Torrington City Council

7/15/2025

Present:  Elinor Carbone, Stephen Ivain, Molly Spino, Anne Ruwet, David Oliver (Zoom), and Drake Waldron (Zoom).

Absent: Paul Cavagnero

There was emphatic opposition to Item 8 on the agenda, which allows the Town of Litchfield to continue utilizing Torrington’s wastewater treatment system. Multiple residents lambasted the item during the first portion of public comment.

Michael Banzurik blasted not only the “embarassing” agreement, but also what he cited as a lack of transparency with the public on the matter.

“This has not been brought up to the public for many years for discussion,” Banzurik said. “The way the IMA is written is disadvantageous to we the people of Torrington that own our system. Especially in the IMA (intermunicipal agreement), if any of you have read it, there’s a word in there in regards to a shared system. It's not a shared system. It is owned by us solely. It is rented, it is leased, it is contracted to another municipality. Nothing is shared.”

Part of the frustration was the disparity in sewer bills between the two towns, and what Litchfield ultimately is contributing. WPCA Administrator Ed Tousey said Litchfield will contribute to capital improvement costs for the treatment plant and affected collection areas.

Public Works director Ray Drew noted that Litchfield’s annual flow is roughly 8 million gallons, compared to 1.7 billion for Torrington. The new agreement also reduces allocated daily capacity from 150,000 to 40,000 per day, something Drew said should allow for future growth in Torrington.

The idea of charging Litchfield more was also broached for later discussion. Ultimately, Carbone defended the deal.

“This is not new. We have been doing this for 40 years,” Carbone said. “It's just an updated agreement that needed to be executed. To the point of the way this contract or this IMA was negotiated, I know that we had a number of executive sessions with members of the council. They may go back two years, but much of this language in here came from the council members in that executive session …

“I know that this language was very important to Councilman Cavagnero that in no event shall the proportionate share of the ONM (operations and maintenance) be less than what our residents are paying.”

The measure ended up passing unanimously, which led to more criticism during the second round of public comment.

“It's embarrassing that after what I dissertated in the beginning, you did not table this to another meeting, or even a public hearing,” Banzurik said.

8/4/2025

Present: Elinor Carbone, Stephen Ivain, Molly Spino, Anne Ruwet, Paul Cavagnero, David Oliver, and Drake Waldron.

The meeting featured a flurry of changes to ordinances. The first was merging the Economic Development Commission and the Arts and Culture Commission into one board.

“The formulation of the cultural district and the cultural district committee reality did supplant a lot of the duties and responsibilities that the Arts and Culture Commission was charged with,” Director of Economic Development William Wallach said.

The council later voted to repeal the Arts and Culture Commission as a result of the ordinance change.

There also was an update to the proposed parking fine structure for the first time since 2005.

“Our fines have remained consistent for the past 20 years,” police chief Bill Baldwin said. “And as we spoke with other municipalities, we're very low, we're not in line with other municipalities and what their fine structures are.

“The fine increases that are being proposed in this ordinance are not significant, but they are meant to deter people from committing these violations and they're meant to enhance our public safety so that people don't get hurt.”

Later in the meeting, councilors, Cavagnero in particular, lambasted a proposed right-of-way swap.  A motion was authorized allowing Carbone to release the city’s ownership of an existing right-of-way leading to Besse Park, and in exchange the town will receive a new right-of-way on adjacent parcels.

The new right of way would move up Lovers Lane and run along the boundary between the city-owned land and the parcels held by the developer. The previous right-of-way cut directly across the developer-held portion of the parcel.

While the change is procedural and “not even a land swap”, Carbone said, the frustration stemmed more from what is being built.

The parcel will soon be hosting a state-approved solar farm on once-open farmland near Highland Avenue. The board has opposed the project from the start, however the Connecticut Siting Council, a state body, has the ability to override local zoning for the siting of local projects.

“This is another grotesque example of loss of local control over our city by the state,” Cavagnero said. “We have so little say over this that it is an abomination of the whole idea of local control. …

“The city of Torrington – and other cities, it's not just Torrington – none of us apparently have control over this state siting council. This is a situation that cannot go unchallenged.”