A central focus of the meeting was the decision to purchase a used loader, manufactured in 2009, for $40,000. This purchase was deemed necessary to replace the district’s aging and unreliable backhoe equipment, specifically the older JCB model that was hampered by hydraulic issues. The loader’s larger bucket capacity and improved dumping reach are expected to enhance operational efficiency, particularly during water main breaks. One board member highlighted that the loader’s acquisition would reduce the district’s reliance on external engineers for water line projects, thereby saving on high engineering fees, which have previously amounted to $200,000 for single projects.

The meeting also delved deeply into a recent site visit to the Townsend water treatment facility. The facility features four granular activated carbon (GAC) filter towers and new bag filters, designed to extend the primary filters’ lifespan by capturing sediment. The operator estimated that media replacement costs would be around $200,000 every two years, suggesting that while the initial investment is substantial, the long-term maintenance costs are manageable. The board members expressed appreciation for the facility’s efficient design, though some noted that the building appeared smaller than expected. Discussions emphasized the importance of balancing chemical treatments, with a preference for ultraviolet (UV) treatment followed by reduced chlorine levels.

Financial considerations extended to water rates, with comparisons made between Lunenburg’s rates and those of neighboring towns. While Lunenburg’s rates may be higher, it was noted that many nearby towns are also considering increases, posing challenges in maintaining competitive rates. The recent investments in infrastructure by Townsend, known for historically lower rates, raised questions about their ability to sustain those rates.

The board discussed hiring a surveying service from Haley Ward to establish a 400-foot radius around the well at Hickory Hills, with a quote of $1,850 for this service. The proposal included using permanent markers, such as three-foot steel pins, over temporary stakes. The board unanimously supported the proposal, recognizing the importance of defining the well’s area for district planning and potential land claims.

Billing structure updates through Invoice Cloud were also addressed. Delays with credit card companies have pushed the implementation timeline from January 1st to the end of January, necessitating changes mid-billing cycle. The board emphasized the need to inform the public about these changes through social media and the website, stressing transparency and communication.

Further discussions revolved around the introduction of a bag filter system to assist in removing physical particles, such as sand, that could clog the treatment system. Though not designed to handle PFAS contaminants directly, the bag filter was seen as a preventative measure to extend the lifespan of existing treatment filters. The financial implications of the system were debated, with a clear distinction made that cost savings were secondary to effectively addressing water quality issues. Concerns were raised about whether the current engineering team had adequately explored this option, leading to discussions about the adequacy of the treatment plant’s design.

Additional topics included technical communication needs, particularly regarding radio equipment for operational purposes. Bureaucratic delays and complex bidding processes have stalled progress, leading to considerations of collaboration with local fire and police departments to streamline installation costs. Frustration was expressed over the slow pace of decision-making, with procurement laws cited as a contributing factor.