State committee signals support to transfer Randall parcel to Waterbury for flood mitigation

The Buildings and General Services Committee signaled support on March 20 to transfer a state-owned parcel commonly referred to in the meeting as the Randall property to the town of Waterbury so the town can pursue long-term flood mitigation.

The committee’s discussion, led by Wanda Manoli, Commissioner of Buildings and General Services, centered on aligning a subdivision and transfer with the state’s stormwater-management needs and ensuring the town receives clear parcel language and a statutory ‘‘notwithstanding’’ clause to Title 29 VSA §166(b) for the transfer. ‘‘If you choose to transfer, we would want the opportunity to work with the town of Waterbury to ensure that the subdivision reflects our stormwater management needs,’’ Commissioner Wanda Manoli said.

The parcel is currently leased to a farmer. Commissioner Manoli told the committee the lease brings in ‘‘a little bit over $3,000 a year’’ and that staff have notified the leaseholder about the discussions. She said the state cannot develop the parcel for the nearby Waterbury state office complex and that the town’s proposed remediation—silt removal and regrading—would better serve flood protection for homes on Randall Street that abut the land.

Douglas Farnham, chief recovery officer for the state, described the state’s recent work with federal programs and said an application to the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program was submitted but is unlikely to receive funds in the current rounds because buyouts are being prioritized. ‘‘That application was submitted,’’ Farnham said. ‘‘But when you compare it on the statewide scale, it’s unlikely that in the current round of hazard mitigation or the next round that it is going to be a candidate to receive funding.’’ He added that town ownership ‘‘can only help’’ and ‘‘absolutely will not hurt’’ Waterbury’s prospects for federal or other funding programs, and that completing the subdivision and having municipal ownership could simplify some federal funding paths.

Tom West, speaking for Waterbury, asked the committee to move quickly on the transfer and noted potential funding and workload constraints at the state level: ‘‘We’re not necessarily arguing for [state-paid] engineering; we understand that requires an appropriation. … We’re arguing for the transfer to occur relatively quickly,’’ he said. West also said the town receives a substantial pilot payment from the state and that the fiscal impact from transferring this parcel would be small compared with the public-safety and facility-protection benefits.

Committee members asked staff to supply the official parcel identifier rather than relying on acreage estimates. Commissioner Manoli said the committee should refer to parcel numbers when drafting transfer language and staff agreed to provide the parcel number and to work with Waterbury and the leaseholder on timing and permits. The committee agreed, without a recorded roll-call vote, to advance preparation of transfer language that would include: (1) a parcel identifier, (2) ‘‘notwithstanding’’ language to address Title 29 VSA §166(b) fair-market-value requirements, and (3) notification to the current leaseholder. The town requested the draft language for review before final approval.

Farnham outlined prior debris-removal work and said a debris-removal action in 2024 was not completed in a way that FEMA could justify for reimbursement because the farmer subsequently disturbed the site. He described buyouts as consuming much of the available hazard-mitigation funding statewide and said the Waterbury project—while valuable locally—ranked lower against widespread buyout priorities.

Next steps recorded in the meeting notes: staff will obtain the parcel number from the town, draft transfer language including the requested notwithstanding clause, ensure the leaseholder is informed, and provide the draft to Waterbury for review before the committee considers final approval.

While the committee expressed support and set these procedural next steps, no formal recorded vote or final transfer authorization was made during the session.