FARMINGTON – Selectmen were pleased to learn Tuesday that the town’s wastewater treatment plant was not in violation of state-mandated phosphorous levels as they previously thought.
In a letter dated Nov. 1 to Town Manager Richard Davis, Andrew Fisk, director of the state Bureau of Land and Water Quality, apologized to him and to Wastewater Superintendent Steve Moore for a “mix-up at our end.”
An inspector from the Department of Environmental Protection mistakenly told Moore that he was not in compliance, although a study to determine appropriate phosphorous limits for the plant that dumps treated water into the Sandy River had never been completed.
High water levels in the summer of 2003 prevented sampling the river’s water but a new water quality study had never been scheduled nor conducted.
“The Department apologizes for this oversight, the misrepresentation of license compliance and any inconvenience or difficulties that this may have caused (the town) or any of its officials, specifically Steve Moore,” wrote Fisk.
Meanwhile, Moore said Friday he’d spent almost $9,500 for chemicals to meet the department’s criteria – money which wasn’t in the sewer department’s budget. “We’re out of the hot tub on this one,” he said.
“I’m relieved because I thought we were looking at being fined,” Town Manager Richard Davis said Tuesday.
Selectmen also approved most changes to the town’s comprehensive plan – all but the formation of an open-space preservation district, which would replace the town’s current conservation district.
The approved changes to the plan, prepared in more than a year’s work by the Comprehensive Plan Implementation Committee, were mostly minor wording – using “maintain” rather than “establish,” for example – and elicited no discussion.
However proposed changes to the definition of conservation districts, which under the new plan would be called open space preservation districts, did present questions for selectmen.
In presenting the plan to selectmen, Ed David, chairman of the plan committee, told them committee members are still working on details of the newly defined district; it’s designed to encourage people with more than five acres to keep it open rather than subdivide it. Using various state-subsidized programs, landowners could potentially save up to 95 percent of their property taxes, although this would not include the value of structures on the land.
The cost in terms of lost tax revenue was not clear. Committee member Tom Eastler said he wanted to clarify that before submitting the proposal.
“This is an idea that’s a long time in coming,” he said. He added that he did not want the town to be giving away tax dollars if state subsidies did not meet proposed reductions.
The committee will meet again Tuesday. It expects to have the new district’s definition and other details worked out well before the town’s annual meeting in March.
Comments are no longer available on this story