East Hampton WPCA and POCD Agree to Rebuild Sewer Map From Scratch

Water Pollution Control · Meeting of July 2, 2026

East Hampton WPCA and POCD steering committee agree to strip old sewer expansion maps and start fresh. The Water Pollution Control Authority held a special joint meeting July 2 with the POCD steering committee — one day before the plan's state deadline — to resolve a basic but contested question: what does the official sewer service area map actually show? Members of both bodies reached a working consensus to discard decades-old projected service zones, confirm only the parcels with pipes physically in the ground, add Hampton Woods as an already-served area, and rebuild the map from that baseline.

No formal votes were taken. WPCA Chair Jack Solomon and POCD steering committee member Juliet agreed that the WPCA's upcoming facilities plan, roughly a year away, will determine actual plant capacity and may prompt further map revisions. Town staff said the state would be notified July 3 that the POCD is not yet complete, with a public draft expected to reach formal Planning and Zoning review by September or October 2026.

Multiple public commenters, including residents of Middle Haddam and Cobalt, demanded that sewer expansion beyond the existing footprint be rejected outright, while at least one resident, Jacob Kravitz of 34 Walnut Street, argued that targeted expansion along Route 66 could support businesses and grow the grand list.

In the full story:

• Background and stakes
• The question before the body
• Who Was There
• Organizations And Documents Referenced
• The complete report — 2,629 words

Source: the Water Pollution Control meeting of July 2, 2026, reported from the official video recording and transcript.

The Full Article

Meeting Context and Purpose

Background and stakes

The Water Pollution Control Authority convened a special joint meeting with the town's Plan of Conservation and Development steering committee on the eve of the POCD's statutory submission deadline. Connecticut General Statute Chapter 124 requires East Hampton — and every Connecticut municipality — to produce a plan of conservation and development on a roughly ten-year cycle. The current cycle's plan was due to the state on July 3, 2026. A key required element is a future land use map that must identify areas served by existing sewerage systems, areas where sewer systems are planned, and areas where sewers are to be avoided. The POCD steering committee called the special meeting to align with the WPCA on what the baseline sewer service area map should show before the POCD draft is finalized.

The question before the body

The joint session was convened to answer a single operational question: what is the current, accurate, officially agreed-upon sewer service area map, and are there any areas beyond it that both bodies could agree to designate for potential future service in the POCD?

Public Comment: Transparency Concerns and Competing Visions for Development

Multiple residents used the public comment period to raise concerns about past practice and the direction of sewer planning.

Mike Perigolini, 16 Fern Lane, opened by questioning why a 2006 sewer area map had not been publicly available until he specifically asked for it. He challenged the legal basis for any proposed map changes, asking "under what state statute or town bylaw does this committee have the authority to change the utility maps?" and calling for a fresh start given recent controversies involving prior WPCA staff. He also identified discrepancies he said existed between draft maps that had circulated and the current East Hampton zoning map, particularly in residential zones R1 and R2.

Ian McKinney, 44 Longville Road, Little Haddam, praised board members for their volunteer service but made a pointed procedural request — one he said he was raising for the third time. He asked that meeting materials, including maps, be made available to the public at least 24 hours in advance of meetings. He noted that neither he nor, apparently, some board members had reviewed the maps before sitting down that evening. "How are you going to answer a question with any confidence when you haven't even had a chance to look at it yourselves?" [00:11:07]

A commenter at 4147 Culture Street Avenue (name not audible on the recording) reminded both bodies that what goes into the POCD is a legal document that can and will be cited by developers: "We've got to be very careful to cross our T's and dot our I's."

Douglas McEwen of Middle Haddam stated that neither the 2006 nor the 2017 future land use or sewer extension maps were ever voted on by the public, and that Chatham Health Department reports show no public health crisis in Middle Haddam — no well contamination and only a few repair permits since 2023.

Alana Cachoe, 26 Shipyard Road, Middle Haddam, offered a one-sentence statement: no new sewers that would result in dense development and congestion, noting that sewer expansion has been rejected by voters before.

Kevin Rogers, 8 Coughlin Road, called in to note that the POCD is advisory only, and that the nearly two-year effort to site a bio-waste facility in town demonstrated that advisory documents are not always followed. He asked that future town decision-makers take the POCD's guidance more seriously.

A caller who did not give a name or address said she had filed a FOIA request related to the 2016 POCD and was told no correspondence or data from that process existed — yet the current discussion appeared to reference decisions made in that cycle. She called for a moratorium on sewer expansion beyond its current footprint and said WPCA matters should be paused until "reliable sources" are working at town hall.

Jacob Kravitz, 34 Walnut Street, offered the only voice in public comment in favor of targeted expansion. Living near downtown, he argued that the water quality is poor and that sewer capacity near Route 66 could enable restaurants and businesses to fill empty commercial space, grow the grand list, and create community gathering places. "Why wouldn't we expand down the busiest road in town?" [00:19:51]

Rebecca Hodge, 20 Old Milton Road, Cobalt, said she had spent over an hour before the meeting trying to find the relevant maps on the town website, found maps but was told they were the wrong ones, and that one map she had been tracking placed much of Cobalt's residential area in an economic development zone. She described the geology of her neighborhood — ledge and rock, no open parcels, no room for new septic — and said bringing sewer to Cobalt makes no practical sense: "There's no open parcels for development."

What the Maps Actually Show: Untangling the Layers

This section consumed the core of the meeting's deliberation and generated the most technical exchange.

The POCD steering committee member identified as Juliet explained that two maps had been brought to the meeting. The left-hand map shows only where sewer pipes are physically in the ground — the true existing service area. The right-hand map overlays two additional colored zones: a blue-hatched area labeled "existing service areas" and a yellow-hatched area labeled "historical service area."

Dave, a WPCA member, explained that the blue zone is not where pipes exist but where the treatment plant was projected to have capacity to serve at some point in the past — a planning projection, not an approved commitment. The yellow zone traces back to the 2006 facilities plan, the last time the WPCA produced a comprehensive capacity and service area study.

"Those are just projections," Dave said. "It's not the law. It's not in stone." [00:47:40]

He added that Hampton Woods, which was in the 2016 POCD as a planned area, now has sewer infrastructure in the ground and should be shown as part of the current service area rather than a projected one. He also noted that between 2006 and today, some areas in the blue zone had come to fruition while others had not, and that the upcoming WPCA facilities plan — roughly a year out — would for the first time since 2006 establish what the plant's current and future capacity actually is, a figure complicated by nitrogen removal requirements that have since been added to the plant's operational obligations.

Jack Solomon, WPCA Chair, asked whether the WPCA staff member identified only as Jeremy or Carly (working under someone named Taiki) could produce an updated GIS map confirming the pipe network. Staff indicated that a map of existing pipes could be produced and overlaid against the current service area boundary to identify any gaps or errors.

The consensus reached: strip all historical and projected colored overlays from the existing maps, confirm the true pipe-in-the-ground service area, add Hampton Woods as already served, and build any future designations only from that confirmed baseline.

Statutory Authority: Who Decides What Goes on the Map

A recurring debate throughout the meeting concerned which body has legal authority to approve sewer extensions and where the POCD fits in that chain.

Juliet walked through the statutory process: under Connecticut law, any proposal to extend utilities triggers what she called an "A24 review," in which Planning and Zoning must first assess whether the extension is consistent with the POCD. Planning and Zoning issues a finding — consistent or not — but does not have final approval authority over the extension itself. That authority rests solely with the WPCA. If Planning and Zoning finds an extension inconsistent with the POCD and the WPCA still wishes to approve it, the WPCA must do so by supermajority.

"WPCA is the only entity that can expand," Juliet said. "It is your WPCA and WPCA alone that votes on whether or not that extension takes place." [00:32:16]

Solomon proposed that once a baseline map is prepared, the WPCA should send it to Planning and Zoning for their agreement. Juliet and the POCD process representative pushed back on the framing: Planning and Zoning does not vote to "buy in" to a WPCA map as a separate step. Rather, the POCD steering committee — which includes Planning and Zoning members — is the body that incorporates the map into the POCD draft, which Planning and Zoning then formally adopts through a public hearing process.

The distinction mattered because Solomon appeared to want a direct, bilateral confirmation from Planning and Zoning before the map moves forward, while the POCD representatives maintained that the process itself — including public comment periods, a 30-day public posting, a Council of Governments review, and a formal Planning and Zoning public hearing — already provides that check.

30 Long Crossing: A Live Dispute

One area generated pointed disagreement: 30 Long Crossing, a commercial property near Hampton Woods.

Juliet argued that 30 Long Crossing should probably be included in the POCD's sewer area map because an A24 review had already been completed and the WPCA had voted to approve an extension of sewer to that area — meaning it is, in effect, already part of the service area even though a developer's agreement was never finalized and construction never occurred. She said the DEP would likely require any future developer to connect to existing sewer rather than install a package treatment plant.

Karen Wanat, WPCA member, stated plainly that she would not support adding 30 Long Crossing without a specific development plan from the property owner, saying the owner had told her he wanted sewer first and would decide later what to build. "I do not want to support the sewer. Period, end of story," she said. [01:01:32]

Ted Hintz, Jr., WPCA member, said the matter of whether Long Crossing goes into the plan can be debated later, and that — given the housing bill's requirements — the WPCA may have limited ability to refuse a connection if a developer applies.

The exchange became heated at points, with board members speaking across each other and one commenter in the room audibly objecting to the tone. Solomon called the meeting back to order.

A separate commenter, identified as Dave, clarified the record on the A24 vote: the WPCA had approved the engineering drawings for a sewer extension project in that area but had never reached a final agreement with the developer on a permit. The extension was approved as a concept but never executed.

Process Going Forward

Juliet outlined the remaining POCD process: the steering committee will prepare a revised draft incorporating the updated sewer map; the draft will be provided to Town Council, which may hold a public meeting and submit comments to Planning and Zoning; the draft will then be posted publicly for 30 days for review, including by the Council of Governments; and a formal public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Commission will follow, at which further public comment will be accepted.

She said the plan was due to the state on July 3, 2026, and that staff would notify the state the following day that the plan was not yet complete, with an expected completion by end of year. A public draft is anticipated to reach the formal Planning and Zoning stage by September or October 2026.

"The POCD hasn't made any decisions on anything. Period," Juliet said. [01:08:38]

Members of both bodies agreed that the map being discussed is a starting point only, that nothing in it constitutes an approval of any extension, and that the public will have multiple formal opportunities to weigh in before the plan is adopted.

Board Members Present: - Jack Solomon — Chair, Water Pollution Control Authority - Karen Wanat — Member, Water Pollution Control Authority - Ted Hintz, Jr — Member, Water Pollution Control Authority - Additional WPCA members present based on discussion participation (names not fully distinguishable from transcript — see REVIEW section)

Staff in Attendance: - Staff member referred to only as "Dave" — WPCA member or staff, involved in map preparation and GIS coordination (role not fully clear from transcript) - Staff member referred to as "Juliet" — POCD steering committee, appears to be a Planning and Zoning staff member or consultant leading the POCD process

Public Commenters: - Mike Perigolini, 16 Fern Lane — resident; also identified himself as chairman of the PSA Committee - Ian McKinney, 44 Longville Road, Little Haddam — resident - Commenter at 4147 Culture Street Avenue — name not audible on recording - Douglas McEwen, Middle Haddam — resident - Alana Cachoe, 26 Shipyard Road, Middle Haddam — resident - Kevin Rogers, 8 Coughlin Road — resident, called in - Unnamed caller — called in while driving; no address given - Jacob Kravitz, 34 Walnut Street — resident - Rebecca Hodge, 20 Old Milton Road, Cobalt — resident; referenced prior WPCA proceedings involving herself and an individual named "Ms. Hodge" (same person)

Outside Parties Referenced in Discussion: - "Wayne" — property owner or developer associated with 30 Long Crossing; no surname given - "Jeremy," "Carly," "Taiki" — town GIS or mapping staff; surnames not given - "Tony" and "Ted Rossi" — referenced in connection with a past Middle Haddam development proposal; Tony's surname not given, Ted Rossi identified by full name by a commenter

• Connecticut General Statute Chapter 124 — the primary planning statute governing Plans of Conservation and Development; cited throughout as the authority requiring a future land use map with sewer area designations, and as the source of the "shall" language requiring certain map elements
• Connecticut General Statute Chapter 297A — cited as the authority for the state Plan of Conservation and Development and priority funding area designations, referenced in connection with the requirement that municipal POCDs be consistent with the state plan
• State Plan of Conservation and Development — the state-level document showing priority funding areas, priority conservation areas, and balanced growth areas; cited as the document municipal POCDs must be consistent with
• A24 review process — the Connecticut statutory review triggered when a utility extension is proposed; requires Planning and Zoning to assess POCD consistency before the extension can proceed to WPCA for a final vote
• 2006 East Hampton POCD — the last POCD that included a WPCA facilities plan and sewer service area map; the yellow-hatched "historical service area" on the maps under discussion traces to this document
• 2016 East Hampton POCD — the subsequent plan; noted to have omitted some expansion areas that appeared in the 2006 plan, including areas north of the lake near Mott Hill
• Chatham Health District reports — cited by Douglas McEwen as showing no public health crisis in Middle Haddam, with only repair permits issued since 2023
• WPCA facilities plan (forthcoming) — a comprehensive capacity and engineering study last conducted in 2006; the upcoming version, expected to take roughly a year, will establish current plant capacity including impacts of nitrogen removal requirements
• Council of Governments — required to review the POCD draft during the 30-day public posting period before formal adoption
• DEP (Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection) — cited in discussion of what would happen if WPCA refused a sewer connection request: the DEP could require a developer to connect to existing sewer rather than install a package treatment plant
• Housing bill (state) — referenced in connection with middle housing requirements and fair housing obligations that the POCD must address; cited as the reason Long Crossing and similar commercial zones are likely to see housing regardless of local preference