The pilot study, intended to evaluate the interaction of different water sources and their effects on the system, was a focal point of the meeting. The board’s need for the study was underscored by ongoing complaints about water quality, such as hardness affecting car washing and showerheads. A commissioner highlighted the importance of understanding the chemical interactions, stating, “I think we need to know that,” pointing towards issues like calcium buildup when different water sources are mixed. This sentiment was echoed by others who stressed the necessity of data to guide future decisions and address public concerns.

However, the financial implications of the pilot study raised concerns. The proposed study’s cost was nearly $90,000, which some argued was essential to avoid larger expenses in the future. There was discussion of calling a special meeting to secure the funding, with one commissioner confident the proposal would pass. The urgency of moving forward with the study to gauge public support and secure necessary funds was apparent, as the board sought to avoid further delays and potential water management challenges.

Despite the consensus on the need for data, there was a divergence of opinions on whether to proceed immediately or wait for additional guidance from the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). Some members expressed skepticism about delaying the study, while others advocated for a brief pause to gather further information. Public comments added another layer to the discussion, with residents raising questions about funding availability and the implications of blending water sources on different areas, such as Reservoir Road.

Technical aspects of the water treatment process were also dissected, with members acknowledging their lack of expertise in chemical treatment. The complexities of managing water hardness through blending strategies were noted, and concerns were raised about the potential for worsening conditions in certain areas. The necessity for thorough testing and understanding of the impacts of blending different water sources was emphasized.

Beyond the pilot study, the board addressed other matters, including compliance with state regulations. A longstanding issue involved the relocation of a kayak rack in a protected area, as stipulated by the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection. Despite ongoing negotiations and the board’s attempts to resolve the matter amicably, no definitive plan had been established by the kayak rack owners, leading to frustration among board members.

The condition of the Water Department’s machinery, particularly an aging JCB excavator, was also a topic of concern. Members debated whether to invest in new equipment or continue using existing machinery that had been maintained with temporary fixes. While some advocated for upgrading to enhance functionality, others preferred a more conservative approach regarding expenditures. The idea of developing a capital improvement plan to outline financial strategies for equipment purchases was discussed, with an emphasis on ensuring any significant investments align with the department’s broader financial strategy.

Environmental concerns were raised during public comments, with one resident noting the presence of standing water near Hickory Hills and historical issues related to a former dump site. The potential for leachate seeping into the lake was highlighted, prompting the board to acknowledge the concern but refrain from offering immediate solutions.