June 4th: SLUDGE APPROVED

Just hours ago, the Hoosac Water Quality District voted to approve a budget that maintains the current practice of composting sewage sludge—despite months of public concern over PFAS contamination and a $200,000 allocation by Williamstown to support safer alternatives like landfilling. I attended the June 4 meeting, held at Williamstown Town Hall. While not as packed as last month’s session in North Adams, the room was filled with familiar community voices urging change. Instead, the board reaffirmed that it will continue composting and selling sludge if buyers are found, citing the absence of regulatory mandates—and, for the first time, a belief that waiting for state action might unlock funding to help offset the cost of switching practices.

Residents from both Williamstown and North Adams once again voiced strong opposition to the land application of sewage sludge. Stewart B. questioned what would happen if state law changed midstream, while others warned that waiting could mean higher public health costs in the long run. “We’re going to pay for this either way,” one speaker noted. “Either now with responsible action—or later, when the PFAS makes us sick.”

Multiple attendees also pushed the board to use Williamstown’s allocated $200K to begin shifting practices now. Suggestions ranged from exploring covered storage for the compost to slowly investing in landfilling, though all agreed the current approach was unsustainable in the face of known PFAS risks and shifting national norms.

In response to questions from Sarah Gardner, Chair of the Williamstown Agricultural Commission, Brad Furlon, the Chief Operator and District Manager, clarified that the HWQD compost pile currently holds about 4,300 yards of material. Gardner attended the meeting to follow up on the Agricultural Commission’s open letter—sent last month urging the district to stop land application—and to ask whether residents were still taking compost home and whether they understood the risks.

Brad confirmed that while the facility gate is locked when closed, residents can still take compost freely during open hours. When they do, they are required to register the pickup and are provided with documentation about how and where the compost should be used. He emphasized that the compost is not recommended for use on food gardens, particularly for crops grown underground.

Later in the meeting, a different resident raised concerns about the environmental impact of leaving the compost pile uncovered, especially during rainstorms. Brad responded that due to the internal heat the pile generates and the need for any structure to withstand snow load, no temporary or affordable covering solution has been found. He added that drainage improvements are currently underway to help prevent runoff and protect surrounding ecosystems.

Board member Russell Howard once again defended sludge composting by pointing to California, suggesting that if it’s permitted there—often considered an environmental leader—it should be acceptable here. But as several attendees and critics noted, this argument lacks essential context.

California does permit land application of treated sewage sludge (biosolids), but it does so under tightly controlled conditions governed by the State Water Resources Control Board. The state’s General Order 2004-12-DWQ outlines strict pollutant limits and safety protocols (source). Local jurisdictions within California can—and often do—set stricter limits or prohibit biosolids entirely.

Despite regulatory controls, PFAS remains a major issue in California. A 2024 investigation revealed widespread PFAS contamination in rural drinking water, even far from known sources (source). The state's 2023 ban on PFAS in food packaging reflects growing concern, but biosolids regulation has not fully caught up.

California’s $50 billion agricultural industry plays a major role in shaping state policy. This influence often tips environmental regulations toward economic pragmatism. The same industries that benefit from land-applied biosolids also hold sway in Sacramento. Critics caution that just because California permits something doesn’t mean it’s the most health-protective option—it may simply reflect the interests of powerful stakeholders.

In a shift from previous meetings, HWQD board members added a new point to this discussion: if the state eventually mandates a halt to land application, that regulatory shift may come with funding to support facility upgrades. Acting now, they suggested, could mean missing out on future grants or subsidies and shifting the full financial burden to ratepayers. While some attendees accepted the logic of waiting for funding, others argued that the cost of delay may still be too high—especially in terms of public health.

      1. Operating expenses increased by $100,000, while capital costs are projected to decrease by $173,000.

      2. Electricity costs remain steady, supported by solar credits (though new legislation may raise locked-in   rates slightly).

      3. Chemical prices have stabilized, but fuel and transportation remain unpredictable.

No line item was added for sludge disposal, as the district continues exploring options.

The board unanimously certified the budget, preserving current operations—including composting.

Operationally, HWQD reports a projected $200,000 surplus, though that figure is expected to shrink after pending bills and a full audit. Two staff positions remain open, and the district continues to plan long-term capital projects including riverbank stabilization—though that project currently lacks full funding.

The next HWQD meeting will take place in July (exact date TBD due to travel schedules). Civics Corner will continue to follow this issue closely.

After the meeting, this reporter stayed briefly to speak with several community members—some of whom expressed deep sadness and continued concern over the board’s decision. One attendee later texted:

“I’m sorry I left without speaking to you. I was—am—pretty upset. To be continued.”

In covering these meetings over the past several months, not a single community member has spoken in favor of continuing to sell the compost. The public voice has been consistent, and yet the board’s decision remains unchanged.

To be continued, indeed.