Op-Ed: Growth opportunities deserve a holistic review
October 10, 2025 | By Elizabeth BrownWe are an aspirational community.
No one would debate that Waterbury has a lot of heart with an inclusive vision. When developing and adhering to a long-term plan, however, constraints must factor into decisions, priorities and focus. What we can afford is a constraint. What we can invest in from an infrastructure perspective is a constraint. How many children can we add to our schools is a constraint. Environmental impacts are a constraint. Town safety is a constraint. Geography is a constraint. Water and wastewater are constraints.
We need a holistic and unbiased assessment of impacts. Our recent focus on quickly and substantially increasing housing stock is one example where we seem to be lacking the necessary analytical rigor to be sustainable and to avoid unintended consequences. Isn’t a role of our local government to make sure the necessary checks and balances are in place?
For our citizens to consider:
Growth should occur with “prudence”
The updated Waterbury Municipal Plan is not yet complete. Given that, I reference the 2018 plan.
“Growth in Waterbury’s business, industry, governmental, and residential communities should occur with prudence and at a rate that is reasonably accommodated by existing and planned services and facilities. Growth should not occur at the expense of the natural environment or Waterbury’s historic and cultural resources. Waterbury should continue to promote and support growth in appropriate locations that respects the community’s historic and scenic character, the unique charm, and the natural resources.”
This plan does prioritize “continued availability of housing” with an emphasis on considering impacts to natural resources, prioritizing restoration, and acknowledges that need to consider impacts to traffic and services.
What is the role of local government in housing?
Historically, our local government has provided housing and development guidance via our Design Review Board as businesses and developers proposed projects to meet demand and opportunity.
More recently, with the implementation of the 1% local option tax, we have carved out a majority of that revenue to support housing as directed by our Select Board. The most recent project has us acting as an intermediary, buying and selling land, and selecting a developer. As our town manager stated, “Towns are not often in a position where they directly engage with housing developers, particularly on projects of this size.” Have we overstepped? Are we informed, experienced, and ready for these roles we continue to expand into? Are we losing sight of the core duties our local government should be performing?
Are we evaluating unbiasedly and comprehensively?
Government provides the necessary oversight and rules to support the comprehensive assessment of impacts to make informed decisions, consistently and equitably. Financial analysis that shows aspirational tax revenue without adequate assessment of costs (one-time and ongoing) is misleading.
It is precisely the job of town government to require appropriate assessments – traffic and road, environmental, schools, public safety, public works, at a minimum. For Waterbury, it is just not feasible create four-lane roads to accommodate increasing traffic, for example, nor can our back dirt roads sustain significant increases as commuters and tourists try to find alternative routes. Are we clear on impacts to the Edward Farrar Utility District? How can we know with certainty that mitigation efforts in the flood zone will help and not hurt those in the Randall Street neighborhood? The assessments need to be holistic and additive, not just project-by-project because of the next item:
It's not just our growth, it’s our neighbors
We are at a crossroad, literally and figuratively. We are at the mercy (and benefit to be fair) of our surrounding neighborly communities. As neighboring communities expand, much of that traffic comes through Waterbury. The same can be said of our waterways. Think of nature when there are converging forces, many of which are beyond our control. So being downstream means just that. It’s not only our planned community growth that we need to plan for. It is theirs. And vice versa. We are not in this alone to increase housing stock.
Does the math add up?
Town Manager Tom Lietz estimates that the total cost will be $50 million for 90 units. That is over $500k per unit, which is consistent with projects across the state. With $600k in estimated real estate taxes, that is $6,700 per unit, or over $500 per month per unit. For comparison, a $500k mortgage is over $3,000 a month. Quick math shows that each unit would have to rent at over $4,000 to cover costs, and probably more with property maintenance, utilities, etc. Some of these units will be affordable, some workforce, some market rate. It seems to me that all would have to be subsidized.
Are we clear on large investments and when those investments need to be made?
There will be necessary big jumps in infrastructure and service investments, but at what point? We need to know when to execute those investments, as many have a long lead times.
For a time, our expenses (taxes) will jump to fund those investments unless offset with state funds (which are also our taxpayer dollars). With our local taxpayers already under strain, what is our capacity to pay more? We are being asked to fund the new high school tech center. We anticipate a bond ask in the near future to fund our local public schools. We anticipate needing a local police force again. We are told there is tax relief through growth of a larger tax base, but we have yet to see that in practice. So far, more is just that. More.
I am grateful for all who serve in a variety of capacities, as employees, and board and committee members. No doubt you are staying connected as the problems and opportunities you are leading and evaluating are interrelated. I urge you, and the members of our community, to make sure that we have done the necessary due diligence, analysis and research on initiatives related to our growth ambitions, whether it is housing, recreation, or other ways we hope to “grow” Waterbury. Once we have started, there is no going back, and there may be consequences we hadn’t hoped for.
I hear a lot of passion about our town chipping in to solve the state housing crisis. However, let’s ask the right questions first before it is too late. Let’s not be short-sighted in our long-term ambitions, pace accordingly and thoughtfully, with the appropriate analytical rigor, and truly capture “all costs,” including those that are not financial.
A simple question: How much, how soon?
Waterbury resident Elizabeth Brown is a former Harwood Unified Union School Board member.