Thomaston board approves WPCA upgrade plan, forwards project to selectmen for town meeting

The board voted to approve the Water Pollution Control Authority (WPCA) project as presented and to forward it to the board of selectmen for action at the next town meeting.

The presentation to the board laid out a multi-year schedule: engineering in fiscal 2025–26 (the packet cited roughly $138,000 for engineering work), equipment procurement and construction in 2026–27, and completion in 2027. The presentation said the ultraviolet (UV) disinfection system is the facility’s primary constraint on handling additional flow, and that other priorities include replacing final effluent pumps and valves, upgrading controls and adding on‑site spare parts storage so the plant can return to service faster after failures.

Officials described the project as serving two purposes: bring the plant to a more reliable operational baseline and, secondarily, enable additional hookups. The presenters estimated the full package could support roughly 500 new connections at an estimated capital cost near $6 million; the same materials in the packet estimated a potential increase in the town’s grand list value of about $2.6 million. A town representative also noted an approximate annual tax‑revenue figure of about $98,550 tied to that grand list growth.

Board members and presenters emphasized the project would not pay for itself quickly. One member warned that if the town delays, state regulators could impose enforcement actions that include daily fines and consent orders that bring expensive engineering and construction mandates. The presentation said some enforcement fines can be large (a presenter referenced fines ‘‘up to $25,000 a day’’) and consent orders can trigger multi‑million‑dollar remedies.

The packet also included operational measures intended to reduce ongoing costs: installing sludge‑thickening equipment to raise solids (the presenters described a goal around 6–6.5% solids), which the board was told would substantially reduce annual sludge‑hauling expenses (current hauling was described in the presentation as roughly $210,000 a year). The presenters said short‑term costs to test and repair collection mains were likely: TV camera work was budgeted at about $150,000 for roughly 18 miles of pipe, with initial repair/lining estimates described as roughly $500,000 contingent on what the inspection finds.

No USDA funding award had been received as of the meeting; staff said outreach to USDA and Connecticut Rural Water was ongoing. To limit immediate debt service impact, staff recommended borrowing via short‑term BANs spread over the earliest project years and converting completed portions to bonds once construction is finished.

After discussion the board approved a motion to move the project forward to the board of selectmen for placement on a town meeting warrant; board members indicated town meeting or a referendum would be scheduled in February, subject to required notice periods.

Public comment at the meeting included remarks from Tim Browski, who identified himself as a large local multifamily property owner and noted connection‑fee and development implications. Browski suggested the town should weigh the grand‑list and connection‑fee revenue (he cited a $4,000 connection fee per unit and said 500 connections could yield about $2 million in connection fees) when considering the project.

Next steps: the WPCA project will go to the board of selectmen for final placement on the town meeting warrant and for the board to decide whether to present the measure as a town meeting item or via referendum.