Orange County held a public hearing July 23 to receive public comment on a proposed $185,000,000 program to make longevity improvements to the Harriman Wastewater Treatment Plant and expand treatment capacity from 6 million gallons per day (MGD) to 9 MGD.

The project team, led by Eric Denenga, Commissioner of the Orange County Department of Public Works, and Marybeth Bianconi, partner at Delaware Engineering, told the Legislature the work is needed both to meet a new SPDES permit and to replace aging infrastructure. Bianconi said the core work is a new 7 MGD sequencing batch reactor to replace “train number 1,” upgrades to keep train number 3 operating at its current 2 MGD, and other site longevity improvements. “The new project is a 7,000,000 gallon a day sequencing batch reactor,” Bianconi said.

The nut of the county’s presentation was financing and timing. County consultants presented an all-in preliminary cost of $185 million and said the county has applied for federal and state financing including the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and programs tied to the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, a Water Quality Improvement Program grant (application due July 31), and a Water Infrastructure Improvement grant described by staff as covering up to 25% of net costs. Bianconi said the county is pursuing up to about $60 million in potential grant and low-interest loan support but cautioned that nothing is guaranteed.

Presenters laid out estimated rate impacts under different financing scenarios. County figures in the hearing record show about 18,000 equivalent residential units in Orange County Sewer District No. 1. Current annual operation-and-maintenance (O&M) cost per single-family-equivalent unit was stated as $562.34. The capital-repayment portion for the $185 million project, assuming no grants and a 30-year repayment, was shown as about $500.92 per unit, producing a combined annual cost of approximately $1,063.26 per typical single-family home. Staff said that, if certain grants and low-cost financing are secured, that figure could fall to about $876.86 per unit.

County staff described a multi-step schedule: design completion targeted for August 2026, regulatory review and approvals expected in early 2027, bidding in 2027, and construction through 2029. Bianconi noted there is a second phase for collection-system work that will be the subject of a future proceeding.

Public commenters raised concerns about development, fairness of a flat per-unit charge, local impacts from multi-year construction and odors, and the distribution of costs between existing and new users. Joyce Sloan of Blooming Grove said a flat per-unit charge “doesn’t incentivize conservation” and “I don’t think that’s equitable.” Bonnie Rum, also of Blooming Grove, urged the county to account for household occupancy rather than treating every single-family home the same and asked whether properties not currently connected to the sewer would be charged. Wayne Mitchell, mayor of the Village of Harriman, said residents welcome relief from odors but asked the county to consider compensation or special consideration for village ratepayers because the plant sits inside Harriman and his village will bear most construction impacts: “As the only community directly impacted by this multi year construction project, we request that you consider some form of compensation or consideration to the ratepayers in the village of Harriman.”

Gedalia Segedem of the Town of Palm Tree and Village of Kiryas Joel said a substantial portion of the project cost stems from bringing the plant into compliance with the new SPDES permit and from longevity work: “This is clearly a state mandate. They have not funded this mandate.” Mike Egan of Monroe asked for clarification about the financing programs and the mechanics of allocating capital costs between existing and new users. Maria May asked what safeguards the county would put in place to avoid repeating capacity shortfalls in the future.

No formal vote or legislative action took place at the hearing; the Legislature opened and closed the hearing after public comment. County staff said written comments from an earlier hearing remain part of the record and that all comments will be addressed in the final document required for the district’s financing and environmental review.

The county provided tables used during the presentation showing the unit counts, the assumptions for O&M and capital-repayment calculations, and several grant/loan scenario outcomes; staff said those tables are posted in the Orange County Sewer District folder on the county website.

The hearing record and staff presentation also note that the collection-system work described as a separate phase was evaluated in the project’s 2024 environmental review and will be the subject of a future public proceeding.

The Legislature closed the hearing after the final commenter and no further public speakers were called.