Good afternoon everyone. This is the regular monthly meeting of the Dy Storm Water Committee, Wednesday, March 18th, 2026. I'm going to call the meeting to order at 10:08 p.m.
Stand for Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you.
>> Roll call attendance. >> David Phillips here. >> Calonia here. >> Tom Ferry here. >> Gulad here. No one's on Zoom at this time.
>> Okay. I had copied um Jim Reen on the uh emails. Um I didn't get a response that they might sit in, but um we're going to proceed with as much as we can anyhow with because as I said, um
I got an email about two proposals which we'll cover later in the agenda. Agenda item 4 a update on Horton Street storm water permits for three houses. I'm happy to report that the three
permits were issued using the updated language with the terms and conditions that were prepared by Weston and Samson attached and uh Tom Lisa and I saw Mr. Lango yesterday gave them the permits uh
explained some of the stuff they don't have to be concerned about. Got an update on the project. Um everything's moving along quite well and uh if anything comes up uh relative to the terms and conditions on the permit, he will get in touch with Tom or
me or if it's something that might be lease's uh area, they'll be in touch with them. But anyhow, finally got that taken care of and u I haven't been by there lately. Have you? >> Uh not I I was going to take a drive by
today. I didn't go today, but I I plan on going soon. Well, have you been by roughly? He said rough plumbing's in there. Electrical is coming. >> I've been houses now, but the site work I know that the weather has not been copatic to grading, but the driveways
need to be regraded to encourage the water not to go in roads. >> Oh, okay. >> There's nothing they can do immediately yet. >> Right. But for I guess for the most part, they're working inside the structures. I mean, it's they've in spite of the weather, they've made good
progress um to get the houses built. Uh agenda item 4B, the 2027 calendars. Uh I finally got the invoice for the 2026 calendars. Gave to Ellie yesterday. Still collecting pictures if anyone has
them. Um, but uh I do want to get the pictures to Bristol Plymouth hopefully early May so that the whole file can be set up and it'll be sitting there when school opens in se September
to save time >> uh because it gets pretty hectic and they have their open house and every event that's coming up there people want printing. So hopefully we will be able to move that along. Uh, agenda item 4 C, 2231 Elm Street,
second storage building. So, I had contacted Jennifer Haney uh from Even Plumbing and invited her to today's meeting. Excuse me.
but she's not available today. Uh the other thing I advised them was that the storm water permit uh their storm water permit for the site expired on February 15th of 26. I asked
her to request an extension in writing and I suggested that the extension date go through February 15th of 2028 because the permit is for two years and this would be the maximum they could get
and to send us a check for $65. She did request the extension, but she didn't put a date. And since no one could come today, we don't have the check either. So, the first thing I would like the board to do is
uh approve an extension of the storm water permit. >> Hang on a second, Nancy. I'm sorry. Um, did you receive her email at 10:30? You might want to take a look at I
haven't I haven't had a chance to read it. >> Okay. >> Oh, she talked about the permit. >> I didn't see the permit in there. I scanned it quickly. >> She's questioning
>> Oh, I know about that. She's questioning everything, but the specifically we got to deal with the permit because it's spying, >> right? >> Okay. So, um, >> is that copy to me? Do you know Heather originally? Probably not.
>> No, it's it's addressed to me, Tom Ferry, Heather, and Jim Ren. Um, so I sent another email just before I left the house advising her
that I would ask the committee today to tenatively approve extension of the storm water permit for steam and plumbing. at 2231 Elm Street through
December 15, 2028, which means uh that we will tenatively tenatively approve the permit through that date.
uh once she confirms that date is okay and they pay the the town $65 which is the standard extension fee. So can I get a motion to tenative tenatively extend that permit under the conditions that I just listed?
>> So moved second. >> We have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? >> No. >> Hearing none. All in favor? Hi. >> Hi. >> Okay. So, I did send an email, so I'll wait to see. Uh, let's see. Heather, how
long does it take to get this meeting posted at our site so somebody can watch it? >> You know, it differs. The usually it's within a week, but the most recent one, the February meeting was almost a month. >> Who does the posting?
>> Cable committee. >> Oh, okay. Um, >> okay. So, do they just access it or do you have to send it to them? >> They have access to it. you could send an email and just ask
them to post that this meeting as soon as possible so that the information that we're going to discuss will be available to Jen and the owner and anybody else
that wants to watch it. So, I received the following email this morning from Jennifer Heene who is the service manager for human plumbing and heating. Good morning Nancy. I apologize that I
am unable to attend today's meeting. I would like to get some clarification so I can discuss with the owner as well. Especially where we're told previously as you mentioned that this was unnecessary. This what she's referring to as
unnecessary is the request that the storm water uh sent to sent through Carrie to Weston and Samson requesting requesting storm water services at the
site of the second building at 2231 street. So, as you know, there have been emails going back and forth that there was misinformation given to Aean again, and I thought it had been clarified when I
wrote back, but anyhow, so she said, especially where we're told, we're told previously, as you mentioned, that it was unnecessary. That unnecessary came from the chairman of the planning board. I understand you
said the planning board has no authority, but that is not something that I would know. So, I have to justify the additional costs that we did not account for. We appreciate the board's intent to ensure compliance with the approved plans.
However, condition E of the site plan approval requires the applicant to bear the cost of inspections only to the extent such inspections are required and does not establish an ongoing or open-ended construction phase observation program
doesn't understand storm water management requirements even from the federal level which I have a brochure I can certainly give to it. The proposal from Weston and Samson appears to go beyond this by including general field observations for overall
project conformance which were not identified as part of the approval. I'm not sure whose approval she's talking about. Maybe it's the planning board. Excuse me. We intend to construct the project in
strict accordance with the we approved plans and comply with all applicable requirements. All includes storm water, even though she may not think so. To move forward constructively, we would be agreeable to limited, clearly defined inspections
focused on key elements such as storm water BMP installation and final asbuilt verification consistent with condition E. Not sure what condition it is, unless that's part of the Western and Samson proposal.
We respectfully request that the scope of any required inspections be clarified and appropriately limited. At this time, no specific inspection requirements, scope or triggers have been identified by the board. Don't know who the board
is. Could be planning board, not their turf, not up to them to make the determination. The proposal submitted by Western Samson appears to establish ongoing open-ended construction phase observation services that were not included as a condition of
approval are carried in our budget. Condition of approval by whom? Planning board. Again, this is something that we have run into on other projects that I'm not going to get into here, but they have to be
addressed. The project has already undergone full peer review and the board has approved the plans as compliant board is the planning board. As such, we respectfully request clarification as to what
specific inspections are being required, the defined scope and limits of such inspections, and the basis under the approved decision for imposing ongoing peerre services. Again, approved decision.
That's by the planning board. the town storm water bylaw regulations, the EPA rates, the state storm water handle, all of the stuff that deals with storm water management and controls
does not fall under the planning board. They don't get involved with approvals of storm water issues. They don't do storm water enforcement. And I think one of the problems is going
back to the original request when they were going to build building one and we had a very contentious meeting here over the storm water issue.
They were given the wrong information on that project. They were told they didn't need a storm water permit. And I know this is old information to you, but since this meeting is going to be u available to the public and I asked Jen
to watch it, I want them to understand the project did need a storm water permit to construct the first building. That was clear when our storm water
agent said it was needed and the property owner was told, "Oh, that's not true." We don't know who made that statement. We know that the resulting conflict ended up before us.
When our stormwater agent left, Lester and Samson had already been engaged to do uh the peer review for the planning board. We asked Lester and Samson to also
review the project for storm water compliance because when Lester and Samson was engaged to do the peer review and they looked at it, they immediately said to the property owner, you need a storm water permit. you've already
disturbed more than an acre of uh land. As a result of that, a storm water permit was issued. The cost for that storm water permit was a little over $3,200.
that storm water permit as issued by this uh committee uh approved by the board of health was for the entire site not just the portion of the site where building one
was built. Therefore, because the storm water approved and permitted the entire site, we in effect have saved eman plumbing in excess of another
$3,200 because it's based on the uh area of disturbance when they started construction land clearing and and footings and things like that on the first building. uh and we were in the process of approving waiverss.
Uh I remember the discussion here that in addition to the area where the building would be in the surrounding disturbed area, they had cut trees further south and they were trying to explain what they were going to do. And finally I said, "Is it a staging area?"
And they said, "Yes, fine. That's within the storm water regulations and it was covered by the permit. I fully believe they knew they were going to build a second building, but for storm water it was not relevant
to the permit because the entire site had been permitted. Once they said, "We're going to build a second building." Obviously, they had to go to the planning board with the next set of plans. So, let's set that aside for a moment.
The construction of the first building had oversight by the town's storm water agent up until the point of his leaving employment. After that, Weston Samson was engaged to
do engineering work which was paid for by the property owner. The work that was done by the stormwater agent, an employee of the town, was paid for by the town of Dyon. However, since we no longer had a stormwater agent and the town appointed
uh Weston and Samson as its engineer, then wherever they do work, the property owner or the project owner has to pay based on detailed proposals from Western and Samson. They just don't say, "Oh, we're
going to do a storm water review or a study." The proposal is detailed and they are sent out to the property owner or project owner ahead of time so they can review them and they can question them and discuss anything.
When the check is sent in based on the amount in the proposal, a separate account is set up uh at town hall with the town accountant so that we are able to track invoices because quite frankly there are a number
of western Samson projects not only ours but uh storm water and I think concom has used them. So >> so they're all set up separately. By the same token, if in the course of planning board,
conservation commission storm water requesting services from Weston and Samson, if there is an area that overlaps, they don't request and submit three
bills. We share the information so that there isn't a duplication or triplication if that's such a word of services from Weston and Samson. So that is another thing that is done to ensure that the project owner property
owner is not getting double or triple charged. We share information. Each board, committee, commission, whatever, has its own rules and regulations that have to be followed. The town has the as
the planning board has all of the planning board rules and regs. Conservation has to uh follow the wetlands protection act and and the stormwater committee has to follow the clean water act. Those two acts of federal legislation and our requirements
and our rules and regs are based on them. We don't make stuff up as we go along. Now, what uh I don't think is clear to Jen that
in effect the work that was done by the storm water agent was not bills to them directly. He was a town employee. when he left and the requirement was made by the uh of the planning board to have
a proposal for engineering services which they paid for which even plumbing paid for. Information that the stormwater committee needed in order to proceed was provided as part of that work.
That was part of the concern when they came in to meet with us that they were going to be charged extra for work that had already been done, which that doesn't happen. Uh so the work that we're looking to have done
relative to construction of the second building on the permitted site permitted by the snowwater committee is not part of the proposal that the planning board put together when they
asked Lester and Samson to do the peer review to look at the plan so forth and so on. The proposal we ask for is substantially separate. So, um I'm explaining all of this. So, uh
Jen, uh hopefully you will get to see this relatively soon. Uh if you have questions about the proposal uh that I haven't addressed, feel free to let me know and we can set something up with a
discussion with Weston and Samson. Uh they will tell you why what they have proposed is needed and and we'll go from there. I will also state because we have separate accounts. If in fact the work gets done by Weston
and Samson and all of the budgeted money which is paid for by the property owner, a project owner is not used. It will be refunded to you. The town does not keep
that money. It is only used to pay for engineering services built directly by Weston and Samson and you're certainly welcome to look at any invoices or question any invoices that come in. Work will not commence
until the money is on deposit. You have the right to question the proposal. You you've stated in the email concerns, but in reading this email publicly,
it's clear that you are confusing planning board areas of authority with storm water. The uh planning board
chairman sent an email that uh pretty much said we're done. Everything we needed is done. That addresses planning board concerns.
And that's when I got the information from the office manager, the planning board office that I should contact you and pursue uh the status of the proposal and the payment. So to wrap this up for today after you
have a chance to see this and again we're going to try to get it posted on the website as soon as possible. Uh and have the the project owner listen to this also. Uh feel free to get in touch with us. Uh it the
project will be on the uh April agenda third Wednesday of the month. know that uh you're welcome to come in if the questions haven't been answered by then. But again, I want to reiterate, we don't
want a repeat of what happened with the first building when you were given wrong information. And unfortunately there appears to be either wrong information, misinformation
or quite frankly I can't understand how something like this could happen because the planning board storm water committee again con we all work together and if they were really concerned
I would have thought the first place they would contact was the stom water committee and not make decisions that don't fall within the area of expertise or supervision or anything covered under the bylaw. But anyhow, uh we're ready to
talk with you any time. Uh and I'll leave it at that now and maybe you'll be able to come to the April meeting so that uh we can have more discussion or by then you will have talked to Weston and Samson. Uh, I will forward your email to Jim Reed at I think did you
already and Samson? Yes, you did. Um, and I'm also going to um forward this to uh Mrs. East today in the planning board office and to the chairman of the planning board uh so
they understand what your concerns are. But from what I can determine from what you wrote, you are looking at planning board regs. you're not looking at storm water planning board regs do not cancel storm water uh regulations and requirements.
So anyhow >> thank you for explaining that Nancy >> uh does anyone else wish to comment? If not we will move on to agenda item 4D update on Milk Street Housing Development Bill Farms. Is anything new happening there? I haven't heard
anything. I haven't heard. >> Um the only thing new was we had our final peer review done. Uh we meaning conservation and um Weston and Samson completed that and CEC um did respond
with the wetland um scientist and provided us additional information that we had requested. Um, so that is continued to our meeting which is tomorrow night, the 19th conservation commission meeting. Um, if anyone's
interested in watching that start six. >> Yeah. All right. So, it's still open on Con, right? >> Yep. >> I think they're first on the agenda, too. >> Correct. 6 PM.
Uh just just as a comment, Jen, if you're still watching this meeting, this is an example of cooperation between boards because even when Kong signs off on this project as far as uh the developer meeting their requirements and
the planning board is signed off u to whatever extent, they've still got to meet with storm water and there's got to be a storm water permit and there's got to be oversight, which means Western and Samson will be requested by the stormwater committee to put together an engineering proposal to oversee that
housing development when it it starts to break ground. I'll put it that way. This is just standard procedure. Okay. Uh agenda item 4E
FY27 budget update. So um the budget meeting our budget meeting was held um like frankly the there's no place to cut
uh my position still is take last year's take the current budget increase it by contractual obligations for labor and any services that we might have and submit it. Um, I know that there
were some changes, but um, this is not uh, something that I I feel can be cut and cut and cut. Um, >> I agree. Um, >> I think if anything you guys should be going up on it. >> Well, well, the thing is I will mention
this. So, we had a we placed uh in the budget, we included $15,000 for MS4 compliance. We got that approved in the current budget for testing and things of that
nature and we put it in again in the FY27 budget. Uh and I notified the town administrator and accountant that uh I was waiting for a proposal,
not a proposal, prior prioritized list of what the storm water committee should be looking at for FY27. the list came in.
It totaled $51,000, which we know doesn't have a prayer. So, I'm just going to read you. This is just for 27. And this came in from Jerice Schwartz, who was the engineer uh working on the storm water uh program
under the OPA grant. She says, "For FY27, I would focus on the following in order of priority. One, additional mapping of drainage infrastructure in urbanized areas. These are all estimated costs, $20,000.
Develop illicit discharge, detection, and elimination IDE plan based on available information provided by the town. Include catchment, prioritization, and ranking matrix 7,500.
Develop system vulnerability factor SVF matrix to identify outfalls for wet weather sampling $3,500. So those are items two and three. Item four, develop nitrogen source identification report phases one and two
$20,000. So um I showed this to Tom. We talked about it. So the only thing we selected was the first item, additional mapping of drainage infrastructure in urbanized areas, $20,000.
So I have shared that information with the town administrator and the town accountant. It's not in the budget. Uh but um this has got to be this has got to be looked at. the $15,000 that's in there
is to uh do the work. In other words, every year we have to do this work. The work that was done uh by Weston and Samson last year from the grant, there's 15,000 to do it this year.
In 27, we've still got to do that that work, but now this is additional. Uh and this is only for FY27. Obviously, if we only pick one of these, we've still got these other things to do, but again, uh it's going to depend on uh funding. So,
>> Nancy, did we get any feedback from the accountant or the town administrator >> on this? No. No. I told him ahead of time. Uh I sent an email and said there's going to be another number. And I was at the meeting
and explained that the list that came in prioritized list was over $50,000 and I knew there wasn't a chance. So that we were looking at the 20,000 for the additional mapping. So um so this
discussion is going to have to take place u further. >> Did did you already meet with the fin? >> Uh yeah we were here. How did that go? >> Think of they, you know, they didn't say yes, no, or whatever. I just explained
to them. >> They don't really understand what we do at all. >> No, I No, I wouldn't say that. >> Okay. >> I think they knew ahead of time there was going to be something. We said 15 was a placeholder.
So, that only deals with what we have to have to do this year, which will be the >> 27. It'll be the third year in a row that we've had to do this. And I explained to them the testing that was done last year by Weston and Samson under the grant,
those test results had to be filed with the EPA when I sent in, but not attached to the MS4. So, every year they're going to be looking for those test results. Uh, and the
other thing too is as long as we're making an attempt to do these things, there's no way we can do all of this at once financially. And I and I think the EPA, the people we deal with know that. But we're not telling
them, well, we don't have any money. We're not doing it. That's what got the town fined back in 2006. So, we continue to make progress. small steps, but we're still moving forward, and that's the important thing. Uh they know we're serious. They know we do what
we can with what we have. So, um the uh the list here, as I say, in looking at it, we we asked the engine to prioritize it. She did. So, we picked the number
one issue that she says needs to be addressed. So that's in the budget for fiscal year 27. The number one task the 15,000 testing they did not it's in here. Okay. This is the additional and when this was put together I told them
15 is only a placeholder and I'm waiting for a prioritized list. So this 15 should actually be $35,000 if we get the funding we need >> right >> to take one thing off of this list. Um
if we do then in successive years we've still got to do this list before I ask you for another list which I'm sure there are out there but uh at least um if we get the first one next year it's 7500. Uh so that's
a decrease. Um and then the next year is 3500. It's the fourth item that's back to 20 uh000 and that's the nitrogen source. Can we use any of the fees that we collect towards any of this?
>> We don't collect storm water fees. Permit fees go into the town. >> That's the only fee we get. Uh it goes in under permits. >> They've talked about storm water fees and all those other things. Uh we
studied those at um MMA and some communities make out. Well, but the thing is anything you collect through those storm water fees or whatever you want to call them that deal with developers, it goes into if if the town accepts it,
it goes into a special account gets spent for storm water. >> We don't have that kind of income. We we don't have thank goodness any large developments right now >> and >> we do for some commercial development, >> right? And the other thing too is this
is a process that would have to be accepted by the boards, the various boards involved. I believe it would have to be accepted at a town meeting. Uh when you meet with a developer, that's all got to be spelled out ahead of time. You don't just say surprise, we want
this money from you. >> So, uh anyhow, >> thanks. >> So, anything else on the budget? haven't heard any time since the meeting. >> Okay. Agenda item 4F update Western proposal. I already talked about Elm
Street MACS Arjo found. This is the one that uh I think it was November or December the Stockwater Committee uh listened to a presentation
from Jim Re and he explained all of the comments they had about um their inspection. The main concern at that time was the potential for
over topping of the basins in a severe storm storms. Um, and after uh Mr. reading went through all of the the charts that were there and expressed the concern. We as a
committee voted to request a proposal from Weston and Samson to address uh testing which would provide more
information about the potential capacity of the basins in a horrendous storm. and and things like that. I sent that to Carrie and she forwarded it to repeat
in Glenn at MACS. That was January the 5th of this year. Uh there was no response. Uh Jim Reagan got in touch with me and asked about that proposal and he also asked about
the one for 2230 uh 20 2231 El Street which we already addressed. In the meantime, I sent an email to Glenn
and asked the status of that proposal. That one's got a price tag. That's a little over $23,000 to do the work. And in the meantime, he sent in a report which I think is in response to Western
and Samson's response to their report that talked about potential dangers of uh the basins overflowing. So, I don't know if Glenn
whoever at MACS thinks that this situation is his last report took care of it. As far as I know, from what we know from talking to Western Samson, the last report is what kicked off our request when we need more
testing. We need to know about those structures. Um, so I checked with uh Carrie and she told me it had been sent out on January 5th, the proposal, the storm waterline
proposal for work at uh, MACS and there was no response and obviously there's been no pain. So anyhow, I followed that up and I am waiting now to find out uh where that proposal is
again. And Carrie said in her email, the work that the storm, excuse me, the work that the planning board required from Western Samson has been completed. Therefore, this is a storm water proposal
and it was identified um as phase C. So, it will be set up in a separate account and I did explain that to Glenn that that proposal deals strictly with storm water.
So, I I'll wait to see if I get an answer. The report that I saw uh is a response to the planning board work. I don't believe it contains anything that would negate
the proposal to by the stormwater committee to determine if these basins have the capacity to handle this. But again, uh Westerner Samson was copied on email. We'll wait to see what they say. Uh, I don't know if there's anything in that report to the planning board that
would change anything. If it would change anything, it might reduce some the scope of the work. It might reduce the cost, but that's a western and Samson call. That's not ours. So, we'll wait and see how that all works out, but
that's where we are on that one. Um, anybody have questions on that one or comments maybe? Agenda item five, new business. Do we have any new business? I don't think so.
>> Do we have any unanticipated items? >> Yes, >> Mr. F. >> So, the unanticipated part is we had a contractor do our basin cleaners reach out and wanted to get started. So, this they already started basins. I
>> saw them on Maris Lane today. When does the sweep a good place to start? >> Um, what was your question? >> But sweeping when when the snow stops, sweeping begins. >> We we will start sweeping before our next meeting. >> Oh, okay. That means it's not going to
snow anymore, right? >> No. >> We may have to put somebody else in charge of whether I am not sure yet. Okay. So the the basin cleaning this is contracted work, right? >> The basin. Yes.
>> And cleaning >> cleaning and disposal. >> Yes. >> Happy to see they were dumping it in the back of the truck >> versus what? Somebody's backyard. Where else would they dump it? That was
a good place for it. Any public input? We don't have any public here. Any correspondence of anything other than the all these emails that I've mentioned today, that would have been the only correspondence back and forth. Uh expenditures,
none. Next month we'll have the uh bill that we're going to pay for the calendars for 2026. >> I actually submitted that. >> Oh, it's already been submitted. >> Yes. Do you want to know the total
amount for the record? >> Sure. >> $1,731.75 for 6 2026 calendars. Very good. I don't know what happened. They
usually bill very very quickly and I had to keep contacting asking for the invoice. But anyhow, that's taken care of. Uh approval of the minutes of January 21 and February 18th, 2026. Is there a
motion? I'll make a motion to approve the minutes of January 21 and February 18th, 2026. >> Second. >> Any discussion? >> Hearing none. All in favor? >> I I
>> I vote unanimous. Um the next meeting is April 15, 2026, income tax day. No break on filing this year. your holiday. >> Does anyone know of anything that
on your next agenda that we haven't covered today that might be ugly? >> Um, is there an outreach table this summer? Are you doing an outreach table at >> Oh, so um I can I can report this under um
actually public input uh because it's alliance. Uh yeah, I talked to Tom way back when because we've only had one public event to give out information which was lights on with the calendars. And so I said,
"Well, um I'll plan to be at the couch festival in June." that because we better have a minimum of two that will take care of the reporting here. I've already been contacted by uh
about the event in October, the arts festival. And she I she wonder if we're going to participate and I said yes. And so we're all set. So that will be our first event in the
next reporting year. So we're all set for a spot somewhere. We'll have um obviously we've got a good selection of we've got we've got supplies, bags, rippers, coloring books, uh
whatever else we've got stored. Uh we will be giving out all of that stuff. So, yeah. So, we're planning to be there as part of our public education program. Uh, anything else that we can think of? That was a good thing to bring up
because I wanted to mention that I had been contacted already for the October event. Um, if not, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> I'll second it. >> All in favor?
>> I. We are adjourned at 1 153.