May 5, 2026
To the Members of the Association,
Members are entitled to a clear account of the Board of Governors’ April 29 authorization of Notices to Proceed for the Shared sewer contractors. A letter circulated to the membership Monday evening has questioned that authorization. The four Governors who cast the vote should not have to defend in public a decision they made in a public meeting on a complete record. As President, I will. The record on which they acted, the input they weighed, and the path the recommendation followed are documented and unobscured. Members are entitled to that account. The four Governors who voted are entitled to a public defense of the work they did.
The State has issued a written eligibility determination. On April 24, 2026 — five days before the letter circulated to the membership — Carlos Esguerra, Supervising Environmental Engineer at Connecticut DEEP, issued an Eligibility Determination Memorandum, copied to the Office of the State Treasurer (Kimberly Masson) and CWF-Financial staff. The memorandum identifies CWF-eligible construction costs across the four project contracts (CWF 720-C Shared, 644-C OCBCA, 645-C OLSBA, 655-C MBA), confirms the 25% Small Community grant subsidy, and confirms the State’s one-time supplemental $15M principal forgiveness for the Shared piece. The memorandum states, in its own words: “The DEEP authorized the Associations to proceed into construction on January 31, 2026, to address the documented community pollution problem and in response to the Consent Order.” This document — signed by a named DEEP engineer, on State letterhead, in the project’s official file — is the written documentation the recent letter claims does not exist.
The State’s commitment is documented. On March 26, 2026, Connecticut DEEP issued DEEP-approved drafts of two relevant Clean Water Fund (CWF) amendments — CWF 720-D Amendment 6 for the Shared work and CWF 645-D Amendment 8 for the OLSBA Internal work. A “DEEP-approved draft” is the State’s binding working position on the financial terms; what remains is execution, not renegotiation. DEEP has been reviewing the largely completed and submitted construction applications CWF 720-C and CWF 645-C since February. The outstanding items were administrative — signatures, a certified copy of the January 31, 2026 bond resolution vote, and applicant contact information — and the April meetings placed those items on the record. DEEP also issued an Approval of Project Planning Activity on February 18, 2026. On April 30, 2026, DEEP acknowledged receipt of the completed CWF 720-C construction application. On May 5, 2026, DEEP acknowledged receipt of OLSBA’s completed CWF 645-C construction application.
The funding pipeline is operational. OLSBA has been actively drawing reimbursements against CWF 645-D into 2026 — Requests 32, 33, and 34 are signed, submitted, and processed. Amendments are executed. The construction-funding applications (CWF 720-C and CWF 645-C) are in final review by CT DEEP and CT Treasury, with approval expected in mid-June and funds available by mid-summer. That timing fits the construction billing cycle.
The Association is bound by a 2018 Consent Order. OLSBA, OCBCA, and Miami Beach Association are bound by the 2018 Unified Consent Order with Connecticut DEEP to connect to a regional sewer system. The original deadline expired in 2018. Continued delay does not protect the Association; it increases its exposure. We have lived that exact pattern for fifteen years. Each delay raises the cost. The higher cost is then cited as an argument against the project. The Board declines to repeat the pattern.
The financial framework is in place. The 2026 Supplemental Bond Resolution authorizes $22.7M in total project financing — OLSBA’s 21% share of the Shared work plus the full OLSBA Internal scope (sewers, stormwater, and road), with the sewer system capped at $18.7M. The State’s contribution is documented, not speculative. At the April 21, 2026 DEEP project meeting, DEEP and Fuss & O’Neill each presented the funding structure for the $26.5M Shared Project: $6.5M (25%) in CWF grant funds, $15M (57%) in EPA/CWF loan forgiveness, and $1.6M (6%) in CWF interest subsidy — $23.1M, or 87% of cost, in State support. That structure appears in writing in the Fuss & O’Neill Old Lyme Projects — Construction Phase document of April 21, 2026, page 11, and derives from DEEP’s March 26, 2026 amendment approvals and CWF Table 4 statements. DEEP indicated final construction-application approval could be reasonably expected by mid-June.
The State’s representations at the April 21 meeting were substantive. I attended the April 21 DEEP meeting in person. The State official’s procedural caveat — that no individual DEEP staff statement is itself binding because Connecticut’s regulatory compliance process must run its course — accompanied a substantive endorsement: based on the years the State has worked this project, DEEP is exceedingly confident the application will be approved and funds will be available in about 45 days, with only administrative items remaining and in process. Reading the procedural caveat as decisive while reading the substantive endorsement as ambiguous inverts the actual weight the State placed on each. The substance of what DEEP and Fuss & O’Neill presented at that meeting in no way placed the funding in doubt. The figures on the page on April 21 are the figures.
The contractors are ready. Baltazar Construction’s bonds and insurance certificates were delivered to OLSBA on February 13, 2026. The design is stamped and signed. The Construction Phase document was issued April 21. The Updated Certificate of Bond Resolution was filed April 22.
The questions raised in Items C, D, E, and G are answered in the project record. Contractors are bonded and insured. Supplier price changes flow through standard, state-defined contracts and change-order procedures that also require DEEP approval above certain limits, not by reopening CWF eligibility. Reimbursements pass from CT DEEP/Treasury to OCBCA (the Shared Project’s fiscal agent) to the contractors on documented invoice cycles, with invoices submitted by the second of any month paid that month. The April 21 cost figures reflect the full Shared Project scope, including the Route 156 work. None of these questions is novel.
The Board’s authority derives from the membership. The OLSBA Board of Governors (BOG), President, Vice President, Treasurer, and Secretary are elected directly by the membership at the annual spring meeting. The Charter defines the Vice President as the appropriate successor to the President, so the line of authority back to the membership remains unbroken. The six elected Governors carry that mandate forward. The WPCA, while serving the Association, is not directly elected: its Chairman is selected by his committee’s seven members, each appointed by the Board of Governors. The Board carries the membership’s mandate – a mandate expressed in three separate votes to complete this project. When the Board acts on a recommendation that has cleared review by the engineers, counsel, the State (DEEP & Treasury), it acts with the membership’s authority intact.
The process that produced the April 29 vote was complete. The recommendation to advance the Notices to Proceed for the Shared project gathered documented input from CT DEEP, CT Treasury, OLSBA WPCA, Fuss & O’Neill, Bond Counsel (Danielle Braun), and Association Counsel (Norbert Church). No party with standing on this project was excluded from its preparation. The proper venue for any officer or member to challenge a recommendation of this scope was inside the process that produced it. Both the ninety-day window between the January 31 Notices of Award and the April 29 vote, and the meeting itself, were open to that purpose. The Board voted 4–0 in favor of proceeding, as documented in the draft meeting minutes. Two BOG members were absent. The four voting members made time to attend a meeting that ran less than thirty minutes. I sign the documents that vote authorized, and I stand behind the four Governors who cast it.
A call has been made for further “thoughtful public discussions & deliberations.” Ninety days have passed since the Notices of Award were issued on January 31, 2026. Throughout those ninety days the WPCA, the Board, the Officers, Fuss & O’Neill, CT DEEP, CT Treasury, and counsel have deliberated, met, voted, drafted, and signed. Deliberation has happened. The vote on April 29 was not premature action. It was overdue authorization.
After fifteen years of planning, contracting, design, redesign, bidding, and financing, this project is moving from paper to ground. The Board acted on a complete record, on the schedule that DEEP and the consent order require, and within the funding constraints the Association has approved. The four Governors who voted have honored the repeated, expressed will of the membership and done the Association proud. I will keep the membership informed at every step.
Respectfully,
John Cunningham
President
Old Lyme Shores Beach Association