Terra Friedrichs

& her local work in
Acton, Massachusetts

Your Subtitle text

Water Resources

Below, find Terra's statement about water from her 2018 campaign. The information/positions are still relevant with this one update:

UPDATE:  Since 2018, the town has engaged in a "build out" analysis to determine how much water would be required IF we let Acton become "built out" [where builders build to the max]. This exercise, while it might be scary to find out how much building could occur, it seems critical for us to understand what life in Acton would be like under such a scenario. 

The key question which will hopefully be answered in 2020...will we have enough water to:
- remain "independent" as a water district or will we have to become dependent on other water suppliers
- keep our aquifers and eco-systems healthy,

Info from 2018 follows...


1. The Nagog Pond situation
2. The water crisis in general

1. Yes, the Nagog Pond litigation is complicated. But settling and giving up our rights because you are afraid of what the courts will do, seems to not be in the Town's best interest. I have not seen the final settlement offer. But the last one we saw was unacceptable. See Green Acton's assessment. And this associated Town Meeting article that asks the voters to give up our rights for 20 years, seems irresponsible too. I do not believe that any court will force Acton to give up its water rights to a town that uses more than twice the amount of water per person than the other town. Green Acton members will be presenting at Town Meeting and urging voters to vote no. I am with them. They are scientists and lawyers. It's complicated if you don't believe we have a right to and need our Nagog Pond water, per the Legislative Acts of 1884. It's simple if you do not. Just because an issue is complicated doesn't mean you shouldn't work hard, including going to court, to protect your rights. If we do not protect our rights, we will lose our rights.

2. Terra believes that because Acton is headed for a water CRISIS, that she wants voters to help her make this election about water.

Why does she believe WATER is "the issue"?

Take a look at the following slide, which was presented to the Acton Board of Selectmen on March 5th by local scientists. Please scroll down to see the explanation and why this is so important.


The RED LINE shows the amount of water the state allows Acton Water District to supply to the public. The state is pulling back on increasing allowable limits and in some cases is reducing allowable limits.

The BLUE LINE shows how currently allowable land uses (construction) will bring us FAR BEYOND the amount allowed.


The slide was prepared by Acton's Water Resources Advisory Committee (WRAC). The WRAC is a group of scientists and concerned citizens who over the past few months, reviewed Acton's official planning documents. The numbers in those documents estimate the number of people, housing units, and businesses expected. The totals presented above are calculated from these official numbers.

As you can hopefully see from the slide, we will need almost DOUBLE the amount of water that we are allotted by the state.

The old planning practice was to just ask the state to allow us to pump more water. BUT that was "last-century". These days, not only is the state being much more careful about increasing water allotments for towns, but they are even decreasing some!

So we've got a problem.

This is the same problem as when Terra was a Selectman in 2011. And it's got to change. Will her opponent, backed by the current Board of Selectmen and the policy managers that brought us to this point, change their ways? Probably not, unless you elect Terra to be a strong voice for water on the Board.

Just as an interesting note, see the following quote, which was from Terra in 2011. Nothing has changed!

"Water policy is fragmented in Acton, split among different boards, departments and town By laws.  I have been pushing for Acton to begin a process to consider looking at this more holistically. We are not looking at the cumulative impacts of individual projects on our drinking water, on flooding, and on water quality.  We have traditionally treated development projects as unrelated to our ability to supply drinking water. I believe that it is a responsible thing to do to look at those relationships and guide our policy based on what we learn.

I believe that we need to be to be proactive decades in advance relative to our drinking water, rather than reactive.  And I believe we should base our decisions on data and facts. I believe that you, the residents and users of the water, should get the the information, so that our policy discussions about our future path can be fact-based."

Please elect Terra Friedrichs, so she can be a strong voice for appropriate, triple-bottom-line planning!

Website Builder