Board of Public Works Meeting January 22, 2026

So, what I'd like to do is um begin the meeting uh of the Dartmouth Board of Public Works for January 22nd, 2026.

Um I believe we have a quorum, so I'll take uh I'll take role. Uh Mr. Leel.

Yeah.

Uh the chair, Mr. Almy, is here. Mike's here just to let you know.

Uh there he is. Mr. G, we were just taking roll.

Are you present?

He's muted.

Present.

There he is. So, uh all members are present. This meeting is being uh recorded.

Uh Tim, very briefly, uh it looks like we've got a significant storm coming in on uh starting Saturday night, possibly into Sunday night.

And uh as part of your uh director's uh information at the end of this meeting, I'd like to ask you to talk a little bit about uh what the residents can expect in terms of plowing and also what their responsibilities are for clearing sidewalks just because it's it's been a while since we've had a real real snowstorm and this one could be quite real.

All right. Um, all right. Getting getting back to our um agenda.

Our first order of business is to approve and accept warrants for the bills payable. Uh, do I have a motion?

Motion to approve and accept the warrants for bills payable period ending December 15, 22, and 29 of 2025.

I have a motion by Mr. Label. Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Mr. Gier. Uh, Mr. Leel, how do you vote?

Yes.

Mr. Gier, yes.

Chair votes yes. Item is approved. Uh, next item is to approve and accept payrolls.

Prove and accept approve and accept the payrolls for the week ending December 13, 2027 of 2025 and January 3rd, 10 and 17 of 2026.

I have a motion to approve. Do I have a second?

Second.

Second by Mr. Gier. Uh Mr. Leel, how do you vote?

Yes.

Mr. Gier, yes.

Chair votes yes. Uh item is approved.

Uh, next item is to approve and accept meeting minutes for the meeting of December 15, 2025. That was a joint meeting and Mr. Label, I recall you were not present.

That is correct.

Uh, Mr. G, have you had a chance to look the meeting minutes over?

I have looked at them and I make the motion that we accept the meetings of December the 15th.

We have a motion by Mr. Gier. The chair will um second. Mr. Gier, how do you vote?

Yes.

Chair votes yes. Um I want to point out that the meeting minutes were uh prepared by uh a new preparer and uh I think Tim if you could take a look at the format.

My own personal preference is that I preferred the format we had at the meeting before, but that's that's a matter of style rather than substance.

Absolutely.

Um, so moving down the agenda, our next item is old business. Uh, item A, an update of water enterprise rates and quarterly billing. Tim, yes. So, so as we know water rates uh have increase has been approved at 13%.

Um at the same time the TS structure has been adjusted and along with the quarterly billing uh adjustment from bianual billing. Um those you know new bills are planned to go out in February for the first quarter. Um, I have worked with Steve Sullivan on putting together a public notification letter to be inserted into the bills which basically explains the increase uh the reasoning for for the increase, the

impact of the increase and uh and other uh information um that the residents can use to keep an eye on their water uh to monitor their use um to conserve use and to go on online. We created a a calculator where you can go on to the website and put in your usage and get an estimated cost of your bill. Um the the state also has a similar um tool, a lot

more detail into into how you use water uh to basically give you a you know an estimated usage as well. um as well as a lot of uh conservation tips and tools.

Um and then we have we have our ion on water uh program which you can log on to with your account number and you also need your customer ID which which is not on the bill and basically you have to call the water department to to get your your customer ID and we're trying to work um with our billing company to get that on a bill so customers can just see their their account and see their

customer ID and be able to log uh to ion water.

Um also our billing clerk Chrissy has been working hard on a on a quarterly billing schedule um for all of our water and sewer bills. So that I sent that an additional document in our packets. Um so our you know our first uh billing date is scheduled for February 16th and uh and then it goes our next quarter will be May then August and then November.

And we worked with worked with the collector's office um to to offset our billing with taxes real estate taxes so they don't and send at the same time.

Board members, any questions?

Nope.

Uh Tim, I'd like to work with you and Steve on a uh press release emphasizing the need for residential customers to um control outside irrigation in the summer.

Yeah. and hint at potential enforcement of the rules and also uh remind people to be sure they don't have water running inside if they leave their houses for any length of time. Those two things seem to be the most recurrent complaints we've had and I think it would be good to get some kind of a uh discussion or put materials out so people are reminded. Absolutely. And I've been working on also a public

notification for, you know, conservation of, you know, non-essential water use basically.

Yeah. Yeah. Okay.

We can work on that and uh Yeah. And moving forward, you know, it'd be good to work with, you know, down the community media to get that out, you know.

Yeah. Okay. All right. I'll uh I'll connect with Steve on on Friday and and um if you I know you're going to be really busy because of the way things are going right now. So uh I'll I'll see see if Steve and I can get something to you that um uh that anticipates what you think is important and uh help it along.

Uh the sooner we get that out the better. I think I agree. Absolutely. Mr. Chairman, before we move on from this item, um, one of the things that we did historically in the past is we had some interns and some senior citizens in the senior workoff program that would be assigned to different departments to help out. And I'm thinking that in fact, we should have specifically a person who

might be working part-time under those programs.

specifically to look during the the hottest months of June, July, August, and when we see situations where uh sprinklers are being used that are in violation of the regulation that they would have the opportunity to speak to those individuals and ask them to correct the situation. I think I think imposing this upon the current water staff with what they have to do, we could better address it by having

somebody either a retiree or an intern help educate people when we see violations happening.

Yeah, we can definitely look into that.

Yeah, that would that would be something uh I think beneficial. I can think of a number of instances where seniors in the tax work off program uh worked on stuff for DPW.

Mr. G, if you have some experience, could you maybe work with uh Tim and uh the town administrator's office and give it a a little bit of uh historical background and shape so they they can um understand precedent and kind of how to go about it.

Definitely.

We also have a new communications person uh at town hall. uh she just started so we can work as well.

That's a great idea.

Yeah.

Um excuse me, Mr. Chairman, just as a reminder for me, what is the town's recourse for people who are in violation?

Tim, there are fines uh laid out in in in the rules and regulations or rules and policies of the water division. I believe it starts with a $50 fine and then it it tears up, okay, for multiple violations.

And if if a if a violation is reported as someone sent out to observe the infraction so that the uh fine sort of holds water, no pun intended.

Yeah.

I think if if I get the idea uh of Mr. G's suggestion is it sounds as if there would be someone who would make an initial contact in of a of a water user and explain to them the value of conserving water and the risk of continuing to waste water. and the um a fine would occur perhaps subsequently from and would be imposed by professional staff if the water waste continued. Is that kind of where you

were headed with it?

Yes.

Y yeah. Okay.

So basically we we you know we we usually send a notification with the fine and give them a timeline to uh resolve the issue. um whether it be about a week to to two weeks and then and then after that I believe the fines uh daily if they don't resolve the issues gentleman Solomon uh also with the quantity billing we could put a reminder each time to uh about the water use

restriction usually they used to get it once once a year now we can do it more often so it's going to help it along and also So when we get a call in the office, someone's one of the staffs go out with that letter and explains to them why they shouldn't be using their water because of the restriction.

Yeah, that I I think this is going to be um an awareness and change habits kind of effort uh to be most effective. So all right, anything else board members?

All right. So uh Mr. Chairman, I do have one more piece of information based on water conservation. Um, uh, just to let everybody know, we we're currently entered into a a mild drought in southeastern Massachusetts. So just let you know I I you know along with notification that we put out we can inform the the residents as well that we are currently in a mild drought.

Even though we have snow on the ground, we've had some rain, we just haven't had enough to sustain the uh groundwater levels and river levels, pond levels.

All right. Yeah, that's I think Rob, Rob, I I think one of the things that people have to understand is, you know, Tim is saying a mild drought, but the problem is that each of these aquifers that we're drawing upon in Dartmouth for Dartmouth water supply has certain restrictions on them that when they get to a certain level or the wetlands or rivers that are adjacent to them get to a certain level, they have

to turn off those wells.

which means we're buying water from the city of New Bedford. People have to understand it's not just a trout. If you're concerned about how much water we're buying from New Bedford, it also has to do with us being totally subsistent upon aquifers which are affected by droughts. So people have to understand that that you know it's it's a situation where we we don't have any control. That's state

and federal law that you have to shut those wells off.

Yeah. Yeah. And you know, we do have, you know, bylaws and enforcement in in hygur areas for, you know, construction and recharge, but you know, it's never been really enforced. Um, and that it's really we find it really lax. when we try to enforce compliance, uh, we get a lot of flack for it, you know, both from town agencies and, you know, and the residents, you know, it's difficult. We become the

bad guys, you know.

Well, I when this comes up before the zoning board, I think you might invite one of your board members to come in and explain how important it is.

Absolutely.

All right. Anything else on this?

No. Yeah, I think we're going to be looking at the issue of water use um more than once in the next six eight months. So, okay. Uh old business B update on the operating budget and CIP.

Yes. So, I presented our FY2027 operating budget to the finance committee on December 12th. Um it it was well received. Um we had a a few minor questions um nothing substantial and uh you know we met with a new board member uh who will be our liaison um moving forward uh named Dedra um she seemed very interested in and some experience in DPW and in other communities so it went well um we're planning um the

capital improvement plan uh presentation is currently tenative at the end of February. Um and we're working on a date uh for for my presentation as well. Uh both the operating budget and the capital budget uh proposals are are in the packet. I don't know if the does the board have any comments or questions at this time on it.

Board members, any comments or questions? The only comment I have, Mr.

Chair, is that I really think we should put something in the capital improvement plan to do a operation and functional analysis of the transfer station. Um, I see some bottlenecks up there that I think, you know, that that layout of that station's been as it is, I think, for probably about 30 years. And there are some situations that I think it makes it difficult for the residents and

for the individuals who operate the facility. And I think I don't know if this is something we would do internally through the engineering division. I think we maybe should be looking at um putting together some money from the solid waste uh enterprise fund to fund a functional analysis and a recommendation on that.

Um I think it would help the residents and the operators up there.

I know we work with the with the district as well on this and u you know we we did a lot I've done a lot of this in the past uh internally uh and we could you know we could work on it internally as well. We do have a capital item for uh basic reconstruction of the scale house um and transfer station. Um so that you know at that time we can

probably work on this as well.

I think one of the the priorities and why we should uh move forward with it because I think the way the MSW bins and the demolition bins are set up and the way people have to back into them um I think there's a I think there's a worker and public safety issue there where there's conflicts between the demo and the MSW bins and uh you see some pretty hair raising situations there where cars are very

close to workers and others who are using them. And I think before there's some kind of significant accident there, we can uh address it and figure out how much it's going to cost to correct it.

I agree.

Yeah, Tim, I agree. Uh I had the opportunity to be up there with a trailer um a few weeks ago. I think if you if people are going to bring trailers in there, I think there needs to be a a different traffic flow that includes uh utilization of the space uh at the far end of the transfer station and perhaps um move some of the vehicles that are stored up there. uh and um

have a a a more rational arrangement of the various bins and and as I say a different traffic flow particularly for bringing trailers through. Um and I couldn't agree more uh with Mr. Gier about the worker and public safety issue. I agree with that. Um, I think I think Rob, one of the things that can be addressed, you know, presently is those operators are probably going through pairs of shoes

every month because I see them walk from that cardboard bin up in the area that you're talking about all the way back to the MSW bins, to the demo bins, to the styrofoam bins, to the mattress bins.

And it's like something's got to be done so that they, you know, these operations are a little more fluid and a little more tolerable for the workers.

Can I say something, Miss Al? Anything beyond the cardboard container, we're not granting access there, no matter what, because that's where we store all our uh catch basin material, all our working material, not just vehicles are stored up there.

Plus, that's what we call if we were doing a road project, the trust come in and drop wrap up there.

We can't have public beyond that footprint. Plus, that's the access road to the back for the compost pile that the uh water pollution uh control uses.

Yeah. So, so you no trailers. That's what I I actually rules the regulation. There's no dump trailers allow for demo there.

Yeah. So, I'm not thinking about dump trailers. I'm thinking about somebody with a a small U-Haul where they've got they've put a um That's real.

Yes. You know, a washer or something, you know, that's accepted and you know, they get in there and they got to turn around and it's tight. And so, I think traffic flow is definitely something to look at.

Yeah, we're definitely there. We're in exactly the fixed footprint because they and the outer edge wetlands back there that were restricted to get access to um we're in a tight footprint up there.

There is on record he worked on it when he was uh um in the engineering department the uh permitting up there for that transport station. We have a design plan there which board members should freely look at it and see how we can place things and I mean it's on file with the state. Timmy has it. We file every year permit there. It's permitted there. Um feel free to take a look at it and

pencil in what we can do up there. But we're stuck in a tight footprint.

Yeah, that's that's apparent. There's no doubt it's very challenging. Um, and we can't have the public down beyond there in a working area down here at the bottom because at any given day we got machines being around there, move, trucks being moved. Well, you know, he said that's even a worse hazard having them drive down here.

All right.

So, Tim, can can you take Mr. Hier's comments and fold that into the work that's going to be done next year?

Absolutely.

All right. Thank you. All right.

Anything else on the uh operating budget? I I do have one comment and that is uh Tim, as the operating budget is developed and as the CIP is developed, um if you could get the board members copies of documents marked draft with a date. Um so we have a little bit more time to to look over these documents.

They're fairly uh comprehensive. There's a lot of in information there. Um and understand how they've been u so we can see how they've been developed.

You see the operating budget in the CIP.

Yeah. Yeah. For example, when you when you go in to talk to the uh finance committee and it would be nice to see um what you're going to give them uh so we're we're aware.

Absolutely. and also give us a little more time before a meeting like this before uh we're in a public setting and would like to have any kind of conversation.

Yeah, we can definitely do that.

All right.

Next item is Could I ask one more question? Sorry to de labor this, but in the water enterprise fund, the 1.750 uh 1,750,000 in for non-energy utility water, that's New Befford Water.

Yes. Yep, that is correct.

All right. Um, how is that tracking in this budget year?

We've overspent that already.

Okay. Is this enough given the fact so based on what we're our schedule is uh in here in November and December um we we spent a total of $1,600 in water. Um which is good. Uh, you know, we worked with Steve to to to really work on limiting the amount of water that we're pumping uh from New Bedford, especially through these winter months where it's it's typically not needed um except during peak time some

sometimes. So, if they can, you know, adjust the flows and it's been working.

Um, right now we're working on getting the the CT pipe uh and completed and getting the Penelli wells back online.

Uh, we can get another uh three wells back online. Um, which will, you know, supplement a lot of that what we've been using. Those wells have been off since 2020. Um, so once we get those welds back online, we'll be in much better shape.

So, so like I said, I I expected it it to be enough. Um, but you know, depending on mechanical failures, electrical failures, you know, we've had many uh we've had storms that knock out the same wells twice and took out the electric and transformers. So, so, you know, barring any emergencies, um, we should be in in good shape. But, you know, there's always failures.

I just want to note it, you know.

Yep.

So, working with um with the increase uh the rate increase and we did we did increase that budget line item um from last year.

So uh and and especially the you know we expect the city to increase uh the rates again by 8% again and I have an expected increase in the silver as well for for 3%. Um which they've been consistent with over the last couple years as well but we haven't we haven't received that notice yet. And uh I do have a couple emails into the city to discuss uh the rates and and possibly lowering our rate

uh or working on a tier where we when we use more than our normal use that we you know maybe we can get a a lower rate you know.

Yep.

Okay. We we do pay we do pay quite a bit than their residents and you know as as our discussions went that you know they couldn't lower our rate lower than what their residents pay because they'd have an outcry but you know and I think we're comfortable with you know a reasonable reduction there to uh to help us as well typically 20% isn't it?

Yes. Y Tim, where are we in in um updating the agreement with uh with New Bedford?

Um I I sent a couple emails. They haven't responded, so I was going to send the letter out.

All right. And then you do you think it would be worthwhile to have one of the uh the board members directly involved in those discussions when they occur?

It it could be um it you know it I I assume so they have a a water board, right? They have a water commission. So So if we're discussing with their water commission, I think having one of our board members would be would be uh received.

All right. So if you would keep us surprised as to what's going on, please.

Absolutely. But right, in light of the nature of the, you know, the discussion we're having here now and those wells going back online, I think some of our consultants need to tell us based upon what we have knowledge of of the increased number of residential units that are in the planning stage, in the permitting stage or are fully permitted. What is going to be the impact of those as it relates to

our wells and how much water we're going to buy from New Bedford? Because I'm not convinced yet and I haven't seen anything to convince me is that we're going to be getting out of this situation of the significant amount of water based upon in excess of 1,400 units coming into the town.

Right.

I think I think we need to know that information. I think we have a responsibility to get that information and we need to provide it to the decision makers who are the permit granting authorities. And I think the sooner we get this relative to our adequacy of providing water for the residents and the commercial customers in our town, we need to get some answers.

So Tim, is that part of the discussion of new business F?

Yeah. Where? Yeah.

Water supply source research.

Yes, that's correct.

Okay. So, we'll uh Mr. G, I think we'll have a chance to discuss that further uh later on in the agenda. I agree with you.

All right. Uh anything else on the operating budget and CIP hearing? None. Uh move on to the comprehensive wastewater management plan request for uh qualifications. Tim.

Okay. So we we received two submitts uh for the uh CWMP. Um and we're working on a timeline to review the RFQS. Um so the the the committee has set up with uh myself, Paul Dart, uh Dennis Moss, Sandy Waterman, and Mike. So we'll be sitting down uh everybody has has the RFQS uh for review and uh we'll be setting up scheduling a meeting to discuss.

All right, any questions on that item?

Okay. So, uh my only comment is that this has been uh uh some time in the development and uh hopefully we're on track to start making some real progress. And um I'd also note that the way this is shaping up, there should be a pretty significant item in uh the budget for next year for this.

So, all right. I'll look for that when you give us the uh CIP.

Absolutely.

Uh if I may, Mr. Chairman, Tim, would it be possible to get me a copy of that? I'd be interested in in reading it.

Absolutely.

And um yeah, a copy of each submitt.

Yeah. Yep.

Appreciate that. Thank you.

Anything else on this item?

All right.

Uh item D, operational study.

There are no current updates on the operational study. Um we were pushing forward uh to to get this study underway. Um, and then I know that, you know, the town administrator uh made some recommendations or more of a a move in and and in our operational uh staffing here and kind of has proposed a business manager uh for the DPW. Uh so they're currently working on that job description

and salary so I can get it in the budget and uh and then he would like to uh post that position uh as soon as possible. So you know that you know originally you know the operational study would would you know and their report would to recommend you know operational changes like that. So I think we're moving forward with uh with the town administrator and and then I think after

that we can we can continue with the operational study.

The uh board members, do you have any comments?

I I do.

Tim, the select board made the operational study uh a priority some time ago.

Yes. And I'm concerned that uh we're not making the kind of progress that I thought we would be in the last few months.

Um in particular, if we're starting to reach ahead of the study and implement changes in staffing, not that those changes won't be beneficial, not that those changes are uh not justified. I think a business manager of a department as big as yours is uh absolutely warranted.

I agree.

However, uh if we're going to do the operational study, we need to get it done. Okay. So, you might um pass that on to the uh the other folks that are working on it and see if you can make additional progress.

Well, good.

All right. Uh anything else on the operational study board members?

Next item is uh storm debris planning update.

So we don't have any specific updates for the storm debris planning, but we did meet with the emergency management peer group this week uh to discuss the draft comprehensive emergency management plan. Um the debris plan was brought up in this discussion and I'm I am working with the EMA director uh to schedule uh to sit down and go over it our debris plan in more detail um and with him in

the uh hopefully within the next couple weeks and then I'll you know and then after that I I plan to convene with the with the district um along with the EMA director's comments.

Okay, board members, any questions on this?

Hearing none, uh we'll move on to new business.

Just uh just to let you know, the town is planning to bring the comprehensive emergency management uh plan to the select board uh for approval in February.

Okay. Could you be sure that uh our board members see that?

Yes.

And know the date.

All right. Uh new business item A, uh notice of sewer met betterment lean re uh release. Tim.

Yeah. So this is a so the attorney working on title for this property uh requested the release of the notice of betterment uh which is not the actual bedment that that is the order of which gets released by the assessors after after complete payment. Um the notice gets recorded and put put on the property to to inform uh you know anybody especially in light of a transfer of property that there is

a betterment coming. Um this this betterment uh was recorded in book 4161 page 188. Um the information is in in your packets. Uh and I recommend approval of this release of notice of betterment.

Board members, any questions?

Tim, what is the location?

Uh 802 uh state room.

Uh give me I mean point of reference, where is that?

Is that the parcel just uh west of Walmart?

It is.

It is west of Walmart, but it's it's it's it's actually Let's see. It's east of Route 6 Marine and Reed Road and west of Brums Auto.

Okay. So, it's the one with the big rocks on it.

Um, no. So, the the rocks, that's the restaurant, right? Talking about No, on the other side, east of the Oh, yeah. So, it's just it's just east of that site as well.

Is that I mean, it's just east of the of the of the leg site. Yeah.

So, that's the site that's just approved by the zoning board of appeals for what 50 units?

Yes. Yep. Absolutely.

Yep.

Yeah, it's it's kind of in front of that site. Absolutely.

Any other questions, board members? Do I have a motion?

Motion to approve the notice of SU betterment lean release at 802 State Road.

I have a motion by Mr. Gier. Do I have a second?

Second.

I'm sorry. Motion by Mr. Label. Second by Mr. Gier. Mr. Mr. Leel, how do you vote?

Yes.

Mr. Gier, yes.

Board uh board chair votes yes. Uh item is approved. Next item is approval of a license utility layer application.

Tim.

Okay. So, so TD Construction recently applied for this utility layer license. Um actually after hitting water service line at 271 State Road. Um the proposed site work uh is at the uh the cyarch on state road the old ponderosa building. Um it was the proposed work was permitted by the building department and DPW was not privy to the to to the plan review or permit review. Um and uh you know TD Construction didn't

contact DBW for any for any uh utility markouts uh during their construction uh and hit the water service. So our crews responded had to shut it down.

They had to dug because the service shut up didn't didn't function properly.

And at that time they were told that they could not complete the work because they weren't a licensed utility layer bonded with the town. Um so in order to turn the water back on they had to hire a licensed utility layer to complete the repair um and get and get that permitted. Um a couple days later that um our senior engineer Paul uh actually noticed the car coming out of the car

wash, reached out to the water department and they found out that the water was repaired and turned back on.

Um so they had completed the repair and turned it back on without a permit inspection or permission.

uh they were issued um a letter and a and a maximum fine to the property owner um for for that work which is which is in the in the rules and policies of the water division that maximum of $300.

But um this you know the contractor is is propose is requesting to be licensed so he can complete the work the repair and get the water turned back on.

Board members any questions?

I don't think I want to see him working in the town.

Yes. Yeah.

You know, uh, the other thing I kind of enjoyed reading this is, uh, these letters of recommendation.

Yes. 2020.

I I I mean, shouldn't we be asking people to get us something a little bit more current?

Yes. Yes. Yep.

Uh, I mean, the guy's already got three strikes.

Yeah. Yep.

Timothy, can I say can I say something about that? It's not only the contractor's fault, Mr. Leel, it's also an internal problem with the building department.

Um, they gave him the authority to work without a DPW review or conservation permits because there's other issues too there with conservation. Um, because I was the one that responded to that problem. Um, so it's a twofold situation.

Um, I don't have I I don't have the board package to be there to reference, but unless they're qualified, we got we're just accepting too many contractors now that that really could drum up anything to say that they're qualified, but my opinion, they're not, right? It's a twofold situation that we're dealing with right now in town. um how that got approved and commenceed work while our

complete review because if we had an opportunity to review it, we would have put the existing service and make it mark it up because we had good record plans of that service and this issue wouldn't have been a problem.

Well, you know, Paul, I appreciate you, you know, defending the contractor and and noting that, but any contractor, you know, worth his salt is not going to put a shovel to ground without calling Dick Safe and without calling a town before they start hitting utilities.

Yeah.

Oh, absolutely. Because I get that excuse a thousand times. I call Dick Safe. But you, you know, I've been doing it long enough, Miss Lavel. When you call Dix, they tell you exactly who they're notifying. We are considered a private entity. So they don't mention us. It's your responsibility to notify us. But apparently the way that they thought they do that, they build upon it, gave them pop block to do it

anything they want because that's apparently who told them to go ahead and do the repair and turn it on.

Yeah.

So, u Tim, we got two things here. We've got a um an issue with whether we uh license this contractor and we have a with the ladder the commun the internal communication issue. Would you please set up a meeting uh between uh myself, the town administrator, the building official, and at the town administrator's discretion, a select board member?

It's time to have that kind of a discussion.

Absolutely.

Chairman, on a on the particular matter uh at hand, the the situation of an intrusion into the public water supply is a very serious issue. I can tell you numerous instances where this has caused problems where communities have had to put boil orders in place.

I would I would make the motion so we expedite this. I would make the motion that we deny the request for uh the permit requested.

All right, Tim before uh so I have a motion on the table by Mr. G. And do I have a second?

I'll second that.

I have a second by Mr. Leel. Tim, before we vote, would you give us a sense uh and possibly Paul, you might have something to add to this of what might happen if we move forward with a denial.

Well, I'll tell you what might happen like everything else. Uh what normally happens here when we have contractors that are hired by a site uh to do a site work and they're not bonded to do it.

hire somebody that is bonded. Okay. So, they were told that day, Mr. Alme um I was on site, I responded. I had a our engineers respond there too to get all the information he needed. He explained the um regulations to the contractor or the superintendent was there what had to be done. Uh contact the office, get a list, hire a bonded contractor, pull the permit, make the repair, and we'll turn

the water on. Um, couple of days later I get a call from Paul Do and I find out the water's on and it wasn't followed.

He was told what need to be do. We always have a situation to where they get out of where they're in and it's hire somebody on the list.

Yeah, I understand that. But I um I guess I'm going to be more specific in my questions, Tim. If the uh unlicensed contractor continues to work on the site, uh what is the second tier of fines? Do the fines increase?

Uh site work is not under our jurisdiction unless it's uh if they work if they do any any um any trenching or any work around the uh either the water or sewer connection.

Yeah. So there is the the maximum fine in our water uh rules is $300.

Okay. That doesn't that doesn't increase for subsequent violations.

Does not it stays at 300. Okay.

For every day. And uh just to let you know that's item E on our discussion today.

Yeah. I Yeah, I know that's coming up.

Um, and then, uh, what what would a stop work order look like?

Uh, to a stop work order, we would have typically goes through the billing department for that. And I don't think they're agreeable to placing a stop work order for the DPW.

All right. I' I'd like to reiterate my request for a meeting. Uh, with that, uh, board members, any other comments?

All right. Uh, Mr. Gier, how do you vote?

I vote to deny the request.

Mr. Leel, I vote to deny the request.

Chair votes to deny the the request. Uh, Tim, if you'd pass that on both to the contractor and to the building inspector please.

Yes. And uh you know historically we've worked well with you know the building department but when we need a a seasoned assist uh stop work and uh just recently that's you know well think about think about sailing every once in a while you got to trim your sails. So okay.

All right. Uh next item is uh an engineering contract with uh TA and Howard.

Yes. So this is stated as a sanitary survey, but it's actually not the sanitary survey. It's uh it was a corrective action from the sanitary survey uh requiring uh water system risk and resilience assessment uh which will identify critical assets and provide recommended updates to the water system emergency response plan.

Um this uh the submission of of this uh risk and resilient asset uh report is due in June. Uh so the contract for this uh engineering contract is for $16,200 to get that completed and submitted. I recommend approval.

Board members, any questions?

Tim, how does this relate to item F?

It's more um of basically a a risk assessment of our entire system, right? Both our treatment and and distribution system rather than anything to uh source new supply. Uh so this is an you know basically identifying our existing critical assets. So if we do have additional supply wells and treatment facilities then those will be additional assets that will have to be included in this assessment in the future.

Right? It occurs to me that if we're going to look be looking at additional sources, uh the nature of those sources and the timing uh of the need for those sources may relate to some of the the sources we have in their condition, their ability and reliability. So I think study should feed into um item F.

Yeah. And it does, you know, part of our critical assets is also our our connection with, you know, with the city of Newford for a supplemental supply.

So, right.

As well.

All right. Uh, do I have a motion on this?

Uh, motion to approve the engineering contract sanitary service tatter and Howard for $16,200.

I have a motion by Mr. Leel. Do I have a second?

Second. I have a second by Mr. Gier. Uh any discussion?

Mr. Leel, how do you vote?

Yes.

Mr. Gier, yes.

Chair votes yes. Items approved. Uh next item is discussion sewer flow and loading study update.

So um we had worked with our consultant uh back through throughout 2023 uh to study and update our sewer flow and loadings data with a final report that came out in January of 2024. Um, since this report was completed, we've had multiple proposals for large residential uh developments that were not part of the sewer master plan or former TWWMP and those flows weren't included, you know, in in our master

design uh for our treatment facility or our infrastructure, you know. So I' I've discussed updating this report with our consultant uh and they agree that given the amount of development proposed endomment that we should definitely you know analyze you know the impact of of all these proposed flows to our collective system infrastructure and treatment facility. Um, and also, you know, while we're working on a lot of

these proposals through peer review, they're they're reviewing the proposals, but they can't uh include any cumulative data from any other proposed uh developments because those developments are not currently approved. So, they have to basically stay within the lines uh uh that are laid out by, you know, the state's housing authority. So we, you know, I think doing this on our on our end and

completing this impact study and flow and loading report update uh will help us see what we're looking at for for future flows and and uh and the impacts on our infrastructure.

Board members, uh any questions or comments?

I have a few. And just to let before you go forward, we're uh we've asked the consultant to put together uh a proposal uh to to move forward and update that as well.

Okay, Mr.

I'm very concerned about the cumulative effect and as I read these individual uh reports that are done by Stan um I see things that are identified in those reports that relate individually to impacts upon the infrastructure of our sewer system. Um and I think we have a responsibility though it may be individual applications we need we have a responsibility to look at this collectively

as to what the cumulative impact is going to be and I think that's important before we make any decisions on the issuance of uh permits to tie into that sewer system. Um, you add to this one.

This is, I think, something that is sort of a ghost that we are not dealing with.

We're talking about these residential units, but from what information I've reviewed, you got a substantial number of households that are on uh sewer extensions that were done over the last 20 to 25 years that haven't tied in. And I think that needs to be factored in uh to the consideration of what is going to be the cumulative effect upon the plant if and when the plant uh reaches

capacity and we can't issue any more permits because we've exceeded the permitted uh total capacity of the plant. Um, I I personally think we ought to ask the consultants what a timeline would be to get these kinds of answers so that we have them in a timely manner as we consider each of the uh connection permits that are going to be coming forward. And I think Tim should give them any knowledge he has of any uh

entity that's considering construction of residential units. if it is from the very conceptual point to the point where they have the permits in place so that we get a good picture before we make future decisions on issuance of permits.

Uh I'm very very concerned about this.

Um I think we're it's an accountability issue. We have a responsibility to the community to know this information before we make a decision and make a wise decision. Um, and I, you know, I've been thinking a lot about this and I've shared some of my comments. I've actually put together some of the questions I have and I'm going to share them with Tim so that he can uh ask the consultants to, you know, consider these

things. But I think this is a very pivotal point that we're at and we better get this done. We better get it done ASAP so we can make wise decisions.

Mr. Label, do you have any comments?

Yeah, Tim, I mean, you know, I read this and we've been talking about this now. I've been on a board, I think, five years. We've been talking about this for five years.

The plant is approaching its 80% capacity for loading flows.

And you know, when you look at the graphs, we had some serious issues.

Correct. How have has the state has D or anyone ever weighed in on us notifying them about our intentions to modify the facilities, increase flow potentials, you know, because all of that is going to come around. You know the I went through a whole moratorium with them once and they shut the city down and you all know what ended up happening eventually anyway to the tune of about a $170 million.

This I you know this is going to come around to bite everybody in in in the town. uh you know the INI issue, the the sewer extensions where people haven't tied in. All of these are big problems and and I I I I agree, you know, with Mr.

Gagnet, we we we got to get a handle on this. We've got to know where we are because there's so many people knocking at the door that want to build in this town. is going to be overwhelmed and it's going to happen quicker than we anticipate.

I agree.

It's it's it's not good and uh I am not aware of the state reaching out uh in regards to uh future capacity plans for the facility at this time. Um I do expect it uh eventually.

Um and it's you know the crazy thing is it's it's the state that's pushing these developments as well. So it it's like, you know, eventually it's going to come from both ends, right?

Where, you know, and the state is really pushing this and and if we deny um based on capacity issues and and basically saying we don't have capacity or we're reaching 80% capacity, the state doesn't care. They don't care because as long as we have capacity uh to them um it's not it's there's no moratorum yet and there's no and we haven't been seen any enforcement from the state in

regards to either issuing a moratorum or um expanding the system.

Yeah. One other small comment. I know this is impossible right now but it it it's a shame is uh Darmmouth used to accept septage and that was stopped because the plant couldn't handle the load I would assume.

Yeah, it was the the BOD numbers were were pretty high.

Yeah, they they still are.

Yeah. So, for a time they did drop down, but now they're they're up again and we don't accept acceptance. So, Right. And this is my question. And you may not be able to answer it, but I just want to make the point.

Um, I'm not quite sure when this was stopped. I think it says August of 2020, but how much revenue did we lose when we didn't accept Septage? And how much revenue are we losing today because we don't have the capability to accept it?

It's a good question. I'm not exactly sure, but I can get those numbers for you.

Yeah. Well, that's okay. You don't have to.

Yeah.

I'll just tell you a real quick story.

We built a a septage receiving station.

I paid $1.4 million to get it done.

I know.

Paid for itself in nine months.

Correct.

And boy was I upset that I didn't double the capacity.

Yeah. And and and now they're getting more use over there because they can't come.

Correct.

Um correct. the the plans uh to upgrade our aeration uh is, you know, basically would would allow us to to start accepting acceptance again. Um it's, you know, we we need funding to move forward with that, which is, you know, why we're increasing rates to get our retained earnings up to fund projects like that.

And uh and you know, we probably have to go, you know, to SRF as that project's about, you know, in the $6 million range.

Yeah.

It's a money maker.

Yes, absolutely.

But you got to have the facilities to accept it.

We do.

Okay. That's it. Those are my comments, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for bearing with me.

Uh any other comments from the board? I have a question. Um that report that was provided for discussion is dated uh 2024.

It has some recommendations in it as to monitoring and Tim do you know whether that monitoring has been done increased monitoring for uh BOD inflow

on here.

Maybe you could get back to me on that.

Um, in any event, um, it it seems to me that we have a number of pieces of information, studies, concerns about uh, the town's ability to treat wastewater and whether it's INI or uh, capacity of BOD or ability to accept SE septage All of these things need to be addressed in the CWMP in the comprehensive wastewater management plan and and then from that plan uh alternatives selected and we need to move forward.

Um, all of this stuff is the need is well enough identified, it seems to me, that the public works department and the town can explain what the limitations of the existing system are, what we plan to do with to do about those limitations.

and what the implications are as we move forward if there are too many connections requested. Okay. And I think we need to be able to have a cogent discussion that we can give to the select board about what we're doing, why we're doing it, and what the implications are uh if the develst strip our ability to permit. All right.

And I think this needs to be done in public. And I this is kind of like the Vince Lombardi School of Public Administration where we're telling them what we're doing. We're telling them why we're doing it. We're going to execute the play and we're still going to win.

Okay.

We need to be more forthcoming to the select board about what the implications are for the development. Mr. Gier has said this. Mr. Leel has said it. I completely agree. I think the time has come to lay this on the table to the select board uh so that the public knows. Right.

I feel the same way about our next item uh item F about water supply research.

Um so this is not an action item. If there are no other comments, we can move on. Uh, Mr. Chair, um, would you like me to request a a combined board of public works and select me?

I I think I'd like to have you assemble the parts of what that discussion would look like. Uh so the board can um help shape that discussion and maybe we could uh either at our next meeting or you could work with one of the board members uh to shape that and I'll leave that piece up to you.

Yeah. So I think I think this um flowing loading study uh to including all the proposed flows is is a is a big uh proponent to that. I think it's a big tool uh to bring to the select as well.

Yes, I agree. I agree. And so the and the scope of it discussing the scope and need for this study is the vehicle for getting there.

Correct.

Because it brings everything together.

I agree.

Well, I think the timing the timing is important to have a meeting relative to this matter, but I may be oversimplifying it. But I think whatever knowledge Tim has in the various stages of the commercial, condo and rental unit projects that we are aware of. I think the consultants can do a calculation right now on your plant capacity will be reached when you issue permit for up to 800. It will be issued it will be a

1,200. It'll be 1,400. Having that answer to come into the meeting that we need to have with the select board is critical because we're speculative on this at this point. But I think we the the analysis to produce an answer to this question is not that complicated.

It's not something that I'm going to wait for for the CWMP to address or even this study to address. is an answer that I believe we can get timely and we can advise the permitting issue authorities that by the time they issue permits for 400 units and be time the you know the preserve comes on with all their phases and everything you're at your limit and then we can have the conversation with the

select board to say what about the residents who haven't tied into sewer extensions and what are we going to do with them So I think it's straightforward. I want an answer Tommy because this stuff is moving through the peritting authorities and I see a continuation till March on one big one that's 300 units. Now I sure as heck would like to have that permanent authority have an answer to this

question to make part of their decision.

So I think we need to scope it down. I think the study Tim refers to is important because it relates to the piping infrastructure we have out there and that is just as critical. But I think an answer to what the capacity of the plant and what Rob I mean Ron has alluded to in the the 80% we're very close to that and I think an answer is needed right away on that.

All right, Tim, can you work on that? Do you need Absolutely. Already in progress. What do you need from this board to answer Mr.

G's question?

Um, nothing currently. Uh, we're working, like I said, we're working with the consultants. I do have a lot of the data um to work with them. Uh, just basically getting it getting it moving and getting it and getting the report completed very in in an expedited, you know, timeline.

It's very timely because you're going to need an answer to this for that March hearing that is coming up on, you know, two big units that I believe will produce over 450 units. And if we can't even handle that, then the permanent authority should know it.

All right.

All right. Mr. Gier, are you able to work with uh Mr. Barber on this?

Absolutely.

All right. I have one more quick question, Mr. Chairman. Just Yes, sir.

is if if somebody issues a permit for construction, can DPW refuse a permit to connect to the sewer?

Given the knowledge that we have, and it seems from time to time the knowledge that other people tend to ignore.

Yeah, I think this is a big part of the discussion.

Mel, when when would we get to a place where the answer is no? And how do we let the community, including the developers, know that it's likely that that kind of a of an answer to a permit request is coming up a even if uh there are otherwise um approvals.

And so we this is uh comes under the heading of telling people what's going on so there are no surprises, no excuses.

Absolutely.

Um Mr. Chairman, I can add to that. So basically, a building permit is not uh it's not impacted by the lack of sewer connection. Um it it's only impacted by water. So, you know, the building department can permit a structure based on existing water and and no sewer because they can also provide a design for a septic system. So, so that said it can be done but we also have the ability

to say no but with with justification on on 40b projects it it's it's more difficult because well this is this is all part of what needs to be discussed with the select board and the building and the building official and the town's administrator.

Right. Um Tim, when you have made some progress with Mr. Gier, could you give us a pro uh all the board members a progress report and keep us surprised?

Absolutely.

All right. Uh board members, any any other questions on this?

I only stress and reiterate this is important information that we're going to need. I should say that the zoning board of appeals is going to need by that March meeting. So I think we need to narrow down and get answers specifically to the capacity of the plan and when it will be reached and when we will be exceeding what the D has permitted for that plan. It's imperative you have that for for March. And I think

Tim needs to move forward to just that aspect so that we can share that with the zoning board of appeals before they make the decision. So then afterwards they say, "Well, we didn't know."

Right.

Jim, do do you have uh in the budget uh the ability to give the contractor uh a small piece of work to do this? And do you have as as the director, do you have the ability to to approve that?

Yes. So the board approved an on call uh contract with with the consultant for that very reason.

All right.

Okay. Uh this is important enough. Uh again please keep us apprised of the progress.

Absolutely I will.

All right. Um any other discussion?

All right. Next item is um item E, update rules and policies of the water division.

Uh so we briefed on this earlier um over the past few months, we've had our water system compromised multiple times. um um where either a contractor or a property owner, a tenant actually connected to the water system or repaired the water water service without permit or inspection or a licensed contractor. The current fine for the policies $300. Uh while the fine for non-compliance with

sewer um rules and regulations is up to $5,000.

Um, so I'm looking uh for the board's agreement to move forward with uh updating the rules and policies for the water division. I just want to let you know that this uh policy and rules and regulations was historically approved by the board of public works and town meeting.

Um it it you know while it's doesn't it's not titled as a bylaw there are some mentions of bylaw in it and I' I've presented that to assistant town council to also review uh to see where we are um with that if it actually has to go to town meeting and if we can increase uh the fines as well. Jim, when's the deadline for uh the warrant for uh Springtown meeting?

Not exactly sure yet.

All right. You We should know that.

I should know that. I'll work with the town clerk to get that.

All right. Board members, any comments?

I think you need to take into consideration the risk to the public when illegal connections are made to a water system.

I can tell you from my experience, I'm aware of this happening in other communities and they had to issue boil orders because they didn't fall these connections didn't follow the procedures required by the D. The flying should be consumer with the degree of severity and risk.

Correct. I agree. So, I can I can say that there was um a sewer and water connection was made on a property without permit. We did find that property owner 300 for the water fine and five we find them 5,000 for the sewer. So I think I think the the risk is is is high really high for the water. So I think that be that should be of equal value or more.

Absolutely.

Mr. Leel, any comments?

Just uh I I read these uh policies that there are no values in here for fines.

Am I correct in saying that? No, there were there were um two locations. Um let me see.

But you know, for me, a contractor who does something illegal in the town.

Yes.

$300 is not enough money.

No. So if you look at Not even close.

Section five um has a tiered uh penalty on page 14.

and and then Okay. I don't see it, but on page 14.

Oh, I thought you said page five.

No, no. Section five on page 14. And um is there's is one.

Oh, I see. Okay. I'm sorry. That's why I missed.

And then on on page six at the top or section 13, that's violation of regulations. That's a $300 fine.

Okay Tim I would adjust those significantly.

I agree.

Uh Tim, as a matter of context, what would a typical residential connection cost to the uh homeowner for water?

Yeah.

Uh $2,000.

Okay.

Plus a meter cost. But yeah, so just over 300. So, if I wanted to put in a second water line uh or replace it, you think it would cost $2,000 to do that to my house?

It cost a lot more than that.

I know, but I'm just trying to Yeah. The permit to connect a a a water service, whether it's an initial or it's separate, is um before the meter or to the main, it's $2,000. And yeah, that's the permit.

Plus meter. Yeah, that's just just a permit. So that obviously the construction costs and and materials are more.

Yeah. What do you have any sense of what a typical construction costs would be?

I know and and I you know we have a number a good number of of utility contractors. I always recommend reaching out to multiple to get a to get a good estimate and a good comparable estimate.

I I don't and and materials differ if you if you're planning to use copper line rather than HDPE which is HDP is a lot cheaper. Um yes if you want that plastic or if you'd rather stick with copper which is a lot more expensive. So so all those are come into effect access to the to the building um as well if you know any any obstructions like porches or anything they have to dig under or

anything. So, and then uh does the fine acrue to the contractor or to the homeowner?

The fine goes to the property owner. Um because typically, you know, contractors don't pay them. Um especially if they're not licensed, it's hard to chase a non-licensed contractor.

Yeah.

Yeah. If if the contractor is licensed, then we will send them a fine as well.

Okay.

All right. Any other questions, board members? No.

Uh, do we want to give Tim any guidance on the amount of fine at this point?

I would suggest that we let Tim make his recommendation to us.

um he he may want to look around other communities and see what they are doing to get a little bit of guidance, but um what we're charging right now is is is frankly pitiful. It's, you know, these guys make a lot of money. There's a lot of variables to digging in someone's yard. They make a lot of money and a $300 fine is like, you know, a tip for a meal, right?

So, yeah, I get it. and uh you know and that's basically you know what what town council is going to be looking at as far as you know bylaws have a maximum penalty of $300 currently. Um but if it's if it's not considered a bylaw uh we may be able to increase that. So I'll keep you updated on that as well.

If Tim if you need to change the wording so it's not considered a bylaw would you bring that back to us as part of the uh package?

Absolutely. We'll do.

All right. Okay. Board members, any other questions?

Hearing none. Uh, let's go to item F, water supply source research. Tim.

Yeah. So, we briefed on this early as well as well with ongoing supply issues, revenue shortfalls, and in increasing demand in town. uh you know you know I the board residents admin elected officials everybody's interested in in additional water supply sources uh whether it be groundwater wells um surface water uh interconnections. So we brought in a consultant uh to discuss future water water sources and they're

working on a proposal a contract proposal uh to move forward. Um I assume it's going to be in the range of around 100,000. Um the first step will be you know to gather all of the historical data that we we we've already um done in in the past for water sourcing. Um so you know the town spent many years searching for new sources. So we're going to bring that all that data uh up

and make it accessible. So, so we have that to, you know, discuss internally as well as uh answer questions from from residents and and other parties that are interested and uh and then move forward with uh researching additional sources.

So, uh, I had the ability to listen in on a meeting with the consultant the other day and, um, I think the discussion went pretty well.

I think they have an idea of, uh what we're looking for. Uh it ties into the to concerns about the number of connections that we can see uh being requested in the next year or two. Uh as well as the cost uh relative cost of our various supplies.

Um Tim, when you mentioned making uh past studies available to the public, will you be able to post those online so people can actually look at them easily?

Uh we should be able to. Yes. On on the website.

Yeah. Okay. I think that would be very helpful. And I also think that whether uh we do it through our board or whether it's an issue that's taken to the select board, um I suggest we have a some kind of a a public committee to uh discuss some of the potential alternatives as a way of uh screening some of the ones that are uh more feasible.

and satisfying in in a public forum uh anyone that has a sense of uh additional supplies, but there's some consensus that for one reason or another they're actually not feasible at this time. And I think that that would kind of expedite the process even though it may take a little more time at the beginning. Um board members, any comments on this?

No.

On on this particular issue, about six months ago, we approved and signed um a uh acceptance of a title for significant acreage on the east side of the Pasamit River. And one of the things assistant town council raised was the concern relative to language that would bind u our ability to go onto that particular land which is held in a conservation restriction with the Buzzards Bay coalition

um to explore and develop future water supplies. I know that matter went back to uh the representative of the fish and wildlife uh group Massachusetts um excuse me, federal fish and wildlife and um they produced a letter that clarified exactly what we had been told by the coalition that we could go on there for water exploration and for well development. and they issued a letter in

that regard. I know that letter has been sent by Tim to assistant town council who raised that particular concern and we had authorized Tim at that time that if that clarification was sufficient for assistant town council that he could accept it and it was believed that we would record it so that years and millenniums from now others would know that we could go there for water. So in

keeping with this particular issue, I would ask since it has been about uh 3 months since that letter has been produced that in fact uh we inquire of assistant town council if he has any concerns about that because I would absolutely think that if we're going to move forward with this with a consultant that area on the western side of the Pascamit River and its proximity to water treatment plants that are on

excuse me on the east side of the Pasamanset. That west side has water treatment facilities. The proximity might make it very financially lucrative to look at that uh in concert with what we have on Chase Road. So my whole my whole reason to raise this is we need an answer from assistant town council. Is there sufficient? And if so, let's record it.

All right. Any other comments, board members?

No.

Okay, Tim, you'll bring this back uh possibly with an answer to Mr. G's question.

I actually have one.

So, so I've met with assistant town council about this and couple other uh projects. So basically uh to sum up his response is he he's looking for a letter from legal uh from uh the federal level from legal to to council. basically stating that um that um at at no time will you know the the federal government um restricts our possible sourcing of of wells or water source on that property. Um the basically the

um the grant that the Buzz Bay coalition is looking to use the past command at land for is is for bird uh habitat. So, uh, council, assistant town council is concerned that, you know, if, uh, specific birds, you know, end up showing up on the property in in the future, you know, many years down the road, he's concerned that the federal government could just step up and and say, "No, you

can't put you can't put wells on here.

It's going it's going to impact the, you know, the bird uh that are protected."

So he he said that just from from fish and wildlife um it doesn't he said it doesn't hold enough integrity and that he's looking at he's looking for a letter from uh council from the federal federal government to state that.

Uh, board members, any comments?

I would ask I would ask what specific legal is he looking from? I understand that he originally wanted an answer from the solicitor general, the US solicitor general.

Correct.

I think the solicitor general is a little bit more occupied with things in Washington than uh birds and water in Dartmouth. Um, awesome. I mean there is a contact now at um Buzz's Bay Coalition since u um you know the individual we worked with is since retired um but I would ask I would ask what level does he want? I mean, uh, I'm sure Fish and Wildlife has legal counsel and

if that's sufficient, that might be able to expedite things, but if you're going to go on a US solicitor, um, we're going to be going round and round on this for a long time.

I can I can ask those questions and get back to you.

Yeah, Tim, I'm concerned that um I I I realize the need to protect the town's interest. Um, and that's one of our responsibilities, I think, is to serve the the residents of Dartmouth. But on the other hand, sometimes questions can be raised that are too speculative and the uh future occurrence of some rare and endangered species feels to me. Um, and I realize this is should be more of it's my opinion that

because I'm not feeling it. Um, my opinion is this. This my sense is that this is a speculative question and we we're working with a public works department. Uh, and so I think we we deserve a a little bit um more grounded concerns, I guess, is the way to put it. Um, anyway, so if you can find out if whether Mr. G's suggestion works. Um I th this is feeling to me my sense is

that we're spending more time on this and that uh this is being made a bigger legal question than it needs to be.

All right. So, I think I think seeing how much time this has taken since we had this on our agenda, um I would ask that specifically the parcel of land that we acquired uh jointly with the coalition be added to the subject properties that in fact are going to be analyzed by this contract that we're going to review shortly. Um so that we we look at it comprehensively over all the lands whether we hold them

jointly or singularly as a town.

Absolutely.

Yeah. I agree. I agree with that as well%. Yeah.

Yeah. I agree.

All right. Anything else on this?

No, I'll work to get some answers as well.

Okay. And you'll uh you'll bring hopefully a contract back to us to begin this process.

Yes. All right.

And just uh to update the board on that that uh the parcels that we had acquired uh with with the assistance of the Buzz Bay coalition um in in the state. Um we had we had scheduled uh for a sitewalk uh with with the BBC on January 29th if any of our board members are interested in uh and taking a sitewalk out at the at the property.

Yeah.

Bring your binoculars and your bird book. Exactly.

Uh Rob, just one other thing.

I I think this concern parallels the concern I raised with the uh wastewater issue. And I would ask I would ask um and I'm sure Tim could produce this internally is that for the zoning board of appeals um if we know there's 1,400 plus units what the water consumption will be uh calculated by the you know the state standards per bedroom unit so that we can f furnish that information and that

way Tim can make a comment that, you know, this potentially, you know, will require or will continue to require that we purchase, you know, quantities comparable to what we've been seeing uh consumed over the last two years and how we've had to supplement from New Bedford.

I want to get all I want to get all the factors into the permitting decision authorities. They're looking at roads.

they're looking at traffic. Let's get the two answers that we're responsible for to them so that they have it before their decisions are made.

So, um I could say to that we so our consultant has our water model and is is is evaluating each of these individual proposals uh through the model. And I'm I'm planning also along the lines of that flowing loading study is to have them work on the model to include all of the demands, all of the proposed demands and and and look at the impact on on flows in the system.

Yep. Thank you.

You're welcome.

Yeah. In the in the words of the National Impol Environmental Policy Act, such it is as it is these days, you're looking at all of the reasonably foreseeable future projects as part of a uh comprehensive cumulative impact assessment. Okay, that's what we're doing here.

Yep. Good.

All right. Anything else on this item?

Okay. So, you'll bring Could you uh be sure to send board members or copy board members on transmitts to uh the ZBA on projects as the consultants are finished with them. So, we are aware of of uh the results of the reports.

Yes. Yeah. They um currently just to let you know that the process we submit to uh special counsel and for review and once reviewed by special counsel they go into and and approved uh they go into the viewpoint portal and they also get posted on the website.

All right. as soon as they're public information. Correct. Could you let us know what the report title is and how to access it?

Absolutely.

Okay. So, so your board can be kept up to speed.

Yeah. And if needed, I can, you know, once they once they're publicly accessible, I can I can actually send them as well. So, yeah. I think g given the size of some of these reports, it would be acceptable to simply tell us where they're posted.

Yeah, I can send a link too the way they're posted so it's easier.

Yeah, that's good.

That works for me.

Okay.

Board members, any other questions?

Nope.

All right. Uh Tim, next item is um committee reports. Board members, any uh reports from committees?

I have none. All right. It's been a a quiet month given the holidays, etc.

All right, next item is a uh the director update.

Um, so touching base again on on the on the snow. Uh, you know, our crews were at it again this past weekend. It it seems like every storm hits us on a holiday or a weekend or a holiday weekend, you know. Uh so our crews have been out there you know you know through the week and then and then on on weekends and holidays as well uh working hard uh you know burning the candle at

both ends um all night. I think you know they put some of them were out for 14 15 hours straight this last storm. Uh they did a great job. I think you know all the roads looked great. you know, come Monday morning, uh, uh, I think we got we got a lot of, uh, some appreciation from residents and, uh, you know, stating that, you know, they did a good job, too. So, that's great, uh, for, uh,

for our crews. Um, unfortunately, we're looking at another potential storm coming this weekend again. Um so um it it it's currently being forecasted as as a larger storm um than this last storm.

Um possibly 12 in uh and so we'll be looking at uh probably moving forward with a blocking band coming into the weekend uh to be expected. And again, our, you know, our our our staff will be out um basically treating, you know, treating roads and and lots um ahead of time uh to get ahead of the storm and then and then snow removal, you know, once once it's uh substantial snow is on the ground. So,

how you guys doing with salt, Tim?

Um Mr. Pacho, are you there? Well, we're holding our own. I've learned my lesson years ago about being nice to the sails, but uh I know the last couple of orders I put in, they've given me enough to satisfy me and then get behind, but we're holding our own. You know, we can't We're looking at a storm that's going to come in between 8 to 10 on Sunday. That's going to push it to 10:00

on Monday. So, it's 24 36 hours. Yeah, the cold is going to be there. Um, but now I'm reading that we might be at a quarter of wine or some warm air, so we might have it be at the heavy end of the snow type again. Um, but we're holding on with soft, but it's I don't know. Now I'm looking already. They're predicting another one for next weekend.

Well, Paul, please tell the guys from, you know, from me and the whole board in particular, thank you very much. I think they did a great job. Well, we're trying to do our best. We get a lot of new faces. Um, they have done their best.

They're out here with me on uh Derek.

It's Sunday afternoon until early midm morning on Monday.

Everybody's trying to do their best.

We'll do the same thing again this weekend. I'll be discussing tomorrow with Timmy once the all the strangest things. Last weekend, the models are all throwing their hands on this this week. Yesterday they're saying all the models are agreeable. Do I believe it? I'm not sure.

We'll see. We'll begin. I know they're saying from 6 to 12. I have one uh been one I always use one forecaster that from the beginning is always pegged at 9 10 inches and they're staying steady. Um we might if it continues to late Monday morning, we might have to just postpone solid waste and recycling, but we'll make a decision Friday afternoon on that. um just to give uh it it's not

feasible to be out there with trucks while we're pushing snow. I just don't have the personnel, but we'll give the public um you know plenty of notification. Um same thing with the pocket. We're going to try to be uh giving the notification. We do it.

There's no enforcement of it, but at least we can do our best and say we did post it. Um hoping for the best. That's all we can do. We're preparing for the worst and Mr. Gagn songs here with me and know how uh we go. I mean, we prepare for the worst and hope for the best but we'll have to see, you know, be patient.

All I can say to the residents, be patient with us. Um, hope through their part, try to keep the cars out of our way. If we can't make it down the street, we can't power. If we can't make the first pass, we fall too far behind.

Uh, time is always an essence on these storms. If we fall behind, it gets too heavy. Means I have to bring heavy machinery down there, you know.

Yep.

Thank you.

And I and it, you know, can't say enough about, you know, complying with the parking bands. Um, just, you know, getting the CODs out of the way so we can we can access them safely and uh and get the snow off the road, you know, so you know, for, you know, for the for that 24 hours or 36 hours that we're out there and then you can go back and and

and park the cars where they were and and the snow will be gone but off the road. But if you know, if we can't get there and access some of these roads or or or around cars, it it makes a mess, you know.

Do we tow cars if they're parked illegally?

We So we do send uh to Diamond PD, but they typically don't enforce Yeah.

the parking b. So I mean, we could hook them up to the plow truck. It's it's a difficult step to take, but as a point of emphasis, this is more than just a matter of convenience for clearing snow.

In in many instances, if the snow removal crew can't get in, it becomes very quickly a safety issue in case there's an emergency. Correct.

So, you know, it I I noticed that uh Miss Sheridan of Dartmouth Week is on the line. Uh this is a we haven't had a storm this big in a while. And I think it would behoove the media uh not just the town media, but other media to uh remind people how important it is to get the cars off the street, at least during the uh snow removal part. All right. So, um I I hope

that can be done. This, you know, my my opinion is it's a big deal. So, absolutely.

It was a big deal in New Bedford over this past storm as well. There was some news articles uh based on the parking bands and compliance.

Yeah. And we're going to if we get 8 to 10 inches, that's a lot different than the last storm. So, all right. Any other comments? Uh Tim, anything else on the uh director's update?

Yep. So, uh moving forward, uh our you know, I I touched on the 579 O Westport Road uh water treatment facility upgrades. Uh you know, the the project is progressing uh really well. They were waiting on some parts, but they're planning to hopefully have the CT pipe uh project completed within uh 30 days, within the next month. Um in in an interim in that timeline, we'll be working with D to uh satisfy their needs

to be able to turn our penalty wells back on.

That's a good good news.

Yes. Yep.

Um, next just some some project updates. Uh, like the the Delano apartments, I met with assistant town council. Uh, they reviewed our MOA um and issued comments um in and revisions. So, I'll be working to finalize that draft um by the end of this week and early next week. Um, if board would like to see that MOA, I can I can forward it to you.

Do you normally bring those MOAs to the board for approval?

I have an Abas.

Yeah. All right.

Absolutely.

So, uh, the Does the timing work to have that come to us at our next meeting?

Yes.

All right. Board members, any questions on that?

I No. question is Tim.

uh Stantech report identified I believe on the last page of the report that they had concerned that the secondary pump in the lift station uh which I think is captain's lane um in fact um they had concern about its adequacy uh to handle the additional capacity and I had raised the issue as to whether or not in theou they were going to be required to uh refurbish that pump and address the

concerns that Stantech had raised.

The the pump station is actually South Station on Russell Mills Road um which is a a larger station. Um, so the I I've spoken to both uh Claremont um council and and and staff as well as uh assistant town council and they both agree that uh requiring the full upgrade of that pump is um is basically isn't fair to the developer and using a percentage of their uh based on either connections based on their connections

or flow based on their flow and and and existing flow uh to issue a cost based on the percentage of use from from their development.

So you will so you will capture uh what is an equitable uh portion of that upgrade cost.

Yes.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Board members, any other questions on that?

All right, Tim.

Uh moving forward, the Hawthon 40B uh ZBA hearing on January 8th uh was, you know, they they discussed uh some storm water and some sewer and water. Um and also at that time they submitted a long list of waiver requests. Um, so we met with council after to go over all the waiverss and then we met with the design uh engineers in peer reviewer this week to to uh issue our comments and and go over each

waiver that's been requested. Uh so we we completed that. Um so moving forward the next hearing is scheduled for February 12th for that for that development.

Uh and they will be I'm I'm sure they will be discussing a little more on on storm water as well as sewer and water and and and and uh and going over the number of waiverss that have been requested.

K sorry Tim what are the uh the major issues that were raised thus far?

Um, one, you know, one one issue was the the storm water basins uh were being partially proposed to be constructed over the existing uh sewer interceptor uh easement and and pipeline.

Um, so we've worked with worked with the with the design engineer to uh iron that out and and and they're work they're they're working to uh resolve that.

Um you know other issues are you know basically you know construction standards and and uh and requirements specifications of public works you know that differ from state construction standards. So basically, you know, you know, any any tougher, you know, local bylaws or regulations, um, you know, can be, I guess, appealed by the developer if they don't seem fair to them. Uh so you know so we we've been

working with with the develop with the design engineers to go over specific specifications that they requesting waiverss for.

Other than that the you know basically they're you know they have you know some big connections into the into that sewer interceptor. That's a 27in uh concrete sewer interceptor that was installed in the late60s. Um, you know, so it's, you know, it's been around for a while. Everything has has a lifespan. Um, so, you know, got to be cautious when they connecting into that pipeline.

And then water, you know, basically water water supply, water demand um and uh and the impact on on our our water system as well. Uh we have a it's an it's only an 8 inch gas iron out in Tucker Road. Um and that um that increases I believe either Country Club or Allen Street to a 12in ductal line. Um we've had a we've had a a couple breaks multiple breaks on that

cast iron line in that area um between Allen Street in and that new uh Hawthon development that we have do have concerns with with the additional demand and and flow going through there.

You know, we could have some some more consistent breaks in that area.

Jim. Um, one of the questions I have is that uh before this meeting I took a quick look at the mass GIS Arc info uh data system that the Commonwealth has looked at the EOEA's page on uh conservation restrictions and uh I took a look at that particular location and they show a very substantial conservation restriction to the west of that property and the law in the back of the homes that are uh

down in Pascamante Valley there. Um I think it's imperative that we get a copy of that conservation restriction and see what it allows and doesn't allow. Um, and I think would be very helpful is if you would go and look at that page uh on the mass GIS system and overlay the plan that they have for the project, but I'm more concerned about seeing the conservation restriction. I know that conservation restriction

was written sometime in the early to mid 80s because I remember it coming up. um and I think we it's imperative when we look at that. I have raised this issue with town council uh in the past. Um I don't know what they came up with, but I think if you were to able to get that and we could all take a look at that, I think it'd be very helpful.

um the area along your easement is the most substantial portion of that conservation restriction and I don't know if there were any guaranteed rights that the donor of that um restriction um encompassed in that. I think it's imperative before the decisions made we we know exactly what that document says.

Yeah, I can work on retrieving that document for both the uh the the section on on the west side of that property uh as well as along the north north side of that property.

Good.

All right. Could you share that with us or post it?

Yep, I can.

Thank you.

Any other questions, board members?

Uh Tim, I heard somebody mention an issue about water pressure in that area.

Could you address that or just let us know whether that's an issue or not?

So the water pressure um is below like state guidelines. So you know basically between 40 and 60 PSI in that area. as you get down to the bottom of the development, it'll it'll increase with with the with the elevation difference, but up top, you know, it's it's closer to the 40 PSI area. Um the the proposed drop based on the data that they've given us and the only data that they they've given us is is basically

residential connection use and and they have a like a central uh clubhouse so to speak.

Um so that you know that those are the use. they haven't proposed any irrigation or anything. So, our consultants couldn't evaluate additional use and demand uh because they we can only use what they've given us for proposed data.

Um so, the the pressure drop is only proposed to be about one or two PSI, which isn't significant. It's just because the pressure is lower in that area, you know, that impact can have a, you know, more of a feel.

the volumewise. I think they had one dead end uh location that had some volume issues um below the you know the standard and that would have to be um basically you know looked at by the consultant and and by the fire department for uh you know for fire flows at at any of those highs.

They're not looping any any of the water manes from street to street. So So basically everything's deadended in in the subdivision. I always recommend looping as much as you can within the development to keep that redundant volume and pressure.

We allow them to do that a dead end.

Yeah. Because you know looping that is important.

Yeah. So, you know, it's it's basically up to the restrictions of the development, you know, if they can loop or not. Um, and they can there they can loop a lot of those dead end streets except I think one of them on the basically east side of the development. There's nowhere to go to loop unless they go back out to like Tucker Road, but they would need an easement through another property to do

that at that point.

Yeah.

But we we we we wouldn't fight that.

Um it it's it's more of a recommendation. I don't think we I don't know if we can require that. It's recommended. Um, I think in in our regulations, sometimes there are, you know, there's a lot of subdivisions that that are that that are dead ends, you know, and and you end with a hydrant and you can't loop it to either another subdivision or or a development.

It is allowed. It's just not recommended. Not Okay, Tim, let me go back. Uh maybe I don't understand what's going on here.

Did you say that there was no discussion in the proposal for irrigation?

Yeah, for any proposed like uh lawn irrigation or anything there would, you know, we brought that up. the the consultant also brought that up that basically they they reviewed the pro the project based on the data that they were given from from the developers consultant I mean it didn't include you know additional demands like like law irrigation that that is let me pick a reasonable word here that does not sound

uh like a complete project description given uh the amount of open space and what residents are almost certainly going to do with these properties and therefore how can that be considered reasonable by the zoning board?

Yeah. So that's the question you know where do where do they feel comfortable with enough information you know where you know the developer says well we only have to give you know so much so much information to get a decision and then the rest of it will be they're requesting to submit post application so you know I think they you know the description or narrative of the development should include food, you

know, uses as such to give everybody the information uh that they need to to complete the calculations of of the demand on the utilities and everything else roughly. And I mean, you know, are we talking 10 acres of lawn or 40 acres of lawn?

That used to be a golf course, an 18hole golf course. Yes.

So I presume that a reasonable estimate of irrigation uh might be based on previous land use minus hardscape and roofs.

Am I being unreasonable here?

Probably about correct.

And it would be a a significant amount of acreage.

Yes.

And if that kind of irrigation is going on in the area of that already has low water pressure and there were an emergency that might affect fire flows.

Yes.

All right. Well, I think that that ought to be a comment that the uh public works makes. And I actually I made the comment at at the ZBA hearing.

And did the fire department seem interested in that comment?

They weren't at the meeting at the hearing. They do have they did have some comments uh more on fire hydrant location and but I can I can reach out.

Okay.

Um before before we leave this uh subject uh the Stantech report that they did on water and sewer analysis issues at the very end of the report they raise what I consider very brief comments about the capacity at the plant in the 80% uh factor. I thought the I thought that was a little lean on explanation and to individuals that are not savvy to what those numbers may mean. I would ask

that you ask Stantech to get a little bit more elaborate on that explanation and put it as an amendment and highlight it for the ZBA. Mhm.

Um to me that's the tip of the iceberg that we talked about an hour ago and uh I think it needs a little more being flushed out for lack of a better term um so that ZBA understands the impact.

Yeah. to to the ex and I agree with you u Mike to the extent there there are big or important issues they need to be highlighted and I mean it needs to be you know top of the list kind of stuff um you know in the past we've when we've had a major issue the ZBA has seemed pretty open to work with us um I realized that these are the with the 40B

projects, we've got some constraints, but um to the extent we can highlight these issues, um I I will trust them to do what they can.

I'll work on I'll work on them on that.

What what really should be done is that before a decision's made that a laundry list of items are set up that have been addressed and have not been addressed.

Right.

And especially in light of the issue that if a decision is made not to grant the project when it goes before the uh hearings officer, the administrative hearings officer at the state, they will look very closely at the items uh that were addressed and were not addressed in factoring their decision. I've been before them and uh lean decisions that are written without substantive reasons are what are the impetus for uh

basically granting as presented.

Any other comments board members?

Okay, Tim. Um other items.

Next up is so so uh did I say that that the next hearing is scheduled for February 12th on this uh at the zoning board of appeals in the select court office.

And all these all of these hearings begin at 6 pm.

Um, next up, the Sherbrook 40D, that's on Old Westport Road. Um, the ZBA hearing for storm water and traffic will be tonight at 6 p.m.

Um, I will be attending. Uh, the sewer and water discussion is currently scheduled for February 26th.

Um, I will be out of town at that point.

So if they don't move the meeting, I will try to have somebody uh from from DBW uh at the hearing. Uh I have expressed this to the town administrator and special counsel. Um we will have uh hopefully we'll have our consultant at the meeting as well.

I I do see I I see a greater impact on the collection infrastructure for this for this development u based on its location and and where the flows go uh into a more of a residential pump station um and then pump into the force main that was installed uh from the Cedar Dell uh assisted living. Um it was installed for their pump station. Um and basically uh where they would this would be

flowing into would go into our junior street pump station and then pumping back into that uh that force man from the uh cedars. So I do have some concerns with that capacity which will be uh ironed out in in the evaluation working with the consultant.

tip on uh Tim briefly on Sherbrook. Um, given the history of the site, what do you anticipate uh might be the risk for um groundwater contamination?

In other words, what kinds of liquid or solid waste was disposed and what's the probability of uh uh any kind of um either fuel or uh lubricants or solvents on the site.

So, they've been working with I think they have an LSD working with uh determining locations. Uh they they've done sampling. Um I haven't reviewed them, you know, specifically in in uh detail.

Uh I know a lot of uh material was, you know, brought to site, constructed uh crushed on site and maybe maybe uh filled in areas on site. So, you know, they're evaluating those piles and those materials as well. Um as fact, I can't really you know discuss to to the fact on water contamination um until we have you know we've reviewed it completely. But they their their plan uh on that site is to

lower the kind of middle to western part of that site.

um sort of cut and filled. So they haven't the the the east part of that site is pretty low. It's been, you know, it's been excavated for soils back in the day. So they wanted they wanted to kind of do a a cut on the east side and bring that material out to to to the west side if if you know if the material is in compliance.

Uh do you think uh is is it your impression that the uh the LSP's report will be made publicly available and and if so when?

Yeah, I can I can check.

All right. I'm I'm concerned because it's in um zone two, correct?

And upgradient.

So, you know, I uh uh my I'm wary of um contamination getting into fractured bedrock and moving uh into zone of influence of our wells.

So, I'd like to I'd like to know better what's going on on that site.

I think I think one of the things you have to be aware of is that just across the street on Lucy Little Road that subdivision I think it's Karen Lane um that area has experienced issues with um draw down when uh those wells the violin wells are pumping and I remember I may be wrong, but I think they ended up having to put water into that subdivision because it was affecting the individual home wells um

you know that were there during significant draw down periods. So I think Rob Rob your concern uh is uh definitely worth uh looking into because I remember those complaints.

Well, and if there are um individual domestic wells in the uh area, that's a big deal. And and I know that Cedardale Lake has springs. And that to me suggests that there uh there is subsurface flow that may or may not be connected with fractured bedrock. And I realize um fractured bedrock may not be a particularly good source of water in this part of the world, but it all it

can be um a uh an avenue for subsurface flow and subsurface flow that is concentrated and can be fairly rapid.

So, all right. Um Tim, anything else on that? No, I'm working on shoot if I can get those reports for you.

Anything else, Tim?

Uh, the Hathaway Road 40B. Uh, this is a new 40B project. Um, we did look at some flows from this early on. Uh, it's a 3,300 unit project that was presented at the ZBA hearing on January 8th for the first time. Uh the next hearing for this project is scheduled for March 2nd. Uh which I I assume uh they'll be looking at the traffic study um maybe some storm water. The developer has also reached

out um to work on water and sewer evaluation. Uh this this project also has some restrictions in in the uh collection system infrastructure, you know, as well as the treatment facility.

So, and we will also be working on water evaluation as well, running that all through the water model.

Board members, any questions?

The only the only general question I have is uh has anyone uh from the town determined whether or not these projects in their size triggers the MEEP review?

I'm not sure if they determinate. I know some of them were being looked at to see if they The only I ask is if they have to file, you know, uh um uh ENF for the notification because of, you know, um the degree and size of the project traffic. Um, I mean that agency has, you know, some really good experts on it that then determine whether or not has to go to a full EIR, right?

I think if we knew that, that might be very helpful. Um, if someone could look at that CMR, I think it's 310, um, and see if this project falls within that requirement, especially when you talk about Hathway Road. I knew this came up on a city project that I was involved with um as it related to that intersection of Hathway Road and Route Six, which we all know is a horror show.

Correct.

Uh Tim, can you find out whether any each any of these three projects has uh filed uh the initial paperwork for MEPA?

And if they have not, would you ask the special counsel to be sure that none of these projects have triggered the need for any further review?

That's a good question, Mr. Kanye.

Yeah, absolutely.

Thank you.

So, next we have uh the Route Six um actually near that 802 um State Road area where the the ledge outcrop is the there's a 56 unit apartment uh project being proposed.

Uh it it was recently approved at GBA um and the developer has reached out to begin sewer and water evaluations there as well. So I I did send letters based on uh evaluating the sewer and water availability and capacity um at the expense of the developer.

Tim, does it sounds like the ZBA approved the project before there was any evaluation for sewer and water?

Correct. um you know in and listening to the ZBA and past projects where we've gone back and forth over sewer capacity and availability um basically you know they they state that they really don't have anything to do with sewer capacity that's a DBW responsibility so basically they're um voting on variances and relief requested for more more of a zoning.

Well, but don't doesn't the ZBA need to make findings of community benefit?

Isn't that one of the key findings that they have to make?

They're also, you know, you know, it's it's a it's it's supposed to, you know, most the variances and and relief is based on hardship as well, right? And you know, it it that should be justified in their decisions as well as community benefit and impact.

It maybe I'm missing something, but a 56 unit subdivision doesn't feel like a hardship case to me, right?

Um, it's not a subdivision. Is it is it a pocket building?

Well, either way, yeah. Uh and it seems to me that in a world where the town is under pressure in providing services and under pressure because it doesn't have enough affordable housing. There ought to be a a broader discussion of potential community benefit for a 56 unit apartment building.

You know, I don't mean to be to get political about this, but I mean, if we're talking community benefit, those are things that it seems to me ought to be raised.

Um anyway, all right. Anything else, Tim?

Uh across the street, um there has been a 15 unit uh more it's not a subdivision, but it's it's more like a subdivision. They're duplex homes. um 15 units to in total um located to the current uh fatal motives on state road.

This is a small project but due to sensitivity with the sewer capacity and and water demand uh I'll be asking them to do the same. This is going through uh the planning board, not the ZBA.

Uh if I can uh build on Mr. G's concerns expressed earlier.

Can can we get some kind of an overview of projects that are in the pipeline?

Absolutely.

I mean, it I'm not talking about any a lot of detail, but uh perhaps some kind of a visual, a map of the town, where they are and how big they are.

Absolutely.

Thank you for asking because I'm still sitting here. amazed at the growth that is occurring.

Yeah.

Yeah.

It's definitely concerning. It's like every every time we we look at an email, it's another proposed, you know, development and nothing's nothing's coming in as commercial or multi-use, you know, everything is residential. Even in commercial zoned areas, everything's being changed to residential.

But I think also this raises the issue relative to the Ellswick Street pump station and that rebuild and the cost overrun based upon what we had from the grant.

um that you know again is this if it's going to cost additional money over the grant who's going to pay for it? Are these projects going to pay for it or are the rate payers going to pay for it?

Right. Exactly. That is that is concerning. Um and we should we should know uh at by the end of next week when the when the general bids come in for that project. But but these both of these new developments are both uh upgrading of those two pump stations. So So they'll both be flowing into both the Route 6 and the Elwick pump stations.

Yeah.

E earlier on we had a discussion about proportional uh funding for upgrades and I think that needs to carry forward to all these new projects. you know, if if they're not on the hook for the full upgrade, there ought to be some discussion about proportional upgrades.

And this would be in addition to the hookup fees, correct? Absolutely.

All right. Okay. You know, if the zoning board of appeals is making their decisions and saying that they don't have perview over the issue of water and sewer permits and the impact on the system, then that tells me that that responsibility falls to this board. And certainly before any of those permits are issued, we've covered an awful lot of issues today that I'm going to be raising and I'm sure my fellow

board members are going to be raising before any permits are issued. Um, we have to come at this in a responsible manner and um, we got some work ahead of us to say the least.

Well, it I I am now very uncomfortable with the lack of planning in this town uh at the at a level of community development and land use planning. These projects should have been anticipated given their size and location uh and some evaluation done as the community's plan was updated just two years ago.

um you know I'm at a loss to know how that process which is supposed to be comprehensive missed this much development and you know I had raised the issue several years ago about um doing a socioeconomic impacts assessment including population growth and demand for housing uh associated with offshore wind development And I mean, everyone was polite enough to uh not to laugh at me, but I was

ignored. And uh this development may not be uh directly associated with that kind of uh offshore activity, but it seems to me that some kind of a anticipation should have been done in the plan. Um I, you know, I I'm at a loss. This is not It doesn't feel right.

I'm sorry. Uh my sense isn't that uh my sense is that this is not um an appropriate place to be.

I'm trying to get away from the use of the word feel. You know, somebody used to say, you mean you feel, right?

Mhm.

No, this is my opinion and uh I'm just I am I am uncomfortable and and I don't know what to do about it. Maybe I'm just Anyway. Okay, Tim. Anything else? You're uncomfortable.

I think I would characterize it as somewhat out of control.

Yeah.

My sense is that it's out of control. If we can't anticipate it as a public agency responsible for providing services, then we we have lost control over what's going on here.

Yeah. And I think I think to add to what Rob and Ron are saying is that once the plant reaches capacity and we have to do a plant upgrade, it was driven by commercial development of residential units for profit and the issue comes up as to who's going to pay for the plant improvements for, you know, additional capacity.

Um, and the same holds true with the issue of traffic, increases in traffic and improvements in roads and installation of signals and things. All of this stuff, you know, gets I mean to talk in excess of 1,400 units. I I wouldn't be surprised when our consultants get back to us and tell us how many units are tied in now to the system that this is not like oh 20 or

25% increase in just the number of um you know additional sewer tieins than we have currently. Um this this has got a lot of concern and I I mirror what Rob's saying. It's uh you know, you hear people complain about traffic. Now, wait till they see some of these projects if they get permitted and they're not traffic improvements.

Uh they think Fon Connor Road and uh Old Westport Road and Route Six are backed up.

Wait till you see some it's uh I mean, somebody's got to say put up their hands and say, "Let's look at this comprehensively. Are we making the best decisions?"

Um, I've said enough today. I I gotta stop talking.

Yeah, I I I have the same sense. Mike, I can say Yeah, I can say we're these units, 1400 units is as approximately in the in the six to 7% of our current units connected.

And Tim, add in the ones that haven't tied into the sewer extensions that have been done over the last 25 years.

Correct.

And you're over the top.

Yes.

And I if the consultant comes back with any other opinion other than that, when you factor in those that have not tied it to sewer extensions, I I'm positive that you'll be over the top because if you read that Stantech report on the Hawthorne Yeah. raised the spectre in very uh vague terms at the end of that report and that's why I've asked for them to expand upon that because everybody's going to know where

are we going and what could be the implications.

Okay, Tim, anything else? Um, just lastly, just touch some base on our staff. We're, you know, we're, you know, Andrew, you know, Laflur, uh, he might still be on here. You know, he's our new assistant, you know, water and sewer, uh, assistant water and sewer superintendent. Uh, he's been working with Steve, uh, kind of onboarding training. So, uh, he's doing well. Um good morning everybody.

Good morning.

Morning.

Morning Andrew.

Um other than that we have you know other new staff in the department that we've been training. Uh we happy to say that we're fully staffed at HMEO positions. I mean except for the water division um HMO position um you know all of our other HMO positions are are fully staffed. There are no vacancies with our CDL driver positions. Um now you know the the highway department have been

working you know strongly with HR um to get all these positions full filled up and uh it's been it's been great. Um now now that the the turn is to get the SMEO positions uh filled. Um and if if that takes some of our HMEOs and we can back fill those.

Other than that, our our water superintendent position is still vacant.

But we have Steve Sullivan that's contracted that's working still working with us. Um, and uh we're also, you know, working on a new uh uh admin assistant here and uh like I said, a business uh agent as well.

Okay.

Some good news.

Some good news. Yes.

Any other comments?

All right. Um, if there are none, uh, I will entertain a motion to adjurnn.

Motion to adjurnn.

Second.

Motion by Mr. Lebell. Second by Mr.

Gier. Mr. Lebell, how do you vote?

Yes.

Mr. Gier.

I vote yes.

Chair votes yes. The meeting is adjourned. Thank you all for your time.

I appreciate it.

Thank you all.