleiBerkshires Staff

LANESBOROUGH, Mass. — The Planning Board held a public hearing on the much anticipated bylaws for short-term rentals, accessory dwelling units, and signage to be presented at the annual town meeting.

For the past few months, planners have diligently been working on wordage of the new bylaws after Second Drop Farm's short-term rental was given a cease and desist because the building inspector said town bylaws don't support them.

The draft bylaw can be found on the website.

The board voted on each of the four articles and heard public comment before moving to entertain any amendments brought forward.

A lot of discussion in the STR section was around parking. Currently the drafted bylaw for parking states short-term rentals require two parking spaces, and with three or more bedrooms, require three spaces but never more than five.

There were questions about the reasons for limiting parking and how they will regulate parking renters choose to park on the lawn or the street. Planners said it is not their call, that is up to the property owner and if it is a public street that would be up to the authorities.

Some attendees called for tighter regulation to make sure neighborhoods are protected from overflow.

Lynn Terry said she lives next to one of the rented houses on Narragansett Avenue and does not feel safe with all of the cars that are parked there. She said there can be up to 10 at a time on the narrow road, and that some people have asked to use her driveway to park. She thinks limiting to five cars based on the house, is very important.

The wordage was amended to say a parking space for each bedroom of the house.

Rich Cohen brought up how his own STR at the Old Stone School helps bring in money and helps to preserve the historic landmark. He told the board he liked what they did and wants to see it pass at town meeting, knowing it might be revised later on.

He said the bylaws now should not be a "one size fits all" but may need to be adjusted to help protect neighborhoods and also preserve places like his.

After asking the audience of fewer than 20 people, the board decided to amend the amount of time an short-term rental can be reserved to 180 days total a year in a residential zone, and 365 days a year in every other zone. This was in the hopes the bylaw will be passed and help to deter companies from buying up properties to run STRs as well as protecting the neighborhood character and stability.

They also capped the stay limit of a guest to 31 days.

Cohen also asked them to add "if applicable" to the Certificate of Inspection rule as the state's rules might change and it can help stop confusion if they have incorrect requirement that the state doesn't need.

The ADU portion did not have much public comment but there were some minor amendments because of notes from KP Law, the town counsel.

View Full Story

More Cheshire Stories