Letter from Bryan LoRusso

There’s More to the Story

This letter is in rebuttal to Bruce Markusen’s letter, titled “Town of Hartwick Coverage Lacking,” published in the May 1, 2025 editions of “The Freeman’s Journal” and “Hometown Oneonta.” These are areas of that letter with which I disagree.

1. In the first paragraph, Mr. Markusen states the problems with the water tank are alleged problems. The problems are not alleged. There is mold, there is mildew, and the structure is in great disrepair due to long-term negligence. Pictures do not lie.
2. In the second paragraph, Mr. Markusen states “the presence of mold has been a long-standing condition…” Mr. Markusen further elaborates that Mr. Briggs has held his position [water supply administrator] since 2019. The question remains, why weren’t the issues addressed in 2019 when he took the position? Why weren’t the issues dealt with in 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 (when they received a report about mold that was ignored), 2024 and into 2025?
3. In paragraph three, Mr. Markusen eloquently points out the fixes identified were quite simple, beginning with a humidistat and proper ventilation. Again, I have to ask, why weren’t these fixes implemented by the water operator in 2019, 2020, 2021, etc…? (You literally could have installed a light switch and flipped the fans on).
4. In paragraph five, Mr. Markusen discusses the lack of a regular water meeting. Does lack of a scheduled meeting for the latter half of 2024 warrant the lack of progress since 2019? Does it warrant lack of progress in 2024? I would say this is nothing more than an excuse. Emergency meetings have been called for all sorts of topics, including a soda ash block in an elbow of the main very recently. Excuses are like belly buttons.
5. Paragraph seven, again Mr. Markusen is pointing out Mr. Briggs’ tenure of six years. The question of the day is this: What has improved over his tenure? What major improvements have been made to correct deficiencies at the water tank or any other area of the water district?
6. Paragraph six states this is not a water quality issue. It is a building design issue. Would you allow for the growth of mold and mildew in your bathroom, in your kitchen, or in your basement? The structure is owned by the taxpayers in Hartwick. It is the town’s asset. The structure’s neglect is representative of many other town-owned assets falling into disrepair at the board’s hands…of which Mr. Markusen and Mr. Briggs have been members for quite some time now.
7. Lastly, Mr. Markusen discusses fear and panic as a tactic. The question of the day is this: Without the alarm, would the issues at the water tank still remain unaddressed? Sometimes an alarm is the only way to get results, as you can see with our recent progress.
8. The last question of the day surrounding this rebuttal is this. At what point does the Town of Hartwick strive to do better? How about exceeding recommended testing allowances? How about very clean and well-maintained facilities?

I am not surprised at all at Mr. Markusen’s excuses for his inability to get things done. All I know is at this juncture the Town Board has hired an engineer to manage the mold, the constructions design, and improvements to the structure to eliminate the mold and mildew problems. Mr. Markusen literally described the inept actions of both Mr. Briggs and himself in his letter to the paper.

Bryan LoRusso
Town of Hartwick Councilmember