EAST LONGMEADOW — The East Longmeadow Town Council is questioning a proposed water rate increase for fiscal year 2027 over concerns about the water quality.
In the proposed FY27 budget, the water rate is projected to go up 50 cents or 11% because of a $430,000 project with Tighe & Bond to come up with a solution for the water quality in town.
Councilor Ralph Page said he was frustrated about the increase because the water quality does not meet state standards for cleanliness.
“Our water doesn’t meet the state requirements for cleanliness and I’m having a really difficult time looking at this saying how the state is basically saying ‘you’re not meeting water quality, it’s been consistent for a long time and you have to improve it,’ and we’re saying, ‘hey, we’re going to go up on your rates 11% for this water that doesn’t meet any of the standards,’” he said.
He questioned if the town should put off on bonding the project and suggested waiting until the state offers a suggestion for solutions.
“I cannot vote for that type of a rate increase, an 11% increase for contaminated water going to the residents,” Page said.
Page pointed to frustrations with the town’s water source at Cobble Mountain Reservoir in Blandford, which is purchased from Springfield.
“It’s not our town, it’s not the people in the Water Department, it’s what we’re getting, and we have no say over it, which is even more frustrating,” he said. “We have to pay for these, we have to pay for Tighe & Bond, for engineering and everything, because we are getting crap water and now, we have to try and find a solution because they’re unable to, unwilling to, I don’t know.”
Councilor Jim Leydon echoed Page’s sentiments about the water quality and jokingly said “It’s safe to drink unless you’re pregnant.”
Councilor Jim Leydon echoed Page’s sentiments about the water quality and jokingly said “It’s safe to drink unless you’re pregnant.”
“I think our residents, all of us here deserve clean water and competent management. I don’t think we’re getting both right now. Having our residents fork over more money for a product that is less than desirable is problematic to say the least,” Leydon said. “It’s something that is becoming more and more concerning, especially given some of the more recent developments up there that they keep on uncovering and it’s not going to get better any time soon.”
Speaking about the oversight of the water, which is done by the Springfield Water and Sewer Commission, Leydon also expressed support for House Bill H.2330, known as An Act Relative to Equitable Representation. This bill, presented by state Rep. Aaron Saunders, would increase the number of members on the Springfield Water and Sewer Commission to seven and would restructure the board so that only four members could serve from the same municipality. Currently the board is comprised of Springfield representatives with no members from the communities that it supplies water to. The bill would also establish an advisory board with one representative from each of the communities the commission supplies water to, which will appoint three members of the commission, with the other four appointed by Springfield’s mayor.
“Maybe the council can take a vote at a future meeting to request that our legislators support that legislation,” he said.
Councilor Jonathon Torcia said it would be good to have a unified voice by voting to support the legislation at a future meeting.
“I think that supporting or doing something at a future meeting would be really important because right now we don’t have representation on the board in Springfield that kind of makes these decisions on the water,” he said. “When I first read that a few weeks ago — it’s kind of extraordinary — not just us but other communities outside of Springfield to not even have one seat, or even one seat dedicated to those other communities but to have it be people that are not really accountable to these communities.”
Page also requested that for the next meeting to have a list of water main breaks in the last few years in the area around Slumber Lane, which is slated for a $1.6 water main capital project.
Council President Connor O’Shea said that the council would be including discussion about the legislation as an action item at its next meeting.
Councilor Kathy Hill said one of the questions raised at the Financial Oversight Committee’s meeting was that the town may be required to increase the water rate.
“We didn’t really have a definitive outcome, but there’s concern that we have to do something, we have to adopt some sort of a rate, and maybe it could be as simple as adopting the rate again that we have right now, with the understanding that based on enough time to investigate this matter more thoroughly, we could adjust,” he said.
Town Manager Tom Christensen clarified that the increase in the water rate was not because of a capital project because that was slated for FY28.
“This is just an increase based on whatever our increases from our bill from Springfield Water and Sewer for our usage, which [the Division of Local Services] has had a problem in the past the way that we budget, and we are now budgeting appropriately for usage based on prior years’ data and budgeting for that number,” he said.
If the town were to not set the rate as presented, Town Account Kimberly Collins said that money would have to come from elsewhere in the budget.
Councilor Anna Jones said she was in favor of discussing the legislation, but questioned the point of not charging the proposed water rate.
“We still have to pay for it, by us not going up on the water rate isn’t going to make it go down, they’re not going to charge us any less, so why are we going to kind of disrupt our budget that we’ve done so much work to make beautiful and nice, when they’re not going to change anything,” she said.
Page suggested looking at different options for an increase as opposed to the proposed 50-cent increase.
“If I go to a restaurant, I order a meal and it’s bad, the next time I go back I don’t expect to pay 11% more for that same bad meal,” he said.
O’Shea said he was also hesitant to not raise the water rate at all.
“I do agree that if we increase the rate the full amount and continue to do more projects in those accounts, even if they don’t technically affect the rate this year, but we know that that’s going to impact the rate in the next couple years, that’s a lot to ask of people, especially knowing that they’re paying for the new school now too,” O’Shea said.
Christensen also said that the increases were “enraging.”
“We’ve been doing our diligence on keeping our system up to date and doing these projects and getting this account to a place where it’s in really good shape, we’re above our marks on everything, and now we have to do something detrimental again to fix this problem that’s not ours,” he said.
Leydon added that while the legislation had passed the Senate in an environmental bond bill for the FY27 budget. He suggested that the council send a letter of support for the legislation to state Reps. Angelo Puppolo and Brian Ashe as it works its way through the House’s budget discussion.
The East Longmeadow Town Council is scheduled to meet next on May 26, when it will open its public hearing over the FY27 budget and continue discussions about the legislation regarding the Springfield Water and Sewer Commission.
