Council delays $35,000 ARPA payment for Flat River Reservoir, asks for townwide lake funding plan

Coventry Town Council on an evening meeting in February 2025 unanimously voted to continue discussion of a resolution that would have allocated $35,000 in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds for invasive-weed treatment at Flat River Reservoir, commonly called Johnson’s Pond. Council members said they wanted more cost details from lake associations and a townwide plan before approving one-time ARPA funding.

The resolution’s sponsors described the funding as a one-time injection to restore the reservoir to a manageable condition after several years of low water and missed treatments. Councilman Michael Pasqua introduced the item as a targeted, near-term measure tied to the town’s recent acquisition of the reservoir; the council later voted 7-0 to continue the measure to the Feb. 25 meeting to allow staff and local lake groups to supply additional detail.

Why it matters: The town acquired the reservoir by eminent-domain court order in June 2024 and has committed to creating public access. Several residents urged the council to address water quality now so future public access investments—boat ramps, beaches, and related infrastructure—will be usable and safe. Other residents and lake advocates urged an equitable approach so all town-owned water bodies receive attention and money is used consistent with federal ARPA rules.

Public comment and technical input drove the council’s decision. Speakers representing three lake associations and contractors described the scale and history of treatment: Mark Lamoy, president of the Johnson Pond Civic Association, said the civic association had not been able to treat the pond for three seasons because of legal constraints and is seeking a one-time infusion to restore control. Water-and-wetlands contractor Colin Gosselin, who has worked on Johnson’s Pond for about 10 years, told the council the plant coverage “has greatly increased” since the last treatments and said his firm "strongly recommend[s]… that the board approves the funds" to regain control this season.

Other commenters urged caution. Tom Pendergast of the Upper Dam Pond Conservation Association said, “The ARPA rules state that funds can be used for lake infrastructure projects,” and argued ARPA is better used for long-term stormwater and infrastructure fixes that reduce phosphorus inflow and the need for repeated herbicide treatments. Jerry Norkowitz, president of the Lake Tioga Association, and Diane Cowell (a Tioga resident) both pressed for equitable treatment across all town-owned lakes, noting Tioga and Breezy Lake also incur recurring treatment costs.

Council debate focused on two questions: (1) whether one-time ARPA money is an appropriate short-term fix for obvious infestation that developed during recent low-water years, and (2) whether the council should craft a longer-term funding approach and coordinated plan so future treatment is fair and sustainable. Vice President Verducci and others suggested coordinating lake groups to pursue economies of scale and identify infrastructure grants; Solicitor Stephen Angel advised adding a fiscal note showing where ARPA funds would come from and that a clear justification under Treasury guidance should accompany any ARPA allocation.

A proposed amendment by Councilman Brown to add $5,000 for Lake Tioga and $2,500 for Breezy (Upper Dam/Breezy Lake) was moved and seconded but later withdrawn as the council decided to ask all lake groups for their recent average annual treatment costs and preferred uses of a one-time allocation. Councilman Pasqua said the $35,000 request was intended as a one-time amount to reset Johnson’s Pond treatment to a normal cadence after three missed seasons and legal interruption, not as ongoing annual support.

The council asked the town manager’s office to collect recent cost histories from the Johnson Pond Civic Association, Lake Tioga Association and the Upper Dam Pond Conservation Association, to supply a finance fiscal note, and to return the item to the Feb. 25 agenda. No appropriation was made at this meeting.

Ending: Council leaders urged coordination among the town, the conservation commission, lake associations and grant consultants before the next vote. They emphasized the distinction between short-term weed reduction work and longer-term stormwater or infrastructure projects that would reduce nutrient inflows and the need for repeated chemical control.