A primary topic of concern was the ongoing legal dispute with the Woodlands Condo Trust regarding the removal of kayak racks located within the zone one protection area at the Hickory Hills well site. The board noted earlier complaints about violations, including parked vehicles and potential pesticide use, which necessitated a meeting with Woodlands representatives. Despite establishing these violations, the Woodlands’ refusal to remove the kayak racks prompted the involvement of legal counsel, leading to concerns about wasted resources.

Clarification was sought regarding whether the hydrogeologist hired by the Woodlands had justified keeping the racks. The hydrologist’s opinion was in favor, but a board member reminded everyone that during the last sanitary survey, the DEP noted the racks’ presence as a violation. The board emphasized DEP regulation compliance and expressed disappointment over the Woodlands’ failure to meet their commitments. If the kayak racks were not moved promptly, the board resolved to pursue legal action, potentially imposing financial repercussions on the Woodlands.

In parallel, the board discussed the Roland Acres water main replacement project, revealing that the actual costs incurred were lower than the estimated $600,000. By completing the work internally, the board managed to reduce costs to $250,000, allowing for potential future investments in equipment and staffing to streamline upcoming projects. The board recognized the importance of planning for infrastructure needs, especially concerning aging mains, and agreed to present a plans for potential expenses in future meetings.

The meeting also covered the draft community engagement survey aimed at gathering public feedback on water service aspects such as taste, odor, and pressure. The survey focused on three primary water sources: Keings, Hickory Hills, and Lancaster. Discussions highlighted the financing options linked to these sources, particularly a State Revolving Fund (SRF) application for combined project funding. The board explored the capabilities of each water source, with concerns about Keings’ water hardness potentially being unacceptable to residents. It was concluded that a combination of sources would better meet community needs and expectations.

Grant proposals for water infrastructure improvements were highlighted, including constructing a raw water transmission line and purchasing an excavator. The board expressed concerns over maintaining redundancy in their water supply and the risk of significant restrictions if a catastrophic failure occurred at the plant. To gather public feedback effectively, the board proposed using QR codes, postcard mailers, and a website and aimed to finalize the survey soon.

Further discussions involved the repercussions of failing to resolve compliance issues with the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). The board reviewed potential actions against ratepayers violating regulations and considered increased voter engagement strategies, such as exploring alternative voting methods. Funding topics included the SRF application for infrastructure improvements and the financial implications of ongoing compliance challenges. The board acknowledged the application process’s importance, given the last year’s availability for certain infrastructure funding opportunities.

A long-serving superintendent reflected on his 40-year tenure, highlighting the depth of knowledge and experience he brought to the district’s leadership. His insights into operational and administrative aspects were acknowledged, emphasizing the increasing paperwork and regulatory compliance requirements over the years.

Lastly, the board addressed water treatment costs, focusing on variables impacting the analysis. Concerns were raised over the presence of iron and manganese in the water supply, affecting filter efficiency and necessitating frequent backwashing. A participant requested a detailed breakdown of treatment costs, expressing skepticism over the provided estimates and highlighting significant disparities between different operational and maintenance options. Questions about SRF funding eligibility based on contamination levels were raised, as was the need for pilot testing water treatment solutions.