Who is a member?
Our members are the local governments of Massachusetts and their elected and appointed leadership.
The Honorable Anthony Petruccelli
The Honorable William Straus
Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture
State House, Boston
Dear Chairs Petruccelli and Straus:
On behalf of the cities and towns of the Commonwealth, the Massachusetts Municipal Association appreciates the opportunity to provide written testimony on H. 834, An Act Relative to Sustainable Water Resources. Cities and towns understand the need to protect water resources; our members are committed environmentalists who take their role as stewards of this important natural resource very seriously.
Over the past 20 years our communities have focused on water conservation, increasing efficiency of commercial water use, and detecting and preventing leaks. As a result, water use in Massachusetts has declined dramatically. Cities and towns have long promoted the need to look holistically at how water resources are managed in the Commonwealth to provide for public health and safety and economic growth for our communities.
House Bill 834 directs the Department of Fish and Game to develop stream flow criteria and would amend the Water Management Act (M.G.L. Ch. 21G) to require the Department of Environmental Protection to promulgate regulations within the statute, establishing standards for restoring and maintaining stream flows, water levels and hydrologic regimes that are protective of natural aquatic life for all rivers and streams in the Commonwealth. H. 834 would change the intent of the WMA by eliminating the balance between competing uses and would place stream flow and aquatic habitat benefit over all else. This would have a dramatic impact on public health and safety protection, economic growth, creation of jobs, and agriculture, all of which are also factors that WMA permitting is supposed to consider. When the WMA was passed in the mid-1980s the Legislature did not prioritize water uses. Rather, the WMA was designed to allow a balance between competing uses of water while granting rights to continue existing uses.
Placing stream flow standards within the WMA, a statute that only controls water withdrawals, implies that flow impairments are primarily due to water withdrawals and thus can be corrected through further limits on water use. The WMA does not address issues with wastewater, storm water, development and natural circumstances, all of which impact rivers and streams. There are measures that can be taken to effectively address stream flow issues in some circumstances. These are holistic measures, not just water withdrawal limitations.
Currently, the DEP issues WMA permits with stream flow protection conditions and the Commonwealth has invested much time and money in studies performed by the U.S. Geological Survey to examine the issue of stream flow and river basin health. These studies are just now being finalized and it would be imprudent to consider moving this legislation at this time until such reports and findings have been made public and have been professionally vetted.
While we have grave concerns and reservations about H.834, as noted above, we do support the second element of the legislation, which would allow, but not require, communities to implement water banks. A water bank is a tool that would provide resources for communities to better manage water supply, wastewater and storm water.
Communities such as Weymouth and Danvers report excellent results with the water banks that they have implemented, and these measures have also benefited the local economy. This tool would also help shift the onus for “balancing the water budget” from the water suppliers, so that all the factors that influence water in a community can be considered in achieving more sustainable water management.
Water banking may not be appropriate, feasible or necessary in every community. Local control and decision-making needs to be guaranteed so that decisions can be made by those with the best understanding of the issues and concerns of the individual communities and water systems.
Some communities have also expressed concerns that they could be subject to lawsuits if they implement water banks. By codifying water-banking options for cities and towns, that threat is eliminated.
Overall, we have serious concerns that this legislation would impact the operations of public water supplies and the ability of communities to provide the essential service necessary for protection of public health and safety. In addition, the costs of operational, structural and staffing changes necessary to monitor and meet the requirements of this legislation would have a severe financial impact on communities of the Commonwealth. For these reasons, we ask you to defer action on this legislation unless and until these issues have been adequately addressed.
Thank you very much. If you have additional questions, please do not hesitate to contact Tom Philbin at the MMA.
Sincerely,
Geoffrey C. Beckwith
MMA Executive Director