Public raises alarm over CUGA inlet dredging; committee to seek extended comment period and a public information session

A member of the public told the Tompkins County Planning, Energy and Environmental Quality Committee April 2 that New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) officials posted a notice for a CUGA inlet dredging project, issued a negative declaration and opened a short public comment window — and that the county should press DEC for a public information meeting and a longer comment period.

"Any comments after that are pretty much performative," said Brian Eden, who told the committee he learned of the environmental notice posting only shortly before the meeting and that the ENB listed a comment deadline he characterized as too short. Eden described the project’s proposed handling of sediment: DEC posted that sediment would be dewatered in a Southwest Park facility with an 80,000 (cubic‑yard) capacity and that the dredge plan would remove about 26,000 cubic yards from the inlet, raising questions about where dried material would be hauled and how many truck trips that would require.

Committee members asked staff to collect the DEC contact information and documents and requested the commenter email materials to staff for distribution. Later in the meeting committee leadership said a watershed steward had contacted the regional DEC office and was told the posting will be updated and the comment date extended; committee members agreed to ask DEC both for a longer comment period and for a public information session so residents can learn project details before the comment deadline.

The Water Resources Council (WRC) chair Cynthia Brock reported that the WRC has been engaged in lake and watershed issues, including producing a two‑page fact sheet that summarizes the DEC CUGA Lake TMDL (Total Maximum Daily Load) phosphorus guidance and recommended best management practices for municipalities, farmers and residents. During the WRC discussion, members emphasized the long residence time of water in CUGA Lake — which means changes to phosphorus inputs can take years to appear in monitoring data — and noted that the TMDL framework gives regulators permit tools for point sources but that most phosphorus in the watershed comes from non‑point sources such as agricultural runoff.

County staff and the committee agreed to follow up: the WRC may place the project on its April 20 agenda for technical review, and committee leadership said they would send a letter to the DEC regional office requesting an extension of the comment period and a public information meeting so local stakeholders can review and comment on the project plan.

The committee’s action is limited to requesting more public engagement and does not change DEC’s environmental determination. Committee members encouraged local stakeholders, including the watershed network, to monitor the DEC posting and to participate in upcoming WRC review and committee follow‑up.