As the Riverhead Town Board on Tuesday evening issued its finding that the Suffolk County Water Authority is not exempt from local review of its proposed 8.5-mile North Fork Pipeline, the Water Authority continued public hearings this week on its own analysis of whether it is exempt from review, setting the stage for a potential showdown in court.
Pictured Above, Left to Right: Water Authority Outside Counsel Richard Finkel, Deputy Chief Executive Officer for Operations Joe Pokorny and General Counsel John Milazzo at the Peconic hearing.
The pipeline would begin at an interconnection station on Whitebrook Drive in Flanders, continuing north up County Road 105 and under the Peconic River, Hubbard Avenue and the Main Road, before turning onto Northville Turnpike and then Sound Avenue, then east to the Southold town line. A pumping station near Iron Pier Road in Jamesport would provide the pressure necessary to move the water further east.
The Water Authority says this pipeline is critical to relieve the stress on its 60 wells in Southold Town, several of which are suffering from saltwater intrusion due to heavy pumping at times of peak demand. It also says 70 percent of the water used during the peak summer months is for lawn irrigation.
The Southold Town Board passed new irrigation restrictions this summer, which have not yet been fully implemented during times of peak water use.
In late 2024, the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation granted the Water Authority Lead Agency status to conduct its own environmental review of the project under the State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQRA), and while the Water Authority had named Southold Town an “involved” agency for the purpose of the review, it had not named Riverhead as an involved agency, despite the fact that the bulk of the pipeline would be constructed in Riverhead Town.
Riverhead responded this summer by beginning proceedings known as a “Monroe Balancing Test,” a nine-point test to determine whether the project should be exempt from review by local land use boards.
The nine points include the nature and scope of the project, the encroaching agency’s grant of authority, the kind of land use involved, the effect of local land use regulation on the project, alternative locations, the impact on local interests, alternative methods of providing the proposed improvement, the extent of the public interest to be served by the improvement and intergovernmental participation in the project development process.
After an Aug. 19 public hearing, the Riverhead Town Board on Tuesday issued a determination that the project “shall be required to comply with and shall not be immune from zoning and land use regulations of the Town of Riverhead.”
In Riverhead’s decision, the town resolved that the project would be massive in scope and have significant impact on property owned by Riverhead Town, that construction on Sound Avenue would have a significant impact on traffic, that the Town Board is aware of alternative options and that “there is no discernible benefit to Riverhead Town residents and property owners.”
The town also said in its decision that the Water Authority “has consistently objected to, resisted and frustrated the Town of Riverhead from reasonable and meaningful participation and dialogue in the planning and development process.”
“There would certainly be basis for litigation if they, after conducting their own self-serving analysis, they were to determine that they had the ability to evade Riverhead Town zoning and land use codes and regulations,” Riverhead Town Attorney Erik Howard told The Beacon last week, just before the town issued its determination. “We will expect SCWA to comply with the Town Board’s findings.”
Here’s The Text of Riverhead’s Monroe Determination
The Water Authority’s response? It held its own Monroe Balancing Test hearings, at three locations throughout the East End this week — the Water Authority’s office on County Road 31 in Westhampton, the Peconic Community Center and the Riverhead Free Library.
“The Suffolk County Water Authority is holding Monroe Balancing Test hearings in accordance with the law,” according to a statement provided to The Beacon by the Water Authority prior to the hearings. “This process determines whether projects are immune from local zoning, and SCWA is very confident in both our right to hold the hearings and in our immunity. The Town of Riverhead has tried to insert itself by holding its own hearing — just the latest attempt to take over the process and delay a project that will bring a safe, sustainable supply of high-quality water to the North Fork while protecting the fragile aquifer.”
“In Village of Munsey Park v. Manhasset-Lakeville Water District, the court affirmed that water suppliers are entitled to make Monroe determinations, and we remain committed to following the law and moving this project forward,” the Water Authority added.
At the hearings, the Water Authority’s outside counsel, Richard Finkel of the firm Bond Schoenen and King gave an overview of why the Water Authority believes it will prevail on the nine points in the balancing test.
He read off a six-page document detailing the Water Authority’s experience providing public water, on the basis of which he said the first item in the balancing test, the nature and scope of the entity, “weighs heavily in favor of the authority.”
He added that Riverhead had never before required an easement to lay public water infrastructure in its roads, and had also never required Monroe hearings before any project the Water Authority had done there in the past.
The Water Authority’s goal, to provide clean, safe drinking water, he said, proves the extent of public interest of the project.
“That’s often the most important factor to be considered, and this is indisputably for the benefit of the people,” he said, adding that the pipeline would allow the Water Authority to retire wells impacted by saltwater intrusion, allow the agriculture industry to pump more water for irrigation and provide adequate water pressure for firefighters to fight fires.
At the Peconic hearing, Water Authority Deputy Chief Executive Officer for Operations Joe Pokorny and General Counsel John Milazzo gave an overview of the agency’s response to concerns raised by the public at three scoping sessions held over the summer as the agency drafts its Environmental Impact Statement on the project, as required by SEQRA law.
A smattering of Southolders spoke at the Peconic hearing, including Southold Town Supervisor Al Krupski and Councilman Greg Doroski.
Mr. Krupski urged the Water Authority to wait until the results of a U.S. Geological Survey study of the North Fork’s groundwater is complete before deciding to go forward with the pipeline.
“It would be prudent to wait for their study before a decision is made on this matter,” he said.
“The reality is, there is always accelerated development with every utility,” he added. During construction, he said, traffic would likely be pushed to the only two other east-west thoroughfares on the North Fork.
“It’s quite busy now, with a lot of commuters every day. That needs to be considered,” he said, adding that there is a great deal more traffic on these roads than on the back roads of Manorville, where the Water Authority recently hooked up residents in Riverhead and Brookhaven towns whose wells had been contaminated with PFAS.
“Neither the New York Court of Appeals nor the New York State Statute specify which board or the host municipality makes the determination of governmental immunity,” he said. “We’ll see how this turns out.”
Mr. Pokorny said the Water Authority believes there was a misconception in the public that the project would be under construction for four years, due to its expected completion date of 2030. The project, he said, would be under construction for just one of those years, but the extra time was built in for permitting and environmental review.
Mr. Doroski focused in his comments, at hearings in both Peconic and Riverhead, on the extent to which the project is in the public interest, the eighth and, Mr. Finkel had said, most important of the nine balancing criteria.
“It’s not that a public interest was served, it’s weighing the extent of the public interest,” said Mr. Doroski. “It’s something that we, as a group of municipalities — Southampton, Riverhead and Southold — have a unique expertise in weighing the extent of this public interest. You folks are very good at delivering water. We, on a daily basis, weigh what the public interest is and what the public benefit is.”
He asked on what basis the Water Authority established the need for the project, pointing out that the agency itself had said that 70 percent of its peak water use, in the summer, is for lawn irrigation. Southold Town instated new irrigation rules this summer, which the Water Authority had supported, and he wondered “whether recent conservation efforts of the county and town will eliminate or reduce the public need.”
“I wonder whether the urgency created by the Suffolk County Water Authority in moving this project forward is artificially created,” he added. “It seemed there was a lot of activity 20 years ago, and then it was backed away from. There was a groundbreaking ceremony, that unfortunately none of us was invited to, which we learned about in the press. It seems like this could be an intentionally artificially created issue.”
“We in Southold really believe in local control, and are fighting for local control,” he said.
“It seems that this whole Monroe Balancing Test is like who’s minding the henhouse?” said Southold resident Elizabeth Brittman. “You guys are stating your case, but it seems like the municipalities involved should have their say, and make their case for the balancing test. I’m not really sure how that’s determined. I’m naive to these things. Southampton, Riverhead and Southold may be able to come up with a completely different outcome.”
John McAuliff of Riverhead made the trip to Peconic. He said he was “very aware of the long history of conflict between Riverhead and the Water Authority.”
“The premise, spoken or unspoken, is the development path of Southold, and potentially Riverhead — the assumption is that there is a pace of development that requires this water. That’s an assumption that really needs to be debated out. It really is a larger community question,” he said. “There’s a question of how much the problems need to be solved by redefining the way we approach water and use water, rather than bringing in more water, which allows us to avoid facing those big questions.”
At the hearing on Thursday evening at the Riverhead Free Library, Riverhead Town Board members Denise Merrifield and Ken Rothwell both questioned the Water Authority’s conclusions.
Ms. Merrifield said that, while other projects the Water Authority had constructed in Riverhead had benefited the residents of Riverhead, this one did not benefit them. She also identified “a long list of information not addressed in the draft environmental scoping document,” referring to the Environmental Assessment Form for the project released in advance of this summer’s scoping hearings.
Those issues included the impact of the project on traffic, the town’s police activities and the potential to “impact the Peconic River, bays and wetlands.”
“Without question, town roads would be impacted,” she said, adding that issues including the deterioration of town roads, traffic safety and staging areas are “all best addressed by the town through its road opening process,” which she said the Town Board had detailed in its resolution Tuesday.
“I am surprised and perplexed that the board of the Suffolk County Water Authority is not here and present tonight,” said Mr. Rothwell, who submitted and read from a letter signed by Riverhead Town Supervisor Tim Hubbard.
The letter said that, “without a formal review process by Riverhead’s various land development departments, the SCWA would essentially fill the sole authoritative role of applicant, project designer, reviewing entity, approval agency, construction contractor and as SEQRA Lead Agency…. Elimination of Riverhead’s participation in the process by Monroe or other agreement and land use review methods for a project primarily constructed within the municipality leaves the town exposed, with exception to it seeking a remedy through the courts.”
Jamesport resident Joan Cear urged the Water Authority to consider the negative impacts on Riverhead’s infrastructure and the businesses along Sound Avenue.
“This project has no benefit to Riverhead, and its benefit to the Town of Southold has yet to be proven,” she said. “You need to balance peoples’ need for water with more assertive measures to encourage conservation. This falls into the category of ‘if you build it they will come, and if you give them more water, they will use more water.”
Former Riverhead Councilwoman and Planning Board member Barbara Blass urged the Water Authority to work with the town.
“I don’t believe Riverhead residents or officials are seeking a hard stop to this process, nor do they want to stand down,” she said. “I’m confident there can be a meeting of the minds. Adversarial relationships ar draining and counterproductive. Reach an agreement now, in an MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) to resolve matters of mutual concern.”
Ms. Blass also submitted eight pages of comments detailing the case for why the Water Authority should not be immune from local zoning.
“Unlike the Lakeville Water District case, Riverhead had substantiated its reasons for conducting the Monroe test as the host community,” she said. “It is a foregone conclusion that, if you conduct the test, you will grant yourself total immunity from local land use review.”
Riverhead resident Mark Woolley, a former Congressional District Director and now a Democratic candidate for the Riverhead Town Board, urged the Water Authority representatives to understand that people here think the project is being “rammed through.”
“Step back and take a look at what the residents are saying,” he said. “The Water Authority has the ability to make that happen. You’ve shown that. Communication is always key to making something successful.”
The Water Authority will continue to accept written comments on the Monroe Balancing Test through its North Fork Pipeline webpage through 5 p.m. next Wednesday, Oct. 15. A link to comment is at the bottom of the page.
With regard to the environmental review under SEQRA, Mr. Milazzo said the final scoping document will be complete and posted on that webpage by the end of October. A Draft Environmental Impact Statement should be completed by the end of this year, he said, after which the Water Authority will hold three more public hearings, likely again in Westhampton, Peconic and Riverhead.
Keep Independent News on the East End
The Beacon is able to provide all of our content online free of charge thanks to support from our readers. Be a vital part of keeping our community informed!
Advertisement
