going to call this meeting of the finance committee to order and we'll take the role Kevin Steve here Trace is not here Sandy here bill here you don't have Paul Cody Zach here Bonnie and I am here think it's a seven so we're good all right let's do it all right uh so we have as I said Frank and John here from the uh water and soore department and um if we could go over their budgets uh you you already reviewed them uh earlier and um I'll share my screen uh the only difference is um the Public Works um portion Public Works director was taken out of the budget okay and uh Frank and John can answer any questions first is water you any highlights um it's basically the same that I had gone over um at the last meeting uh we took out those line items directly related to the DPW director salary and expenses um and uh we did get an updated in fund transfer number um this week from from town hall so um that's what we're looking at uh pretty marginal increases line items across the board um I I can answer any specific questions you guys have can you remind us what the interfund operating number that you had as a placeholder was previously uh before it actually went down I believe I had it today I believe it was about maybe I think before this I think we had it as uh maybe 580,000 okay it was it was a marginal decrease okay in case everyone doesn't know the inter fund transfers that's based on so direct cost for um health insurance um for the benefits like that and then any other services uh Treasurer Town accountant myself um it's a percentage based on what their budget is as a percent of the total Town budget okay right and and the number we were looking at as far as um uh increases for the I mean our actual um for uh uh charges and expend charges and expenditures actually is predicted to gone to be down from last year our salaries are up a little bit because of collective bargaining and our um debt and interest a long-term debt went up but that's not something we uh negotiate on really so any questions or discussion Mr yes bill um Mike is is the removal of the the DPW head which seemed to have gotten a lot of attention um a week or two ago at that joint meeting um I I mean besides saying there's no money in the budget is do we need to say other things um to keep the naysayers at Bay um I I guess uh the the main thing is obviously because there's no money in the budget um and uh you know the the second thing is to say well we are we are pursuing it for the future we're not going to just ignore it forever but um it's something we'll have to plan on for the future but I I can just see someone hav been to enough Town meetings and whatnot um saying well you didn't do it this year and then you're going to use the same excuse next year and the year after and I'm I'm just thinking it's it's might get a lot of attention okay Mike have um I know in a previous meeting you were you're saying that you weren't quite sure what if there was going to be a lot of efficiencies gained with that position have we done any kind of study or or figuring on that to kind of come up with a a possible number no um you know where we would still have the highway department we still have a water and sore Department I mean we're all um you're not going to be able to get rid of employees because they all have to still do the work um the only benefit as we said would be you'd have one person coordinating uh in certain situations uh I know John had talked uh the last meeting about certain areas where they could share um equipment like they do now uh when they're working on certain projects um and the only other benefit is if you spend the money and get an engineer I mean it's someone that's not going to design anything but they would have knowledge of uh engineering and make sure that uh um the things that we get from the engineering companies we hire are you know up to par but we will have to look at it and where someone will be located and uh what what the benefits and cost for next year yeah because I could to Bill's point I could definitely see someone asking us like you know what would be the savings and would that offset the salary yeah okay Mr CH Cody um Mike I think one of the things that I would ask before we moveed forward with hiring that position is has there even been a job description created for that post no that no we have to do that yeah so I mean we don't we don't have a definition of what the role will actually be so setting aside money for a a job that hasn't been identified yet is a that's that's a pretty easy response is you know a we don't have the money B we haven't even identified and and made out what the actual role and responsibilities be Mr chairman exactly a couple questions Mike when was that position approved at town meeting was it last year or the year before um I think it was in the fall last year oh so meeting I think it was Springtime meeting yeah and and secondly what was what was the intended uh uh breakup of uh the compensation for that position was it 70 water 7030 what was the intentional plant I I know you had put it out there at some point I don't remember yeah I I'm not sure of the exact numbers it was directly related if I'm remembering correctly to the uh budgets of each department right what I'm try it was no more than I think no more than 25% attributed to highway I think the bulk of it was water and swer so I understand the budget is we obviously all understand the budget situation at this time but so basically the the actual Town budget not the Enterprise account would have been affected about 25% I'm just curious what that you don't have to give it to me now but what that number is okay I'll get I'll get that to you thanks and uh Mr chairman this is our article four by the way any other discussion okay then the chair would entertain a motion someone anyone Mr you usually do this so it's yeah I can't tonight though um so let's see here if I get this right I recommend um how do we do this H recommend can't you just say as presented I could do that too but 510 personal services 1,27 $7 [Music] 7,99 um inter fund $561 enter transfers 575 $575,000 um 570 charges and expenditures 1, 318,000 um and then 590 debt and interest on long-term debt 1,740 $223 for a total um budget for water uh the Water Department of 4,911 th000 256 that motion in a second go through the r Kevin yes Steve yes thank you Sandy yes Bill yes Paul Paul's here right yeah yes okay uh Cody yes Zach yes and I am also a yes so that passes 8 to zero all right next is um the sore budget which article is this Mike uh this is Article Five Five okay and uh John and Frank basically the same here the budget was the same except for the uh DPW director and the interfund transfers any discussion okay hearing go ahead Cody it's not necessarily related to the uh to the budget but um I will uh Frank will will y'all be on for the uh discussion later on the uh the article regarding the uh Reen Barton at the sewer going down that line yes we're gonna need you like if you're if you're not then I'm was GNA ask you to stick or address anything else uh Mr chair yeah yeah go ahead Zach have just curious have we add added any new sewer customers in this fiscal year by any of the I know there was work done on the Main Street and so on and so forth how many additional tie-ins have you done roughly in the the past year is it pretty flat or is is it it is a pretty small number um I would say under 10 so you're not expecting any addition any major change to the revenues coming in there hasn't been uh anything uh major uh right now we have the building behind the McDonald's that has still yet to be completed I believe uh it's 195 mfield out uh one that is fill um we would expect to see some revenue generated from that facility uh but they've been uh taking quite a bit of time to build that process out um other than that we've only seen a few house connections not actually on West Main Street we've had some on uh on New Street tying it to the existing sewer that's down there um and uh you know I think only only one or two others on West Main Street that have connected houses of B for Farm will be getting built too on Pine Street probably a year from now I I would say is when we would see enough houses on uh the B Farm property to notice any type of significant Revenue coming from there right now they have a a trailer on site that supposed to promote the sale of those new homes they're saying that they can actually build one home every three or four months which I would think would be very impressive to see if that can happen um whether they can build them and sell them is is two different things what about on on both the water and SE and what kind of stress between all the apartments being put in the home construction and everything else that's been going on I know you guys tied in the industrial park a couple years ago what kind of stress is that going to put on the system you got enough water to sustain this you got enough seore capacity we do have enough of both yes okay thank you sure any more discussion or questions okay then the chair would entertain a motion for Budget 60 sewer Enterprise Mr chair yes bill I recommend we approve the sewer Enterprise budget as follows 510 personal services in the amount of $ 46,5 um 561 inter transfers in the amount of $3,547 charges and expenditures 570 in the amount of 1,417 251 and Debt Service $590 in the amount of $397,000 40 for a total budget of $2,428 597 second Motion in a second we'll do the roll again Kevin yes Steve yes Sandy yes Bill yes Paul yes P yes Zach yes and I am also a yes that is 8 to zero all right next is um article nine on the warrant Frank article N9 should be before you we're asking to have basically leftover funds transferred to two projects um one of which a portion of this money um actually let me back up the the leftover funds are actually from the wells 5 and six project we had extra money from that uh the total amount of extra was 600 5,476 24 um so we're actually asking to reappropriate that total amount into two different um areas we're looking for transferring [Music] 178,916 of that money 42649 224 uh we're asking for that to go to engineering investigation and design uh for construction of either a new treatment facility uh at well 3 because of the posos exceedence that we had there and or to cover all these same issues at any of the other Wells that we have including upgrades to the existing treatment facility I know we had talked before about looming changes to the p and p mcls those have come down enforcement is not currently being made but within the next few years um they expect everybody to be uh on track so basically the original EPA number was 70 parts per trillion the new number for the same contaminants is four parts per trillion Massachusetts standard is still at 20 parts per trillion but they will find follow suit and equal or tighten up the numbers um as mass D commonly does uh so it is a very short window of time to act on that uh we're talking multi-million dollar facilities at each of the wells if they do exceed so this is uh just a way to start off the investigational phase um there's a lot of engineering that has to go into it and um determination of placement and what type of filtration unit would be necessary to bring the existing level at each particular facility low enough to meet the new standards so that's why we're asking for that money to be appropriated now instead of using it on a different project Frank I I did see that that that got pasted um you're probably well way more tied into this uh or tuned into this than I am do you expect that there will be any lawsuits or anything like that that might delay things I I I'm not suggesting we delay but I'm just curious if if you know that might happen we do not actually have the option to delay um which is pretty unique so there are pending lawsuits going on with companies that are currently in existence uh still contributing to the problem um there are um lawsuits going on with others who may or may not be involved as far as like secondary and third parties so right now everybody's kind of looking to point the finger at people and uh we as water suppliers still have to come up with a solution to the existing problem even though it Still Remains uh coming into the system you know from other polluted areas whether it be from um you know anything that you can think of that's waterproof is going to have a p FL or P contaminant on it uh anything non-stick you know the list goes on and on and on and each of us have all those things in our own homes right now including myself um it's something that's going to take a long time to go away even if they said right now you know you can't use those products no more everybody's not just going to throw them away so unfortunately we we're going to deal with this uh long before any lawsuits or anything um any settlements come down or anything we can only hope that we would uh you know be involved with some of the settlements when the the payments are there if there's any money left um there's so many different people that are involved with this um and you know the larger corporations have much better lawyers than a lot of the smaller cities and towns and water departments do so if there's a loophole they're going to find it so we're not anticipating any funding um if we get something great but you know Now's the Time to start um like I said we already have one well that had the exceedance at well three that's been offline since October um with these new contaminant levels we run the possibility when our next detect or testing round is required that we could have additional Wells that would bring us right back to the same situation as we are with well 3 and we may not have the option of turning it off and still being able to supply the town with water so there's there's a multi level of concern here and this is just a starting point to get us moving in a right direction and remind me well three was over the previous level right not the not the new level that is correct well three um historically tested right in the teen range 12 13 14 um we had uh two samples that came in above the 20 but because of the the sampling parameters that we were under it's the average for the quarter so we take one sample per month three samples per quarter that average is what DP looked at um we've went from the beginning of when we had the sample till up until last October and believe it or not we actually exceeded by one part per trillion with the average so that well came offline it's going to cost us millions of dollars to put back online because we were over by one part trillion um with the old standard you know obviously now down to the four um and the other action levels that they have in place we would have exceeded anyway but it would have been nice to have that water up until now yep okay thank you I need you Mr chairman yes Z couple of qu question oh he's run off so I got a couple questions on posos so wait till he com back he'll be right back Mr chair while we're waiting for Frank to come back I got a question for Mike sure Cody um Mike where's where are these uh Bond proceeds accounted for in the budget currently um they not on the uh you call it the uh the account sheet that James provided um they this is U money that was borrowed for um projects previously and there they didn't uh there was money left over when the project projects were completed so it would it's that's it's not in It's just in the articles for that I'm sorry I missed the question he was asking where the money is accounted for and I said the money was borrowed previously for these other projects so it's just accounted for within the debt right now yeah this is this is already money that was uh appropriated to be borrowed for another project which was the worlds 5 and6 replacement uh because we did not spend all of the borrowed PLS we're required to use that in some way shape or form within a very short period of time because the borrowed money cannot ACR interest it's actually you get penalized for that um so we've gone through quite a few of the books I think you guys may remember this uh you know we've been back before you guys a few times to try and clean up the books and reappropriate leftover funds whether it be from retained earnings or from borrowed projects like this one and this is just another one of those steps so if these are so these are time sensitive uh borrowing funds that uh is that going to offset your need for the use of retained earnings then this would eliminate us having to use retained earnings to start this process but again it's only a small step towards the the total goal Zach we go back to you Frank on couple things on posos the four pots per trillion you're referring to was that the ruling that just came down a couple weeks that I I saw a blip of on the news or is that something different that is the ruing that you saw um for specific contaminants related to what we used to call P6 now they're pulling it apart even even more um they're focusing on PS and P4 and they actually have um what they call an mclg which is a maximum contaminant level goal that's actually set at zero so that's what they asked you to try and Achieve and they set the maximum contaminant level that you're not supposed to exceed at four so if you can stay in that range between zero and four you're doing okay unfortunately I don't know of any community that can do that well three that you're referring to is that the well on Newland Street that is correct sir and that particular well is not connected to the existing treatment plant at all currently that is correct due to its location um the costs to Plum that directly over and blend with the existing treatment facility were um it didn't make the project feasible so we are still looking at that as an option now that we have something to compare it to which would be a multi-million dollar uh P facility being built there or on adjacent water department land across the street um we still got to come up with some ideas this is where this engineering uh money would be well spent and even though we come up with what we feel is a solid idea it still has to move through the and the EPA for final approval and what kind of numbers are you currently getting of water that goes into the treatment plant for posos are those single digits are they so we have three Wells that feed the current treatment plant right now um based on the current parameters in place we have what's called a combined sample that we take one from the outflow at the water treatment facility those numbers there have been below four but not by much we've seen 3. tws we've seen 2.9 um we have the option if we have one of those three Wells that tends to be on the higher range and we think that's where our numbers are coming from to do what's called a blend where we can lower the capacity coming out of one of the wells and increase the water capacity coming out of the other two assuming that they're the lower numbers to keep the number in the optimum range uh below the MCL if we continue to have unfortunately more rain than we we really need um it changes how the Ager filters out these type of contaminants that are unfortunately in in the Ager it's not something that uh you know it's uh it's purposely created by anything we do um but everything water related affects the contaminant levels that we sample for um there's been no Rhiner reason we've tried to Trend this when we were we were tracking our well 3 uh we thought we actually had a pretty good track on it that when we saw heavier rainfalls that we would see an increase in the posos and just when we thought we actually had a decent track on it it it totally flipped on us and we actually got one of our lower numbers after having a very heavy Dage of rain so there there's many things that you know take into account what happens with the aquifer many of which are out of our control um and unfortunately we weren't able to get any good trending on that before we had to take it offline but it's seems to me the direction they're going it's going to be whether it's this year next year the following year it's heading towards a zero number would you agree with that 100% they that is their I think that has been their effort all along and they've just now found ways to get to that point and unfortunately to get to that number um many of our our other facilities have already looked at it uh you're possibly looking at doing an R plan which is extremely expensive to operate you need extremely high volumes of electricity to run them you know it's it's not something um to take lightly if you're going to step that way it requires a whole different level of treatment operators you know different classifications different training um if that's their ultimate goal we really would like to hear from D or EPA that that's where we should be trending instead of wasting money putting these smaller filtration facilities in that will get us by for a little while you know if we're going to do it we we would like to know up front and we've sent letters um we've had uh you know back up from some of uh you know the congressman's office and stuff looking for those same answers you know basically give the water departments and the water districts a better Direction on how to proceed with this knowing that the assumption is always there that they're going to better themselves with their rules now I I I saw that Mansfield has already got a plant operating for posos and I think they spent and I don't know what year it was built within the last couple and I think they spent about $5 million on that on that facility and I also read that Middleboro just approved at town meeting a construction of a facility to deal with P so my question to you is this fac the plant we have now is what four or five years old when did the even the the the word p come into the water department I mean do we know about this before we constructed the initial plant when did this become an issue that you you were made aware of yeah so P has been around for for a very long time uh what ended up happening is uh we take routine samples every year and every other year and we take what's called ucmr it's a unregulated contaminant monitoring rule basically all the water departments and water districts take a gut of samples hundreds of thousands of dollars over years of time and all of that information goes into their database so they'll look at microcontaminants that may have very minute uh sample detects and they'll see a pattern evolve say in this area three or four communities or what and as that number you know starts getting higher or trending higher then they start focusing on it and they put an action level in place um if communities are having problems reaching and staying under that Action level without doing any type of major um filtration or or or you know coagulant or anything like that to their existing uh that prompts additional investigation and they didn't have enough information on posos P4 or any of the other contaminants that uh that they're looking at now so they changed the requirements for what the standards were for the detect um so they went from parts per million to parts per trillion and now they got the numbers that they were looking for um to have everything flow up in you know basically across the country um for you know it started off as P5 6 now they got they're up to 27 contants so the hard of you look for something want to find it and that's exactly what the goal of the EPA is you know they want to remove these harmful contaminants from you know basically drinking water from anything that we put into our bodies foodwise um so you know they are going to continue looking for it and that's why we're looking for a solution from them for what the end purpose is we know it's zero um we want their recommendations on how they expect us to get there with the least amount of problems from that and I mean this as as far as oh you know we add chlorine to our water for disinfection you have to have enough chlorine in your water for disinfection to kill off any viruses that are there well unfortunately there byproducts that happen from chlorine and that's where you see the thms and that was one of the notices that just recently went out um so there's always a negative to something that that good comes out of a treatment process and we want to see what the least negatives are going to be based on the treatment process that we want to stall and we're very we we're trying to be tactful and ask these questions in a certain way and not come across you know you know as aggressive because we want to make sure that we're making the right decision and spending the money appropriately and to to date we have yet to get a good answer out of anybody we've spoken to so before the existing treatment plant was constructed there was no there was no talk of posos and we may have to deal with that as to incorporate into that plan or was that is this that something came up really in the last couple of years I'm just trying to say you know we built the plant I never heard of this and then all of a sudden now it's it's it's it's an issue and for a resident that's not involved like you are already see every day in the minutia of things they're saying we just built a plant now you thought we need to build another one so you know we're going to try to explain that so people understand it so so the simplest way is that the samples were taken the contaminants were known about we had non detects at the sampling parameter that was required at the time the facility was built new wells went in afterwards which as you all know i' I voiced my opinion about that before definitely should have been the other way around uh the new wells went in at that time they were looking at fos each of our wells sampled and came back lower than the requirements um for an indicated uh MCL exceedence so those Wells continued to move forward and now we're at the position now with the recent changes in the regulations that that are going to flare up and could potentially cause this issues so yes there was uh there was no purpose to design any other removal system to that facility other than iron and magnes removal which oddly enough is the base removal that's required before you can remove a posos and a p from the water so that's where our plants are going to be very costly because we have iron and magnetes in our natural groundwater which we would see over at well 3 and over at well one which are un locations So Not only would we have to build a p p removal facility we have to remove the iron and magines from it first so you're looking at a multi-stage facility that has to be built on each of those properties and you're thinking it' be cheaper to do that than to do the pipe work to get it all into one facility Well that's what we're looking at because the concern is you know for lack of better terms you don't want to have all your eggs in one basket if we have all of our wells plumbed into one facility and God forbid we have an issue with that facility um active God tree falls down whatever now you're in a situation where you're doing an emergency connection with the surrounding Town you're purchasing water from them um or you can't even support uh fire suppression Services because the remaining Wells that are there don't have enough to supply the town um it gets into a very tricky situation with cost over means whereas if we had two separate facilities at the non-treated Wells that we currently have you know it would give us additional locations to pull from and just some background we're trying to get additional capacity approved from well one which is down on Pine Street to make it feasible to put a removal system there right now we're limited to 200 gallons a minute and the cost to spend there even just to remove the mangines that we still deal with there on occasion it it just the math just doesn't work we need more water available to come out of the ground in order to to invest in that so on that note where are you on well replacement you had a program to replace three Wells are they done are those operational what's the the the overview on that yeah two Wells are up and up and running those are wells five and six that's related to this article here with the extra money uh well four is the next one to go in line uh believe it or not you may remember I at one point mentioned uh we were getting some money from Congressman auction class um there's been multiple hoops and and multiple dances that we've had to make to come up with that um this money that was at five and six here um was not eligible for that because of the transfer and borrowing that had to happen from short term to long term so we are paying back that note the good thing is that money that was approved to come to Norton is still Norton's money uh we're going to use that to fund the replacement well of well number four move it a little bit further away from the winter countet on where it is now uh we found some favorable soil conditions compared to its current location so that's why we're going to move it a little bit further away hopefully have some natural filtration there and then the uh the leftover money that we have air marked to Norton we are going to ask for a change in the Congressional language so that we can also use that for p and other filtration opportunities um that's a process that's going to take some time but we've basically got the head nod that it would be something that is possible thank you you're welcome anyone else any other questions actually I have one Frank and that is is zero really possible I know you mentioned sort of the the very expensive plant but is even that going to make it zero there is a possibility of getting a getting a zero um if you're willing to put the money there we may have no choice Frank if that's with their uh it's another one of those mandates without any funding exactly that that was going to be my question is is there any indication that um that there's going to be money made available from the manufacturers of P that are responsible for all of this in our drinking water 3M being like it was d p first and then 3M bottom I think and like all the all the chemical companies that made this and said oh it's fine it's good you're fine and I mean they're the ones that are 100% responsible for the fact that this is now in every drop of water that goes through anybody's body right now you are exactly right we have not heard of any monies coming directly from them um anything that has been discussed has been through um basically lawsuits um you know you're forcing them to to take money and give it back to the communities or to the suppliers who are having to mediate these problems um oddly enough the companies that have created the issue long ago are also the same companies that we are going to be buying the material to remove the problem from just because of the nature of the product um so we we have signed on with one of the law firms for the class action lawsuit good um is there I'm not thinking about this because I'm on I'm on wellwater where I am um and that well three is the closest to me because I'm in the case um so I'm now looking at do I get a home test uh if if that came through M um and let's say the time was awarded would there be any portion of that for uh individual home owners that are on well um that isn't associated with the the town water system to tap into that or would would they each individually have to sign on to a class action that is a good question I'm not sure I I would imagine something we can look at whether um as part of the class action lawsuit we could help people that have Wells that are contaminated if there's water available to tie in right you know from your expertise you're talking about a reverse osmosis system to essentially remove that if somebody was concerned about this and a home and they have a well themselves um is that something that if they put in a reverse osmosis system in their home to treat the entire home um that that would resolve the issue there are some smaller systems that have been designed to work um in what they call like a mini Community um like a Dunkin Donuts Cumberland Farm where they have a decent amount of traffic flow more so than a resident um I haven't heard of any individual personal systems um that would be cost effective there and again even the systems that we talked about before were all referencing the 20 parts per trillion Mass D level I do not know and I did not research any further um if any of those were capable of getting down to this four or the zero goal um I live in rovus so there's no town of water over there everybody's on private Wells um you know all the the restaurants and all this have to they all have to deal with this now and there was some talk a while back from the EPA that there could be some control coming down from the boards of Health over private Wells to mandate testing um there's been no more talk about that but I would have to assume at some point they would probably want to know you know what is in the wellwater whether it be at point of sale or or you know if they can mandate it uh one or two tests per year something like that obviously it's great to know what's in your well I test mine frequently myself um but it's also sometimes a fear of the unknown and what is going to be required of them if somebody tests and they can't afford to put in a system you know doesn't put a black mark on their home you know even if they don't choose to drink the water they they obviously would still have to Bath and wash clothes with it so you know I I can understand it's a double-edged sword um you know myself included thank you Mr chairman that is that ja yeah Co just just the article I was reading just last week 65% of Municipal Water Supplies have tested the posos in this country on a national level so I just can't imagine they can't there's not going to be some federal money down the road we may not we not we may not be able to wait that long but it is a national problem Coast to Coast yeah I can I can tell you from the insurance side because that's my word p p p all the P's have been excluded under um environmental liability policies for really close to a decade probably so they they knew this was coming long before anybody else because they they started seeing the claims coming in wow and the stuff isn't banned so it just keeps getting worse every day I removed all of it from my house personally all the uh cookware and stuff and my house is G you got to start somewhere any other discussion all right then the chair would entertain a motion on article nine uh M Mr chair right before that can we just go over the the three numbers again was the first one 65,0 476 24 that's correct and was the next one 178 or 78 178 9984 and then the third one would have been 426 49224 correct right thank you Mr chair yes B I recommend we are how let's say this um make a motion you make a motion we recommend article 9 UM for a total of 65,7 624 of which $178,900 is to be earmarked or the costs associated with the South Worster Street and East Hodes Street watermain replacement and the balance $426,500 for cost associated with engineering design um and whatnot on the Water Treatment Plant that's it Motion in a second we'll go to the vote Kevin yes Steve yes Sandy yes Bill yes Paul yes Cody yes Zach yes and I am a yes that is 8 to zero all right next is uh article 10 um I'll just go over the slides that uh being presented tonight um to refresh your memory um probably skip through uh some of them um before you jump into that Mike I just wanna for the purposes of the meeting uh I I I expect some Lively discussion so please make sure that you ask to be recognized before you before you jump in why why I keep control of the meeting all all right you ready I'm ready so I I the project itself is uh 400 4,800 feet of 8 inch gravity sore and that will run from Elm Street down Elm Street inclue militarist and run to Reservoir um there'll be one Wastewater Pump Station as part of the project all the sore is gravity um and there'll be 4,5 linear feet of water main improvements on Elm Street and uh just to refresh uh so all the design right now has been funded entirely Grant funded from uh massworks um and we also have received from massworks for construction a grant of $3.5 million um everyone knows the history of the site and uh you know we've had EPA out there doing some cleanup um we've had a phase one phase two study on the site um we demoed spent about 500,000 demo in the PO portion of the building that was a threat to fall onto cross street um as part of the master plan this was a priority economic targeting area and uh the infrastructure Investments are needed to promote the economic development and devco North America is uh company that went before town meeting and had the property reson to Village commercial and um they're looking to develop 140 to 150 apartments at the site and some commercial space um right now uh devco says they've claimed uh control of the site I've asked our attorneys to let us know exactly how they've claimed control they they said they went to the bankruptcy court and received control of the site um they are now working on a covenant not to Sue from uh D um and hopefully moving forward from there what does that mean a covenant covant not to sue um that would protect them if they go on site and say they end up not developing the site they're not going to be a responsible party a PRP okay thank you so the total cost of the project the water main work is 2 million to 2.4 million the sore workor 5.3 to uh six million um the mass warx Grant will pay 3.5 million of that water rates will fully fund the water main project um that's 2 million to 2.4 million then the remaining portion is for the sore project um so on the right you see betterments which per uh home uh 8.6 to $12,000 for a betterment and so the betterment is paid it's an assessment on the property then you can pay it off at once or you can pay it over 20 years if you choose to pay it over 20 years um it right now it would look like it would be at a 5% interest rate and um the so that would be anywhere from $600 to $900 a year uh for the betterments and the total on the betterments um is $550,500 to $768,000 for that funding a portion of the project that leaves the balance of 1.8 to 2.5 million and so that has to either be borne by a developer of that property or if a developer isn't um working working on the property right when the project is completed obviously the town would then have to stop paying that note and putting a lean on the property to be paid back for that cost um and I know [Music] um as part of the betterments um when when people are assessed betterments when they tie in a sore there is no tyeing fee they have to pay the cost of the contract to tie them in but the water and soore Department doesn't charge them a tie in fee because they paid betterments um and as you know at one of the previous Town meetings they changed it to seven years um you're supposed to tie in sore anywhere from the be one year to seven years after it's put in the maximum um is seven years that you're supposed to be tied in and uh so right now um this is uh they're looking at potential sites for um The Pump Station and um one of the sites they're looking at is um briary property Town Mar Library they if they chose that site where would it where would it be I'm kind of wondering like is it going to be visible from the street will be be able to put Landscaping in there like will we have to move the Gazebo you know those sorts of things uh if you're looking at the property where you pull in where the sign is all the way to the left uh there's a stone wall and there's some uh the corner of the property not RAR any of the trees with the pla are but basically behind that there's a lot of heavy undergrowth at the corner of that property before it goes to the next down lot that's the area we were initially looking for a footprint to go um there is some talk even of possibly not doing an actual building there and possibly doing something um with just the wet well and actually an operational cabinet similar to what we have down on offord Reservoir across from Holly Road um still up in the air about cost and and what we can and cannot put there um we still need the approval to actually put it on that site which is uh everything still being worked on uh we're actually in the middle of a meeting right now with uh with the public uh getting some feedback on this sorry for the poor scheduling [Music] fine um so that that is uh the project I know from some of the feedback today um some of the public was saying well why do we on Elm Street have to pay betterments for a project that benefits the whole town and that that's why I mentioned the betterments of 550,000 to 768 th000 of the project but the total sore work is 5.3 to six million so the betterments is a fraction of the project are small I know to some people that will $600 to $900 a year may seem like a lot but as far as um the total project you know the majority of it is not being paid is not a burden on to those 64 How houses along the way Mr [Music] chair um a couple of things I guess the the first questions Frank um the betterments uh assessment the the calculation for that is that still is it $35 per gallon based on 110 gallons per day minimum three bedroom home for 330 is that the the calculations being used right now it is not um betterment calculations are done differently they're done by equivalent dwelling units uh so basically whatever constitutes a single family home whether it be a condo um you know a house and an apartment you know that's how an edu is equivalent given that that's a word you it's getting late um the sewer connection fee the one that you mentioned the which is based on the title five flows and figures uh is for a property that's fronted by sewer that wasn't able to or was not originally assessed a vment um so This falls in line with the houses that on are on plane street that connected that had gravity sewer they paid based on bedroom count This falls in um those fees fall in line with areas Down The Grove and down King Phillip um so there are different rates involved based on how the project was presented and uh based on the funding of the project right is that what's the calculation for these because it's I mean this is this is essentially El Street that's the houses down Arm Street that would be assessed this right that's correct they they would be the only ones that would be assessed the betterment because the project betters that that area by fonting them with sewer and that's if they're looking at what it's going to cost them what what's the calculation for them so it based on whatever the cost of the project so if the project comes in at uh the 7.3 million it would cost them $8,600 if it comes in at the higher number it costs them $122,000 well that's each house is is that number y each each edu just to be clear um if there's if there's a a single family home it's one edu if there's if it's a duplex it's two edus so you may have one person that owns a piece of property um you know maybe a duplex that that's considered two edus um so there's just about for clear if ification there okay and is that um that 7.3 is that's the total including the grant amount yes so there's no there's no break for the fact that the the grant was like you don't get a reduction for using the the um is it a state Grant um well they do because the total cost the was down so if we didn't if we didn't have the $3.5 million Grant then you'd be looking at numbers a lot higher than 8,661 12,000 the cost of a project as a whole didn't go down because of theth right grant but the grant is taking off 3.5 million from that whatever the ending cost of the project is I'm I'm just confused how that works because if the 7.3 million total budgeted cost includes the 3.5 I'm not sure I'm not sure I'm following the math so so the total cost is say um 7.3 so 3.5 is coming off of that I got you yeah sorry I was being dense um the other thing I was going to say is um this is this is one instance where literally running this these lines down that immediately improves the value even if they don't tap into it and like just the access to the water and sewer is one thing but these lines are critical for hold Co to tear down that uh readen Barton property and develop it into something nice which is going to improve their property value in the long run so the better piece of feel like is probably a secondary conversation because immediately as soon as that eyesore is torn down even if they don't build anything there as soon as that's gone their property value goes up um which is great for them happy for them I think the biggest question here for from everybody is going to be on the remaining share um and responsibility for that um I'll preemptively say this because I I feel like someone's probably going to mention it um this is probably a gating issue for like having Water and Sewer run down that uh street is hold pill has to have that but the amount that they're putting into investing in that property um do you have a sense that 1.8 million or 2.5 million out of under the top of that is going to push them over the edge of killing the project um we had mentioned it to him we had a meeting with them and we actually had a meeting this week with another developer because we told them we're not waiting you know for you to hold us up if we can find someone else and it didn't it didn't seem to bother them so I think it and as the engineer said tonight it's well worth it for them for the benefit they're going to get having that sore come down I know it's going to be a cleanup cost but still um they felt it would benefit it so so there's a possibility that that 1.8 or 2.5 could be born by hold Co or re recouped from them if they go forward that that's the plan right now um as you mentioned though if they get cold feed or they pull out partway through unfortunately that that's now born by the town even though we can assess a lean on that property it just makes it a little bit more difficult to try and find a potential buyer for it knowing the difficulties that property also already has I think originally they were anticipating having these resources provided to them not no cost and just paying a connection fee and unfortunately even with the grant you know we're still talking about a pretty significant amount of money for both Water and Sewer on such a small Road it's just unfortunate and the timing of it obviously we know is is very difficult as well okay La last question um the you mentioned the pump station is there I'm assuming that there aren't any houses um that the pump station is going to cause any pressure issues where we ended up on plane Street where only certain people were assessed the betterment because the other ones where the pump station was pressurizing the onine too high can't ever actually connect to it so it just ended up being like what was it six houses correct based on the current design this is going to be a gravity sewer um Everybody fronted will have a connection able to connect to it uh borrowing possibly one or two houses that may sit below the road um they may need a pump system that hasn't been 100% determined yet everybody the initial thought was everybody and initial plan would be everybody be a gravity connection if some of the feedback we get tonight from this public informational hearing um if any of that comes into play and we start looking at other options there is the potential that's been thrown out there for a dedicated Force main just to provide this property with sewer and not properties fronted along the way you know from you know a personal standpoint I think that's a foolish idea you dig up the road you should have connections there they fronted by it they should you know obviously have some skin in the game um you know as a business standpoint it would be great because you would now have an opportunity to build out that property the cost associated with it would be borne by that property or by that developer um you know we still have to do the water improvements there so again there there's no sense of of digging up the road twice you know we would have to do them piggybacked which is the exact reason why that road was paved uh three years ago because this project has been going on for some time uh Keith had money he had to spend and that was one road that was falling apart so it went there knowing that this was going to take another quarter three four or five years until anything move forward with it so at that time we agreed that we would take up the additional cost of what it would be to do the full reclaim on the road anticipating both utilities were going to go in and give the opportunity um if the gas company or cable company was also looking to do any upgrade work down there uh so that's that was kind of some talks that we had going on behind the scenes I know everybody says well that road was just paid that's foolish well it it had to to maintain as long as it has till now than Mr CH one one sec bill um I want to make sure that I'm I'm understanding this because as Frank said it's late so the if the remaining share is borne by the the developer the betterments go away no no no okay that's that's an addition too okay go ahead but we would we would have to borrow that up front and then transfer that to the the developer right like we would have to take that out to do the work and then it would be a reimbursement of from the developer right and depending on how long it is before we have a developer that would be a burden on the town to make those payments each year right go ahead B so um I many questions comments here so the the first thing is um you know we structure the betterment as hey it's 900 bucks a year or a th000 bucks a year or whatever over so many years that you we're totally ignoring the cost to to these homeowners to actually dig up their yard from their Foundation to this connection so that's an additional cost that these people have to bear by themselves so it's it's not just you know 900 a th000 bucks a year for X number of years it's way more than that so we should recognize that before just kind of saying you know no big deal um I guess the second thing is where at the way this is being presented whether or not what were they called devco I forget the name whether or not they actually do what they want to do we're doing this so we can do this and you know if we're if we're lucky and devco says n we changed our mind you know if we're lucky maybe someone else comes in if we're unlucky then it just sits there um has a nice sewer has a nice water M we still have a decrepit building and again all these people are out serious dollars for no good reason um so that concerns me I think it was Zach who said X number of meetings ago and I think you guys have have also mentioned it that in in your informational meeting people are saying this is more of a town project get getting rid of that blighted site isn't just an Elm Street issue that's really a betterment to the whole town so to again think that we should just have these 50 60 whatever houses bear the brunt of it is a little unfair I I I I really have a problem with that because I I understand the Big Goal let's get rid of this blighted site what happens after that you know that's a whole different story but at least we can get rid of it but that's the betterment to the town not just to Elm Street and I will disagree with Cody if I'm at the End of Elm Street where the library is reading Barton standing or gone does nothing to my property if I'm next to the property and it disappears yep my property value is going to go up so it's it's a very small group of people who will benefit from it actually disappearing you know the the rest of the people on the street not so much [Music] um and I don't know I I I could go on I in in in theory I I agree with you know hey if we can get someone to get rid of the blighted s great but I have a tough time saying that you know 50 60 families have to bear the brunt of it because it's more than what you're displaying here Mr chairman z i we have to agree 100% with my colleague Mr rotundi this project is a project for the town it is not a project not just a vent for the 50 people that are there I just couldn't imagine myself living there maybe I just put in a brand new septic system because I didn't see this coming and all of a sudden because we want to get rid of this disaster that's over there which I agree needs to go and something needs to happen uh I'm foot with a $10,000 $122,000 bill then you tear it at my driveway oh I have to pay for the excavation Within seven years and all this out I think it's unfair it's it's unfair and it's and it's unjust I mean it's bad enough that we're changing zoning we have now zoning dour in this town that you know we hit this building so we're going to take it from residential and make it Village commercial or maybe I should build an industrial plant on my uh on my house property and maybe we'll reone that next um so now we're going to put this burden on these residents and I just think it's completely fair if you want to do it uh if you want to do it pass it on to the rate payers of the S evenly uh that's better than or the town all together evenly that's better than just giving it to these few people uh that are there that didn't ask for it um and they G to be hit broadside with it uh and for that reason I can't support this Mr chairman yes um so obviously I look at it a little different L [Music] um the Housing Authority needed sore and we went down West Main Street and everyone along the way was charged of betterment same same thing and the other way to look at it is by having a large project like the Housing Authority funding a good portion of that saw project it made it financially feasible to do that so project and it's the same here you have a large portion of this project being funded hopefully by a developer you have a $3.5 million Grant because of the potential of developing that site so sore going down the street the cost to these 64 homeowners along the street is now reduced because you have the mass Grant and you have a potential development at that site and I remind you that site was zoned industrial it was rezoned to Village commercial um so if we didn't have reeden Barton there and we didn't have the mass Works Grant and there are properties along that way not just this building there are other properties whose systems are failing um one of the assessors was in today who lives on Talbert Road some just put in a septic system on Tabet row it cost them $40,000 so there I'm sure there might be some homes that have great septic systems along there but I'm sure from the age of those houses there are some that don't and uh for them to be able to get sore out in front of their house in the long run it's going to greatly benefit them I know you can look at just the expense of it but you also have to look at the value this adds to that property um and you have technically seven years to tie in so it's not like the second this project is done you got to tie in and who's going to go chasing them at seven years I don't that's that's up to the Board of Health to decide if they're going to do that I don't think you I don't think you're going to see the Board of Health knocking on someone's door at seven years one day and demand that they tie into the sore if they Systems Failing I'm sure they're GNA do that but unless their Systems Failing I'm sure the Board of Health isn't going to start cracking the whip on someone Mr chairman Z I saw your hand up go ahead so I guess to that point Mike I would say so what do you tell the homeowner that's on that street that just spent that may be on that street I know this that may that using your example that may have just spent $40,000 a new septic and then we're going to go over there and hit him over the head with another 12,000 and say within seven years you're going to tie in for another 10,000 you just put him in bankruptcy that's what you just did so again for that reason I will not be supporting this it was funny um tonight I think there were some people that saidwell we love having the sore out there so we know we have the the insurance that if our system fails we have to tie in we just don't want to pay a betterment well that's not the way s projects work that's not the way it worked on West Main Street and so how many how many um edus were there on West Main Street yeah close to close to almost Mr chair go ahead the the biggest difference in your example though Mike is that the Housing Authority was in existence and had you know had people had need we're just hoping and that's the big difference we're just hoping that this developer or some other developer comes in and says that's the site I want to build whatever right and that that's a major difference and there are plenty of polluted sides in across the country that stay vacant so you know if if this developer actually had money in in in the game and actually fully own the property and was showing some true commitment I think differently but but this is a this is more of a hope that if we do X that they'll follow through and that that's a that's a lot of money to spend on a hope Cody you're up did you call me yeah go ahead um so I guess my question is is going to be um I feel like the betterments kind of it becomes a secondary conversation because um anyone along that that route if you're you're trying to sell your home and you're drive past that uh or you know someone's look at buying a home and they drive past Weeden Barton I mean it's it's a huge turn off immediately um anybody that drives past it knows that uh so I feel like the betterments are a secondary part the the main concern might um is obviously the the actual cost of the tie in being 10 15 20,000 depending on how long the line is from the current existing uh septic system to the stub at the uh at the street um depending on the excavation and then if they had to do a pump to get it up uh if it's you know terrain requires them to go uphill or whatever to get to the street so that's the the biggest kind of hurdle here um uh that that can't be born over the course of a period of time and if you're saying listen the town isn't going to come after you at 7 years this project is a critical need for that project to ever get done for anyone de Co or anyone to come in and tear that down the town is not going to tear that down the town is not going to take control of that property it's going to have to be somebody that specializes in Brownfield development um is there a way we can build something into this article that as it's presented to say listen we wave the seven-year requirement for this project specifically you do not have to tie in within seven years unless your septic fails then you have to tie in but if honestly if you if your septic fails it's going to probably end up being less it's $40,000 to do a seed now that's insane um you know $115,000 a time to sewers would be a a fraction of that so if we could build that in is that is that a compromise that would get other members on the uh committee here tonight to to support this I I think that came up at the meeting and uh one of the Commissioners actually reminded everyone that that is not a um something that is enforced by the water and S Department that's a bylaw a town bylaw the seven year it was I think it was two it got raised to five and then it got raised to seven but that is a town bylaw that would have to be changed it does it have to have a bylaw or can it be a specific article for this one specific time because we we did the same thing where we waved the tie-in fees or whatever for the the um historical district or whatever it was we would have to check with Town Council it is a bylaw so I don't know if we can just wave something for uh one project when it's is actually in the bylaws but I'll ask okay I I know that we waved the connection fees or whatever for to properties and that I I think that would still be subject to the bylaw um that would have been a water and store policy the connection fees okay not a town bylaw m Mr chair yes sir to to Cody's point and and it may may nudge me one way or the other but to Cody's point I would think if if you're looking for that type of waiver or whatever I would stipulate failure of your septic or sale of your house yeah oh yeah yeah I agree Mr chair yes Kevin I mean I just was just reading up on similar things in the background and there's a Province Town did a similar project in 2022 and just reading the Cape Cod Times 400 owners who had septic system insalled after January of 2000 will not be required to connect or pay a betterment until their septic system fails or when they choose to connect so it wouldn't be precedent setting it seems like other towns have done similar that private soci public I don't Mr [Music] CH FR y yeah go ahead all Kevin do you know if that was privately funded or municipally funded we have that option as well if a if a infrastructure Improvement is installed and it's privately funded that the requirement to tie in would only be point of sale or point of failure um where this project is municipally funded that that's where the tie-in requirement steps up at seven years this one 25 million from Grants and subsidies 5 million from State Paving funds and tax receipts 45 million from [Music] betterments if we could get a grant like that yeah be nice that's the only thing to think of here guys I mean we know this is a is a very sensitive subject we know it's a very small area and we know it's targeted to this one piece of of property you know to get rid of you know the eyesore and the problems that come with it um again I think they expected to have everything readily available so it was turn key they're going to clean the property up they pay a connection fee their water and sew is right in their front yard unfortunately we don't have the opportunity to do that this gives us one opportunity to move forward with that project and the biggest thing to look at here is and it's you know definitely not trying to sway anybody's opinions is that $3.5 Million number sitting right there uh that's one of the highest grants that's ever been given to a municipality for a job of this size um you know it's not something you sneeze at we know that the state is pulling back funds we've we've seen all of our budgets have to get crunched because of that the chances of seeing that number come through again even if we do try and apply in the future are pretty slim to see anything Sim similar to that um and we all have to assume that the cost of this project is going to increase and that Grant is going to decrease so the numbers that you see before you tonight might be the lowest um that we're going to see if we are looking at putting something substantial similar to what's been presented tonight on that piece of property um there is opportunity there to put something else there but this is what was presented to the town and the this is what we worked with and this is how we came up basically reversing ering what is necessary to be there to meet what they looking to build on that property to make their numbers work Mr chairman go ahead that the only other thing I would add to my previous comments is even with all this there's no guarantee that anything happens with that with that property and we're on the hook for two and a half million and the residents are on the hook for $750,000 and we still have that Isa you know is the town better served they're going to spend we're going to spend $5 million out of pocket on this is it better served to take control of the property make a park out of it try to clean it up can that be done with five million or less and just have some open space then this is there's nothing I mean this is just you have nothing here I mean I I appreciate all the work the water department the water department not the water Department's fault you guys did what you what they asked you to do so I I mean don't take that personally you're doing your job 100% but I'm saying is this the best use of money there's no guarantees of anything other than a possible $2 and a half million dollar to the taxpayer and still the same blight that you have there already so I mean I think all that needs to be into consideration thanks so yeah kind of on that note you know I too appreciate the the work that you that's gone into this I want to see this site get cleaned up I you know I support putting the the sewer in there um but there's another piece of it which is you know I would prefer to have a vote when we have a bigger representation of the the vcom so Mike I I would hope you'd be able to go back go back and talk to Town Council uh and see if there's anything that we can do here to move the numbers around to kind of reduce the burden on people and the reason I say that is based on what I'm hearing tonight the fincom may not approve this and that doesn't mean that it won't pass at town meeting but it also sounds like there's some opposition to to people at the at the you know the informational session too I would hate for this to go to town meeting and fail because of the numbers um you know because then we're stuck with the site which you know we know what what goes on with that and and so on um so you know trying to make this as palatable and attractive to people as possible I think is in everyone's best interest all right thank you Mr chair that K you your head I would also just caveat to everybody that I mean I don't want to say Field of Dreams you build it they will come but I we can argue six to one half dozen to the other that you know hindsight will always be 20 20 we could get stuck with a bladed property and this this line in there um but the same instance I mean we've had a reputation anecdotally to be tough to deal with in the past you know we couldn't up with the blade property if developers feel like we're just going to strong arm them I I'm not saying they either right or wrong um but if if we got the situation the line went in it's only going to ease if that it doesn't work out with devco it's going to make the property more palatable to Future developers I don't want a line in the blooded project but it's not like it's a detriment to the to getting that blooded property removed yeah I tend to agree with you Kevin but that's just me I mean i' I've lived in this town long enough to know that when it comes to financial issues and it starts to hit people's pocketbooks that they get very um animated say I I agree we could we could debate that at nauseum it's uh it's always speculative how much do you invest to entice versus the perception of strong arming there's no right or wrong answer yeah again my concern is that you know with with the way that it stands now even with the Grant and everything else and and this potentially being the best numbers that we can get that it still has a chance of I would say a decent chance of failing at at town meeting just based on what I'm hearing yes c um Mike or Frank what's what's the time frame on expiration of that Grant the 3.5 million there is a very short uh window on that it is on the slide I do not recall and I do not want to misspeak um I I would like to mention that uh you know we really appreciate all of your comments there is another informational session scheduled two weeks from today um at the uh community room I believe it's called um yeah the at the Housing Authority um so if anybody was able to uh attend that and ask questions directly to the the engineers and to the parties that would be there we hopefully have we have the same turnout as we did tonight um just being in a different location it may be less uh but the this is all information that we're looking for uh that time frame you're looking for is FY 24 to FY 26 um for that 3.5 million to be expended uh did did you say it was two weeks from Tonight Frank two weeks correct I believe it's posted on the website so expended by 26 that means we we've got to be broken ground and start drawing on it or it it just has to be um like what what initiates the the time frame because FY 26 is you know a year away I I believe I'm not positive but I believe that the plan was for uh if it was to pass a town meeting that construction would begin this coming fall and wrap up uh sometime before the end of FY 26 so I'm not sure that like you said do we have to start drawing on it for by then I'm not sure if it needs to be finished and spent by then or just begin drawing down by them I'm not 100% sure on that typically you can have uh you can ask for an extension if you have a project at underway yes um if it hadn't started by the end date or the Ming end date there's a better chance that you're going to get denied on that Mr chairman um before you before you go Zach I we haven't heard from Paul Steve or or Sandy I just want to give them the opportunity to speak if they want to Mr chair yeah go ahead Paul so Frank you already fixed the bad waterline on Reservoir Street there was one of your weak links in the whole system over that side of town correct yeah that's correct sure and this just gives us another feed between West Main and Reservoir part of the grid system to really help uh when you have any kind of water main issues to recirculate water around and all that so I'm 100% for the water main part of it for sure um I just had to same concern regarding the force within seven years if you had a new septic system in there I don't have a problem with the betterments I do think it helps the uh the people that's going by improve their um value so there's a way to possibly tweak that with the Board of Health on that policy mic that maybe that might be the sweeter that might make this go through cuz there are some of the houses are are newer and they might have a decent system that could go another 10 15 years before they need to be playing with it you know so I know sometimes it's because you want additional flow you need a certain amount of flow down the water M the uh sewer M to make it work so but yeah um good luck with it Frank I appreciate the work you're putting in thank you sir Mr chair go ahead Sandy yeah I I I think you know you said what I was thinking that just I really want to see this this um passet town meeting um anything that that can be done to make it I think more pable so that that that objection of those people who have to pay to tie in um is lessened or or you know in some way um relieved would be I think more successful or more more likely to be successful a town meeting yeah I feel the same way go ahead Jack has looked at at all uh just going running aligned from that reading bot property out to Main Street and just affecting the small group of houses I think they're probably two or three uh that run the line instead of going all the way down I think the problem is there's another apartment complex um if you come from um East Main Street heading down El Street Beyond Reen Barton there's an apartment complex on the left side whose system has failed and uh they have a waiver now through the Board of Health because they know that sore is coming down the street so if the project doesn't move forward they've got to do something but do we have a cost of just doing that small section I mean the objective here is to to develop that property I don't believe there's been a cost analysis done on providing an individual line uh to that property uh again I don't know honestly if that would be something that would trigger the removal of the grant um because there was everything that was spelled out in the grant indicated connections along the way um basically fronting critical needs areas and all of that so that would be something the language would have to be looked at to make sure that anything we did changing the original design from what was presented um and how we got the design Grant approved and the construction Grant um we want to make sure that any any changes to that any modifications uh wouldn't uh give us the chance of actually losing that Grant okay thank you Mr chair yes B um I I think to to maybe Zach's [Music] question instead of going to Main Street going to Reservoir Street because isn't there a sewer down there at at the Crossing of elm and Reservoir I'll take that there there is um we actually looked at that as one viable option unfortunately the size of the sewer pumping station that is down off of Rumford Road cannot handle that much capacity it was never designed for the additional flows it was designed however to pick up a small portion of Reservoir Street uh the noodly pave section um and it was just something I didn't have a seame put down in the previous years so we had looked at that and in order to make that work and go that way we would have to bypass that station and basically run a sewer M down Reservoir all the way down to the beginning uh as close to Cobb Street as as you can physically get where our Cobb Street SE pumping station is the large station and basically drop into the manhole before it goes into that facility so the cost for that far exceeded the cost of running it this way uh basically digging up a road where people already have sewer and already have water down Reservoir was going to be far more impactful than uh taking the route that we are now okay um last question because I I know it's always said um and I I I do I am somewhat skeptical has anyone ever done um an appraisal that says Bill rundi's house with sewer is worth X Bill rundi's house house with septic is worth why I mean we always say oh you put the sewer there it's your your value goes up is that proven because I I'm I'm not sure it is thank you that's a yes and no answer so yes there have been have studies been done on it no we cannot do it and come up with a single uniform number because each property is different each tie-in is different um the area that somebody may have a septic or even two septics on one piece of poppe one that may have failed and been abandoned and one that may currently be in use and then have to be abandoned when they connect to sewer that frees up all of that available space that now becomes buildable land where before you couldn't put a garage you know if you wanted to in your backyard because that's where your septic and your leeching field was so you know it opens up other avenues that have value attached to them and each property is us in its own way uh that it's very hard to assess what that number is uh the biggest immediate cost savings that you could see would be the potential would be the difference in the cost to connect to a sewer whether you even had to pay a betterment and a contractor to connect compared to what it would be if you walked out your door right now and stepped in the puddle and unfortunately it was your septic system that failed now you got to call a contractor tomorrow to avoid getting penalties and fines from the local Board of Health you can't stay in your home you have have to go to to a a hotel or to a family member's house while that work is being done and it's far more in invasive to your property to have an entire septic system replaced than it is to have a trench dug from your foundation to the street so we're in the 30 to $50,000 range depending on the septic depending on conditions uh of your property and hopefully nobody built over your septic or over your your uh your lines and now you have to deal with taking porches down moving sheds all of that other stuff that you know adds to the cost of having to replace that type of a uh item that's typically forgotten about because it's under the ground but again if if I'm 100 feet off the street we're getting pretty close to even that that's going to be a $40,000 trench if you dig it with mechanical means it's going to get expensive if you have it marked out and you have all your lines traced and you come in with a trenching piece equipment like a Ditch Witch machine you could run an inch and a half line and you never even know it was there because the grass we folded right back up down in the same trench the same day teolog come along thank you thank you you're welcome yeah Zach go ahead and the other thing that nobody mentioned here is s is not free I mean has anybody lived has anybody lived in a house that's connected to Su I mean I have I mean they charge you one time coming in and two times going out uh you water your flowers you're paying sewage uh just I'll give you an example in my business in New Bedford which we are high I am a high water user and they build monthly in New Bedford they B not quarterly they build monthly I average $1,000 a month for the water 2,000 a month for the for the sewer so sewer is very expensive and in a in a 20 year 30-year period you could replace your septic system four times which you're going to pay for so it is ask anybody that has it Mr chair yes Cody um I don't when I looked at um this project for my own home and the the cost of of tying in um the tying cost it it's a private line there was one so it's a it's not a betterment um it's a a connection feed which for my house was 15,500 and then the cost um estimate that I got at the time which was four or five years ago um was like10 or $12,000 um and that was going to include a pump because it was the connection it's 150 ft from from my septic system to the road basically um so exactly the scenario you're talking about Bill um but when I looked at it I wasn't going to hits I wasn't going to exceed the minimum quarterly charge and is that that's the case for a lot of users in town I wasn't going to be tied into water but I was going to be tied into sewer and you can set your meter up so that it's on the other side of um so that you're not getting charged for filling your pool or Watering your yard or whatever so the meteor setup on that side but it's like is it $78 a quarter or for some reason that number is in my head it was like I there was no there was no scenario where I was going to exceed that and it wasn't it wasn't anywh near $1,000 correct yeah in your situation um with having uh the line set up the way it is if a house is on a well we don't meter the whole house so any of the faucets that go to the outside the outside fixtures um any irrigation system that you have because you're on a private well is allowed all of that water is not metered uh totally different where if you're on a municipal system 100% of the water going through the home has to be metered with the assumption that 90% of it is making it to the Sewer so unless somebody is spending a lot of time out there holding their hand held hose and water in their grass you know for the most part it is going to the Sewer is is the it's a it's a corly charge right the it's both quarterly there is a minimum quarterly charge correct for both and most is it is it correct that most houses most single family homes don't exceed that minimum if they do it's not by much um you'd be uh pretty surprised I mean I I know my I home we you know don't you definitely wouldn't exceed the minimum for sewer but you know I we see more and more single family residences using an astonishing astonishingly high amount of water that you wouldn't think so but for 12 it's a 12 unit minimum for sewer consumption and then it's if you exceed the 12 units it's 95% of your water consumption is what your sewer consumption is so um it's really I I know that sounds like a cop up Cody but or I'm sorry I'm assuming it was uh but it's it's totally totally uh different with every house and and all these houses right now run well right there's no there's no water line running down no there is water there is water so this is an upgrade of the water line so that this is an upgrade of the water line and the uh the firefighting um systems that would be out there right now that system uh that there is there are is there are two fire hydrants on that street where they should be with current standards every 500 feet or less um so there would be drastic upgrades to that the size of the water M more than likely is going to remain um as an 8 in which is a moderately sized water M but because it sandwiched between two 12in water Ms we're going to have a significant amount of flow coming through there and we could change that at the last possible minute and go up to a 10 uh increased volume if necessary um specifically if there was a request at this property to build something larger than what they're looking to do now um but even an 8 in line would actually support a small fire pump if they needed to do something like that at that property which is not being presented right now and so they're already on the Neer they're already paying water it's not necessarily going to increase their water their water charges it's just adding a sewer charge on the other side Cor Zach you wanted to know someone who has water and soore I have water and soore four adults in my house 560 a quarter for water and S mine was 116 the the bill I just got from Frank a I'm in my MW so I pay more anyone else on this topic so so Mike you'll talk to the Board of Health and Town Council and we'll we'll uh revisit this on Monday all right very good do we have anything else no all right then the chair well any other discussion on anything okay chair would entertain a motion to adjourn so moved second the second third fourth all right Kevin yes Steve yes Sandy yes Paul nice job yes thank you Cody yes Zach yes and I am a yes as well so thank you very much everyone and we'll talk Monday have a good night