In the meeting, water quality took center stage as the commission grappled with the problem of the randomly changing color of the water coming from the treatment plant. The commissioners considered additional data gathering and the option of adding chemicals to manage the issue. Blending water from different wells was also debated as a potential solution to stabilize color levels. The commission’s concern about the aesthetic aspect of the water quality underlined their commitment to maintaining high standards for the town’s water supply.

Turning to the application process for sewer connections, representatives from Pine Village condominiums voiced their challenges with the required documentation. The standard application process, designed for individual connections, proved to be less straightforward for trusts or associations such as condominiums. Trustees emphasized the need for a simplified process that could accommodate multiple units under a single trust. The discussion brought to light the necessity for individual names on documents for legal purposes and the commission’s willingness to contemplate a revision that would streamline the process for such entities. Concerns about the language related to trustees’ and individual owners’ responsibilities for damages and restrictions on plumbing fixtures were also highlighted.

Moreover, the commission debated the financial implications of sewer and water line requirements for local businesses and residents. A unique sewer situation at a specific address led to the commission considering accepting a doing-business-as (DBA) for the signature while still requiring the owner’s name and address on each application. The possibility of waiving tap fees for an 8-inch water loop requirement for a construction project was discussed, raising questions about setting precedents and the financial impact on the town. The need for a water loop for an addition to a furniture warehouse and the fire department’s role in determining water line requirements due to fire flow limitations were also debated.

Another subject of discussion was firefighting capabilities for a local building. Commission members discussed installing a dedicated 8-inch water main and hydrants, along with concerns about waiving the $50,000 fee for a water main connection. The limitations of the existing 6-inch water main were acknowledged, as was the importance of safety and avoiding future problems by ensuring the right design for firefighting needs.

The commission also addressed the relocation of hydrants and sewer connections for a local business, considering a $65,000 connection fee and the option of a privately funded sewer line. The distinction between publicly and privately funded sewer projects was discussed, and a decision was made to move forward with a permit application for the sewer connection.

Updates from the assistant superintendent included ongoing sprinkler tests, a recent sewer service leak repair, generator start-up at two wastewater stations, wet well rehab work, and filter maintenance at the plant. The potential for short staffing towards the end of the fiscal year was mentioned, and discussions about a postcard regarding TTHM levels and public outreach meetings took place.

Furthermore, the Elm Street water and sewer project, which had been pulled from the Springtown meeting warrant, was discussed with the intention to finalize the design by the year’s end to use grant funding. The potential expansion of the project to include more properties was also considered.

Finally, the bypass pumping plan for C Street Phase Two was settled with the decision that the contractor would handle the work. Disagreements over a peer review for EAS and the planning board’s decision were noted, as were updates on the treatment facility’s work related to manganese removal and the Norton Public Schools’ treatment facility system.