The Local Independent

By Patrick Brodrick

            Nestle, the Swiss-based, world-renown chocolate manufacturer may be able to boast that it “makes the very best” when it comes to sweets; its proposals for harvesting water from the Wekepeke Reservoir in Sterling, however, leaves something to be desired, according to the Clinton Board of Selectmen.

            On Wednesday, selectmen voted unanimously to reject Nestlé’s proposal to use water from the Sterling reservoir, which is actually owned by Clinton despite its geographic location.

            “I’ve given it a lot of thought and I don’t think the risk versus reward is a fair tradeoff, especially with the amount of money to be had from the deal,” Selectmen Joseph Notaro Jr. said.

            Nestlé’s proposal called for harvesting about 230,000 gallons of water a day from the Wekepeke aquifer to be used in its bottled-water line. Nestle had planned to pay Clinton between $200,000 and $300,000 a year, or $2.55 per 100 cubic feet, under the proposed agreement. The proposal also stipulated that Nestle would pay an up-front fee of $100,000 during the first year of the contract, and an additional $20,000 a year for the next five years, that Clinton would use to repair the earthen dams on the 564 acre Sterling property. Clinton is required to repair the dams to make sure they meet state standards, which could cost upwards of $1.5 million.

            “We are under a mandate from the state to repair the dams,” Selectman Anthony Fiorentino said during the meeting. “I think this situation has been over-engineered and I’d like to see it addressed in a more simple solution; this is the only plan we have in place unfortunately.”

            The deal with Nestle drew the ire of a number of residents in both Sterling and Clinton opposed to entering into an agreement with a multi-national corporation regarding water rights on the land. A group of Sterling residents, led by Attorney Jim Gettens, stated they were prepared to move forward with a lawsuit against Clinton if it accepted a deal with Nestle. Supporters of the suit alleged Clinton would be violating the terms of its agreement with Sterling, which the group believes clearly states the town is only allowed to use the water for its residents.

            Selectman Kevin Haley agreed with both Notaro and Fiorentino and said he had a number of concerns with Nestlé’s proposal.

            “I’d rather look at a different option for the Wekepeke and see if we can’t come up with another way to repair the dams,” Haley said. “I would make a motion that we don’t accept Nestlé’s proposal, and look at other options that are available to the town.”

            Notaro seconded the motion.

            “The risk versus reward doesn’t justify this arrangement now,” Notaro said. “I do believe that Clinton, even though that land is surrounded by other communities, has autonomy over that property, and we have control of the natural resources on that land.”

            Notaro went on to state that he would like to see a legal review conducted to determine just what rights Clinton has to that property and the water supply, both above and below ground.

            “We need to be able to come to some terms as to what we can do with that property,” Notaro said.

            Haley agreed and said he’d like to see the review to encompass what rights the town has in possibly selling the land.

            Selectmen voted unanimously to reject Nestlé’s proposal.

            (Editor’s Note: Well, it took seven months but Selectmen Robert Pasquale Jr., Joseph Notaro Jr. and Anthony Fiorentino, along with Kevin Haley and Mary Rose Dickhaut, finally did something that I think they should be commended on – their rejection of the Nestle proposal to harvest water from the Wekepeke. It would have been easy to get seduced by the lure of the money being waved like a carrot on a stick in front of the town, but the board collectively realized what The Independent has been saying all along – the money being offered by Nestle is a pittance compared to what that land and water is really worth. Included in the board’s request is to have town counsel review Clinton’s legal standing in regard to selling the land; however, any efforts to relinquish the town from controlling that land should be met with fierce resistance. That land, and more importantly the water on the property, is going to be worth far more than the land will fetch on the real estate market.

            “To more than two billion people fresh drinking water is more valuable than gold.” – National Geographic)