Montpelier council drops solids dryer from wastewater upgrade, orders budget cuts as construction costs rise

The Montpelier City Council on Tuesday voted to remove the solids-drying component from the city’s Water Resource Recovery Facility upgrade after construction bids came in far above earlier estimates and threatened the bond-funded package.

The move pauses a dryer project engineers and staff had pitched as a long-term disposal-cost saver and a way to reduce the sludge weight sent to landfills. City Director of Public Works Gert Modica told the council the dryer-only portion of the project now carries a preliminary price tag of about $10,000,000 and that payback through reduced disposal costs would be decades long.

Why it matters: Councilors and staff said the rest of the upgrade—odor control, ultraviolet disinfection replacement, clarifier renewal and other critical repairs—remains necessary for plant operation. Removing the dryer keeps the immediate program within the amount voters originally approved for the bond and avoids an immediate new bond vote. Staff said they will continue design work and seek state and federal funding to position the dryer for a future bond.

Modica told the council that the Phase 1 East State Street work originally was estimated at about $1,200,000; after design work and added stormwater treatment the engineers’ estimate rose to roughly $2,500,000, and the bids opened at about $3,300,000. On the larger plant scope, he said, “Current estimate for the dryer portion is about $10,000,000.” He added that disposal payback would be long: “it does not offset the entire project cost for about 40 years as the payback period.”

Plant operations: Modica said the dryer is the only noncritical item that can be cut without endangering essential functions. He emphasized that other components—odor control, the aging ultraviolet (UV) disinfection system and the secondary clarifier—are required. On UV, Modica told councilors the existing system is roughly 20 years old and that the manufacturer no longer supplies a critical component called the ballast card.

Council discussion centered on cost, voter expectations and construction quality. One councilor asked if removing the dryer would amount to a “bait and switch” relative to the bond messaging; staff replied that full dryer work would require a separate bond vote in the future and that it is the only scope item they can postpone without compromising treatment or permitting. Another concern raised by a councilor was construction oversight after recent local paving and drainage problems.

Budget direction and timing: Separately, the council directed the city manager and staff to identify $409,400 in reductions to the proposed city budget, a motion that passed 4–1 after debate about which services should be prioritized. Staff said they will prepare specific options and alternatives for the council to consider before the public hearing and final ballot warning.

Other agenda decisions: The council deferred action on the Country Club Road appraisal until February so members could finish the budget process. Planning staff reported that the proposed Isabelle Circle development raised questions about the city’s development-security policy and private-activity bond rules; no vote was taken on that item.

Public comment: Dozens of residents addressed the council during the public-comment portion. Among topics raised were locked public bathrooms at the City Center, concerns about homelessness responses and shelter timing, and criticisms of how recent ARPA-funded shelter support was procured and administered. The council and city manager responded to questions about records on permit conditions and the availability of files for public inspection.

What happens next: City staff will continue the East State Street design without the dryer, pursue grant and federal funding opportunities to position the dryer for a later bond, and return to council with budget cut proposals totaling the requested $409,400. The council scheduled additional public hearings as part of the budget-warning process.

Votes at a glance: The council approved the dryer-removal proposal by voice vote and directed staff to seek alternative funding paths; the council voted 4–1 to ask the city manager to present options to reduce the proposed budget by $409,400; the council approved the consent agenda earlier in the meeting by voice vote and later entered an executive session regarding the city manager’s contract. Specific roll-call vote totals were not recorded in the public voice votes.

Ending: Councilors emphasized that the dryer remains part of long-term planning for the plant and that removing it now preserves the ability to complete essential treatment upgrades while staff pursues outside funding and a future bond vote for thermal drying.