A point of discussion was the proposed changes to the district’s billing software. The board had previously expressed concerns over the lack of progress in the software implementation, prompting a follow-up meeting with the provider. It was revealed that the provider had addressed many concerns, leading the board to reconsider their initial decision to delay the software switch. The new software is planned for implementation by July 1st to align with the new budget cycle, with a focus on ensuring the billing program is ready by August. This is important for accurate billing by the October 1st deadline, given that meter readings occur in September.

The board clarified that the billing and accounting functions of the software were distinct, as the current system utilizes QuickBooks. Integration with the new billing software was deemed unfeasible, necessitating separate accounting processes. Despite earlier hesitations about the software’s readiness, there was a consensus to proceed, contingent on the software meeting their needs. Concerns were raised about potential inaccurate billing, citing experiences with other software transitions. The need for thorough testing and dry runs before the official rollout was emphasized to avoid complications.

Attention then shifted to the review of bids and authorization for purchasing materials needed for Meadow Lane. Five quotes were presented, with bids divided between pipe and additional materials like bends, tees, and hydrants. Not all suppliers could provide the required hydrant, leading the board to exclude hydrants from the bids and instead procure them from a reliable supplier. The lowest bid for plastic pipe was $15.18 per foot, cheaper than the $54 per foot for ductile iron pipe. This prompted a discussion on the merits and longevity of both materials, emphasizing testing the PVC pipe as a cost-effective alternative.

Concerns were voiced over the durability of plastic compared to ductile iron, particularly in external corrosion and material resilience under pressure. While ductile iron is known for its strength and higher burst pressure, PVC offers corrosion resistance and cost savings. The conversation underscored potential savings. A motion was sought to approve the purchase of the pipe from the lowest bidder, raising questions about the pricing differences between ductile iron and PVC. The inquiry highlighted the standardization of ductile iron in the industry compared to the newer PVC alternatives.

The board also discussed the history of the pipe on Northfield Road, noting no reported breaks or repairs on the PVC section since 1981, whereas issues had arisen with ductile iron pipes in the vicinity. A specific incident involving a valve associated with the ductile line breaking necessitated excavation and repair work. Participants noted the visible deterioration of the ductile iron pipe compared to the intact PVC, highlighting the advantages of plastic piping due to its smoother interior, which results in lower friction loss and better flow rates.

The meeting further examined the sale of water outside the district, which generates significant revenue. The cost to pump and treat water was reported at approximately $1,100 per million gallons, with the board selling water at a substantially higher rate, around $10,000 per million gallons. Since 2017, water sales have generated nearly half a million dollars, with recent projections estimating around $100,000 in annual revenue. It was clarified that these sales do not affect the district’s capacity or its Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) permits, as restrictions are linked to residential use rather than commercial sales.

Public perceptions of water use restrictions were addressed, particularly the frustration over perceived inconsistencies, as businesses seemed to operate outside the restrictions imposed on residents. A review of bylaws concerning non-essential outdoor water use was suggested to improve communication and transparency. The board acknowledged the role of social media in amplifying these concerns and discussed enhancing clarity around state regulations on the district’s website.

The session also tackled the implications of voters denying the appropriation of SRF funding for water system improvements. The potential involvement of an engineering firm to conduct necessary surveying work for the water main was discussed, emphasizing the critical groundwork for future developments. Concerns about water quality, particularly manganese and hardness issues, were highlighted, with debates on the necessity of a water line from Keings to Lancaster and the potential need for a treatment plant by 2029.

In light of these discussions, the board is considering the establishment of a large treatment plant in Lancaster, as it could be more efficient than multiple smaller plants. Regulatory clarity from the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (Mass DEP) is awaited to guide these decisions. The board noted the complexities in comparing their situation with other municipalities and the anticipated updates from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning new regulations, particularly for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).