CONNOQUENESSING TWP — Many township residents directly affected by plans for a $22.5 million wastewater treatment plant and accompanying sewer voiced their concerns Wednesday during a board of supervisors meeting.

The state Department of Environmental Protection informed the board that the township either needs to put in a public sewage system, or the DEP would. Facing this ultimatum, the township put together a plan to create and connect East Connoquenessing and West Connoquenessing sewage systems over five years.

With tens of thousands of feet of linear pipe, 500 to 1,000 manholes and five pump stations, the sewage project was bound to encroach on someone's property.

Each citizen was given three minutes to voice their concerns or support for the sewage project at a Wednesday meeting.

Resident Bill Long said he is against the plan in its current form, and added that he believed the sewage project would “make Connoquenessing less rural ... lead to higher taxes and destroy the roads with the massive growth.” He asked the board of supervisors: “Why not build a smaller system and tie it into Butler's sewage system? Because $22 million is a lot of money.”

Another resident, Laura Mason, said she opposed the sewage project. Her comments both appealed to the emotions of those in attendance and to the economic reality facing township residents.

“My dream was to work hard, have a peaceful life and enjoy privacy. My nightmare is when someone has the authority to come and take away land that I own with zero compensation,” Mason said. “They're saying it will cost $3,800 to connect your house, but what about decommissioning your current septic system and the cost of excavation? This will cost an estimated $15,000 per household.”

Christine Klink also opposed the sewage project, and she focused on the impact to her privacy, saying it “will destroy over 100 trees and lower our property value because of the sewage gas.”

But board members responded that the sewage project is needed to comply with DEP regulations.

Solicitor Andrew Menchyk noted, “The DEP would require this or the DEP would come in and do it themselves.”

Board member Ricky Kradel responded to a resident's question regarding the reduction of the project's scope.

“If we want to spend more money to have engineers look at this again, would you want that?” asked Kradel. The crowd responded, “yes.”

And board member Edward Rupert responded to questions about the necessity of the project not being just on Route 68, but also in residential areas. “When we had work crews digging ditches, sewage was pouring into them,” he said. “Due to the nature of the soil being mainly clay, the conventional system we have should have never been approved.”

While the sewage project is mandated by the DEP, most residents at the meeting said they were opposed to it and called on the board of supervisors to go back to the drawing board to come up with a cheaper, and less invasive, plan.