Or, could it be, as the authors of "In Search Of Excellence" allege, "Lawyers are the beavers building dams in the streams of progress."

Perhaps neither.

But no one questions that, for a number of reasons, the boards of trustees for the Wiscasset and Bath water districts haven't been able to sit down and work out a deal, after beginning over a year ago.

Bath has sold water to Wiscasset since 1988, under a two-sentence agreement, which both boards of trustees decided last fall, should be more specific.

Wiscasset Water District Superintendent Chris Cossette said Tuesday the initial approach by Bath's former superintendent, Seth Garrison, was that the two water districts consolidate.

"This was the catalyst for the new interconnection agreement," Cossette said. The two boards met for the first time in May at Bath's treatment plant. Both sides say the meeting was productive, but a series of events, including an investigation of the Wiscasset Water District, and a change in the makeup of the Wiscasset board, delayed negotiations.

On August 29, Cossette says he mailed a letter to Bath, asking them to meet on October 24. Bath superintendent Trevor Hunt said they never received the letter. In fact, when called by a reporter on October 25 to ask about the meeting, Hunt said he knew nothing about it, and expressed surprise that Wiscasset's chairman, Phil DiVece, wanted a face-to-face meeting.

Bath then sent Wiscasset a letter on September 19, urging Wiscasset "to reconsider its position and promptly resume negotiations." Hunt says Wiscasset never replied to this letter.

Not true, DiVece says. Wiscasset sent Bath a letter dated October 27, in which Wiscasset asked Bath for a long list of documents.

Contacted this week about the request for documents, Hunt said by the time Bath received the letter, they had already requested an investigation by the Public Utilities Commission.

"We felt our positions were pretty well cast in stone, so we needed an impartial third party," Hunt said.

Hunt said he was startled by a phone call on Monday morning from a reporter asking him to comment on a press release, dated November 11, sent out by Cossette, entitled, "Wiscasset Water District Trustees Call For Patience, Fairness and a Review of the Facts."

Hunt told the reporter he had not seen the press release. Hunt said he had received a letter from Cossette dated November 8 in which Wiscasset asked to meet with the Bath trustees.

In the press release, Cossette said Wiscasset had asked twice to meet with Bath, and proposed meeting on Monday, November 21.

"We've had two teleconferences since the date of their letter, now they're trying to say that we have not been willing to meet," Hunt said. "Now they're trying to reinvent their position."

Asked Tuesday about the possibility of meeting on November 21, Hunt said that is the night of their annual meeting.

Hunt said Cossette called him on Tuesday to ask for an alternative date. Hunt said it's possible the two boards can meet, but Wiscasset will have to be ready to bring something new to the table.

DiVece says the decision to put the negotiations in the hands of the two superintendents and their respective lawyers may have slowed the process. This, he says, is why he would like to have both boards sit down together and talk.

"With all due respect to the attorneys, we're [the trustees] the ones who have to sign this agreement. We're the ones that took the oath of office. It's in our best interest to reach an agreement as much as it is theirs."

Wiscasset has taken the position that Bath should not treat the town any differently than any other commercial customer.

DiVece said Cossette has done a survey of eight similar districts which showed that the industry standard for similar district-to-district purchases of water is only 90 percent of the commercial rate. Wiscasset has been paying 100 percent of the commercial rate.

"We're not against a rate increase," DiVece says. "We just want to make sure we're paying a fair share rate increase."

Cossette noted that Bath customers "carry a hefty debt and large overhead costs," whereas Wiscasset, "due to a tightly run operation carries absolutely zero debt service."

According to Public Utilities spokesman Phil Lindley, Bath has filed a request for an investigation. A hearing examiner will do some preliminary research, he said, then ask Wiscasset for a response. The examiner will then make a presentation to the three commissioners who meet every Monday. There are a number of avenues the commissioners can follow at that point, Lindley said, including opening an investigation, deciding not to investigate, or acting as a mediator or facilitator.

Provisions Of The Proposed Agreement

A maximum flow of 350,000 gallons per day or 60 million gallons annually; if Wiscasset wants an increase, Wiscasset will notify Bath immediately and negotiations will begin, but Bath is not obligated to provide the increase until an agreement is reached;

If there is a need to conserve water Wiscasset will follow the same directives given to other customers; Water provided shall meet all requirements for drinking as set by regulatory agencies Water may be fluoridated at Bath's option; if Wiscasset wants fluoride added or removed, Wiscasset will pay for this; If the water doesn't meet standards set by authorities, Bath will make every effort to raise the water quality to an acceptable level within a reasonable period of time; Wiscasset will install, own, test, repair and maintain backflow prevention devices as directed and approved by Bath Wiscasset will pay Bath [a yet to be determined amount] per one million gallons of water delivered or [a yet to be determined amount] per gallon delivered Conditions for measuring the flow of water are spelled out Wiscasset will pay Bath for water within 30 days; if not, interest of one percent per month will be charged Terms for ending the agreement are spelled out Provisions for liability/indem-nification and unforeseen events are spelled out.