Town of Old Lyme WPCA Meeting September 11, 2018
Meeting Minutes
In attendance: Chairman Rich Prendergast, Vice-Chair Donna Bednar, Treasurer Doug Wilkinson, Andrea Lombard, Sal Cancelliere, Steve Cinami, Rob McCarthy, Dimirtri Tolchinski. Absent (excused): Frank Chan and Joe Carpentino. Also in attendance were 3 townspeople, First Selectwoman Reemsnyder and Selectwoman Nosal.
Call to Order: The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Chairman Prendergast. Alternate S. Cinami was appointed as a full voting member for tonight’s meeting.
Approval of the minutes: Motion by D. Wilkinson to approve the minutes of the August meeting. Second by D. Tolchinski. No discussion. Motion carries unanimously.
Chairman’s report: summary sent by email.
Meeting with NL WPCA on August 20 with First Selectwoman Reemsnyder. Introductory meeting. The question was asked, why don’t’ we have IMA with beach associations rather than New London? Chairman Prendergast replied that there is a section in the current agreement with beach associations which states they cannot include anyone else, and they don’t name us. Still in preliminary discussions. We are at 30% volume of the private beach associations. Fee should reflect that.
Hawk’s Nest Beach wells: Concerned about first set of results. Woodard & Curran agreed to re-flush at no cost. Thanks to S. Cancelliere and F. Chan for volunteering their time and labor to verify and help with flushing. Turbidity was very low. Water is just black in some cases. Water stank like swamp muck. Technician checked that machine didn’t need re-calibrating. The process was time consuming and labor intensive. Discussion followed on whether or not we should now go ahead and resume the testing/monitoring, with the reminder that each sample cycle costs a little over $4,000.
Motion by D. Wilkinson to proceed with monitoring of wells. Second by D. Tolchinski. Discussion: If we know that at least 2 wells are sucking swamp water, do we want to continue testing swamp water? We were required by the state to put those wells in on that strip. Don’t jump to conclusions. R. McCarthy agrees that we should proceed with sampling. It was noted there could be problems with sample method, how wells were installed, which should be reviewed and considered. S. Cinami said we put the wells in under certain constraints. Idea to get best spot possible with as little interference as possible. A. Lombard added that we are doing this with direction from DEEP. Could someone be brought in to get assurances that our method is sound? That has already been done. Motion carries (7 yes, 0 no,
1 abstain.)
Public Outreach. Meeting was held on August 16th. Need a bigger room next time. 120 people attended. Overall went well. Answered questions as truthfully as possible. Not everyone liked the answers. Convinced we will have to do more public outreach. S. Cancelliere commented that a question was asked 3 different times about lots on Hartford Ave with multiple structures on one lot what the EDU would be. He felt we were keeping that information from the public. Chairman Prendergast commented that he thinks we will need to go back and reevaluate our definition of EDUs. Goal is still the same - to be fair and transparent.
Cooperation with private beach associations: Land lease agreement has been finalized. Public discussion scheduled for September 19 at 7:00 p.m., and town meeting tentatively set for September 24th.
Budget Update and Expenses D. Wilkinson: Paid Clerk. Bill for postage and advertising for mailing postcard around $1430. Expecting bill from legal but haven’t seen it yet. Researched our carryover amounts, and we have ample funds for testing. Still $15K for consultant if we need somebody as we get further along. Will start soon planning for next year with Board of Finance.
Correspondence: Sent via email in advance of the meeting. One item is a suggestion that CT Water Company is in the process of being purchased (received August 17) that we should contribute to the public comment. Should find out obligation CT Water has to the beaches. Don’t’ want to see people pay for water lines in addition to sewers. Maybe have lawyers look into it. Or ask CT Water directly. Chairman Prendergast pointed out that our lawyer has investigated the documentation. There is a lot of history. Other correspondence includes letter from the First Selectwoman and Chairman Prendergast to New London to thank them for meeting. Got a letter back from New London. Another piece of correspondence came late and was not provided in packet. From OL Conservation Commission on letterhead.
Not signed by anyone. Therefore, Chairman Prendergast sent a follow-up email asking if it’s real. Many of the questions posed on it have been asked and answered. Lastly, WPCA hearing panel has 2 vacancies. If you know someone who wants to be on the hearing panel, please pass their names along.
Old Business:
Groundwater study was discussed in chairman’s report. In process of monitoring Hawk’s Nest area. Passed a motion to proceed with sampling. Unresolved: State has asked us to do 1-2 months of ground level water monitoring. Did this previously to determine flow. Put in a data logger in 1 well (on West End Drive) for 2 months, cost of $4K. Measures water level in area to see if there is a natural tidal influence to the results. Other option is to oppose this request.
Motion by S. Cinami that before further consideration of request for monitoring the ground level water, ask DEEP what is the purpose of the data. Second by D. Wilkinson. No discussion. Motion carries unanimously.
Timeline for sewer referendum: Will hold referendum next summer. Still many more steps – this gives us time to do the work and not get overwhelmed. Chairman Prendergast will ask selectman’s office for recommendations for possible dates.
Carmody Software: Town attorney came back with some minor comments First Selectwoman Reemsnyder plans to review these, and then she will connect with Scott Carmody to move forward.
New Business: None.
Public Comment:
Sandy Garvin, Hawk’s Nest Beach: Appreciate all the hard work with the re-flushing and testing of wells. Thank you, Sal. Thanks to Brent who did work (from Woodard & Curran.) Is this water testing going to be full extent of testing? Doesn’t seem any soil or core samples were taken when putting in the pipes We do have good depth to ground waters. Know there is peat where the pipes went down, and underneath the cottages. We are a barrier beach with swamp behind. Did want DNA testing to specify if its natural or something other than human. Knows it’s an issue, hard to find and expensive. Spoke to State Dept. Of Health. Project at UConn called the Path Project (?) future of water quality testing. Did write them a letter to see if we could be included might be helpful to everyone. Would
like to know if water testing is the only analysis that we are doing? Every week sound public explorer website publishes water quality testing all along Long Island Sound, and HNB always gets good grades. Doesn’t seem to be pollution according to these results for swimming. Wants it noted.
Rob Breen, Swan Avenue: Comments concern CT Water discussion. Water project not in scope of WPCA but related. Water lines in Sound View major concern to people in Sound View. CT Water inherited orders from Sound View Water company. Some pieces of work still remaining. 2100 linear feet. Still under 3000 linear feet. Per foot construction costs of $200 per linear foot. Cost was borne by company itself (SVWC) cost of completing work should be paid for by CT Water, not ratepayers just in Sound View. Concern due to pending acquisition. A neighbor has been in touch with PURA and started a petition. Needs to be finished. Relatively small project. They should be picking up the cost.
Chairman Prendergast responds: In regards to the question about will water testing be only testing, answer is no. Will be doing wastewater plan like last time, public comment on EIE. Will look at all possibilities. Not just water. Agreed to do additional testing. As to Long Island sound grades. That’s great but doesn’t cover groundwater pollution. Rain storms affect closure of beaches. CT Water, he agrees that they are related (water and sewer) First Selectwoman has been very helpful. Challenge has been they are supposed to do it, should do it, but they don’t do it. Chairman will contact CT Water to discuss. Will investigate public comment and make comment if time allows. CT Water Company is a private company acting as a utility.
Motion by S. Cancelliere to adjourn. Second by R. McCarthy. No discussion. Motion carries. The meeting adjourned at 8:54 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Jennifer Datum, WPCA Clerk
| 
