Welcome to the June 16th meeting of the fora commission. The open meeting law states pursuant to the open meeting law any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting to any medium. Attendees are
therefore advised that such recordings or transmissions are being made whether perceived or unpersceived by those present and are deemed acknowledged and permissible. Okay. So we've all been provided with this with the um the agenda and a and a
notice to go with it. First item is uh citizen input. Are there any citizen input miss Paul? >> Nope. No citizens input. Uh just a roll call so we could have it for the uh for the minutes as well. Uh
>> member Howak >> here. >> Member Souza >> here. >> President Alita >> here. >> Thanks. Thank you. And uh member Albs is not here. >> That's right. All right. With respect to citizen input. Is there any >> We did not receive any citizens input for this meeting.
>> Okay. Uh second item on the agenda is minutes of the previous meeting as we normally um do it at the um start of each meeting. We go to u approve the minutes of previous meeting. In this particular case, we're looking at the meeting held
on March 4th, 2026. Um I've reviewed it. I have no problem with it. Um and does anybody have any questions or or want to make any changes? If not, I'll entertain a motion to approve the
minutes held on March 4th, 2026. >> I make a motion to approve the minutes of the meeting. >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? I >> I. >> That takes us to item number three,
approval to Hall Septage. Uh we have in front of us I guess requests to um utilize the U treatment plant down here to um in effect discharge their night
soil and so forth. And we have three new candidates, one of which I believe is um is taking over a business from a former uh owner of the business. So the first one is Rodenheiser
septic of Holliston Mass. [snorts] We know it's my understanding too Paul that um all three have been given temporary um approval to start utilizing the system. Right.
>> Yes. So I I gave them temporary approval administratively to allow them to uh start uh dumping at our facility. Uh, plus it's also gives us a little bit of time to evaluate to make sure there there's no issues uh with with them. >> Good point.
[clears throat] All right. So, the first uh company is Roden High Septic. Um, these they've never been here before, I'm assuming. >> Uh, not not prior to this request, though. So, they're uh they're based out of
Holliston, Mass. >> Yeah. It's coming down a long way. I guess they're really trying to get their feet in the door around here. >> Yeah. >> Um, okay. We spelled out the things I guess that's required of them. Um,
>> Yep. So, we, you know, we require them to submit a letter to us requesting. We review that. We do some background checks on the company. Then uh we [snorts] issue them a copy of the uh a copy of what's required the septage
hauler regulations. Uh their trucks need to be inspected by the health department to be able to travel over the city roads. Uh if all that's completed, I'll issue them the temporary uh and then it comes to the board for approval. >> Uh okay. Um,
at the present time approximately how many haulers do you think we got pulling into this place? >> Uh, coming into here in >> terms of the companies. >> Yeah. I would say we probably have 15 to 20 different companies right now. >> 15 to 20.
>> Yes. Okay. >> Yes. Which over the past over the past four or five years, we've seen a great uptick in the amount of septage that we've >> Yeah. It really helps pay for some bills and so forth. Yeah. I see it in the budget and >> and so forth. I can remember when you
know there were only like four or five back when I you know back in the heyday and uh yeah we were always scrambling. >> Yeah. You know you just look at the revenue side of things. We were uh [clears throat] back uh 2019 we were maybe three
$400,000 a year we were taking in on Septter. >> Uh this year we're already over a million for this fiscal year. So, we'll close out this fiscal year over a million dollars. >> Good. Okay. Um, anybody have any questions with regard to Rodenheiser
septic? If not, I'll entertain a motion to um approve um Rodenheiser septic to um offload their septic septus down here at the wastewater treatment plant
provided that they abide by the rules and tribulations that we requested. And want to make a motion. >> I'll make that motion to approve uh Roden Rodenheiser Septic. I second.
>> Um, all in favor? >> I >> I >> I >> Okay. All right. Um, the second company is um convenient disposal [clears throat] and sanitation.
Um, just just to get me started. Um we we've got a situation here where someone else took over that business, but they're keeping the name evidently. >> Correct. >> Um and reading and reading through the um
the notes that has been provided to us. What was the problem with the with the initial owner? Because we had suspended him, I understand. >> Yeah, I suspended him just uh due to some interactions that he had with our staff down here. I wasn't appreciative
of how he tr how he dealt with our staff down here. So that's why it was suspended. >> All right. So, um that issue has been cleared up. >> Uh as from the information we were provided and why it's even back in front of the uh uh sewer commission for
approval is because it's now under new ownership and uh it'll be before it was the owner of the company that was driving the trucks that had the issue with the staff here. Uh, so this that shouldn't be if it's new owners.
>> Okay. Um, yeah. Well, I um I hope the new owners um had a had a feeling or had a flavor of what happened to the original owners. So
hopefully their people will find a way of getting along with people. >> So So that there won't be any problems. So anyway, let's hope for that. Um, having said all that, I don't have any problems with uh
someone else taking over this. Um, anybody have any problems with it? >> Right. >> Okay. Um, will anybody make a motion to approve convenient disposal and sanitation of
Fore River acting as new owners of the original business to um >> make a motion for convenient disposal and sanitation? >> I'll second the motion. >> All in favor? I
>> I >> Okay, thank you. Motion passes. And the last company is the Royalty Porter James. Porter John's I'm sorry. Porter James. Porter John's of Eastern Mass. Um
is anybody you know who these people are? They're just appears to be small volume I would think, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. No small volume uh truck, you know. Uh but maybe they're getting more business down in this area with their uh with their photo jones. >> Okay.
Um, by the way, each one of these companies that we approved to come in, they go to provide us, I would assume, with some um certificate of liability and so forth. You know, they come in with their trucks
and they the guy comes in and they say he had a bad night and he he runs into his clarifier over there and >> we have to stretch them out >> within the requirements. They are required to uh they are required to maintain uh you know insurance and all
proper insuranceances on their vehicle. We don't require them to provide us proof uh through the health department. I'm not sure if that's part of their inspection uh cuz they do full inspections really on the trucks themselves to make sure that they're able to travel over city roadways and
stuff like that, but I'm not 100% sure if uh if that's part of their inspection process either if it's something uh that uh you know committee wanted and we can look into potentially getting uh >> Well, I can see something like that maybe
cropping up. maybe an additional insurance on their policy might be the might be the right might be the thing to do. >> Yeah. >> You know, in a case where, you know, some of these people come in, I guess, at different times and so forth, then you never know, they might have an
inexperienced driver or somebody who's under the under the influence and we don't know and he's driving in our premises and next minute, you know, he's he drove he drove off into the river and Yeah. only because he didn't know where he was going. Yeah. Uh what I'll what
[clears throat] I'll do if if uh if the SU commission uh would like me to I can check with our law department. They can review our regulation, see if there's anything that we should they should request or add to. >> Okay. Okay. Having said all that, anybody have
any questions with regard to this? If not, so can uh I entertain a motion to approve royalty port John's um to the for disposal privileges at the four river wastewater treatment plant.
>> I'll make the motion to approve royalty port Johns. >> I'll second. >> All in favor? I >> I. >> Motion passes. Thank you, gentlemen. >> Okay. my clip. Makes it easier.
We're at the time of year again where we have to deal with the awarding of chemicals to the uh vendors that have bid on them. Um, okay.
It would appear that we have a budget of about a million 76 something. >> Yeah. >> Right. A million176 a,176,000. >> Correct. >> For the new budget. Right.
And looking at what we're looking to award tonight, um I would anticipate that we're probably going to be able to at least meet that.
And um it would be nice if if at the end of the year we u we had a little surplus. Would be nice. >> Yep. Um, but these are the prices that came in. [clears throat] >> Uh, and if if I could, I just want to
point out a typo on uh the agenda as well as what was provided in the packet. Uh, costic and sodium hypocchlorite uh were uh were reversed. Uh so if you look at the uh agenda, Bon Remington is
providing the costic at 47,000 sodium micro sodium hydroxide as listed on the agenda. And then further down where Costic is labeled, it's Univa is providing so sodium hypocchlorite in the
amount of $561,536. So I just want to point that out. That was going to be a question I had. I'm you corrected me on it. Um okay. So um
so include so in that in the list as you said boarding remmon we'll be providing a certain amount of um costic >> yep >> at a price you said of what 47,000 or something >> uh total total price is 47,
uh96. Uh that's a unit price of $2.35 >> 2.3548. >> So can you give me that quantity again? >> Yep. So the costic provided by voting Remington. Y
>> uh the quantity is $10,000 gallons. >> Yep. >> The total price is 47,96. So 47096. >> Okay. All right. And so that the um
the one that's for 300,000 gallons that's for uni univer is that how you say it univari. Okay. Um, you know, liquid oxygen cost. Got a couple of questions.
Other than that, I had it written down here that there was a question on the two vendors. Other than that, I I myself don't have any problems with this. Um, anybody have any questions? uh any good respect to the other
>> how we did this and >> some of some of some of these >> chemicals have gone >> higher than they did last year that's for sure. [clears throat] >> Yeah, a couple a couple of them went up a little bit. Uh a couple of them have gone down a little bit uh as well. Um so
uh I think we're in a good position budget-wise. Um you know and we've seen uh we've seen you know our plant uh now that we're done with all the construction we have full dewatering operations at our plant here uh we have
been uh seeing lower TSS in our puts and uh [snorts] lower uh demand for chlorine. So you know we used less chlorine this past year as well as less uh sodium bulfite. So uh I think we've
been at a uh with within a good spot uh and you know with what was bid uh the quantities and the budget will be good for them. >> Now boarding Remington brings Costic in for us. >> Yes. >> Quant drums. >> Uh >> is that why they is that why they're
providing us a separate bid for costic? Is it is it the container size or >> Nope. Nope. They bring it in out of tanker. We have bulk storage on site. What's so why can't Univa Univa have done it? >> Well, so so we went out to bid for all
of these uh and we we have to get the low bidder. So currently, so if you look at it this year, FY26 bought in Remington is providing us a sodium hypocchlorite with a little bit when we bid this out last year. Uh, and now this, you know, [clears throat] with
this bid package for FY27, uh, uh, bought in Remington, excuse me, Univa was the low on sodium hypo, uh, sodium hypocchlorite. Uh, I believe they were 1 cent less than bought in Remington. It was a very close bid between Univar and bought in Remington.
But >> yeah, just Yeah, but we're talking costic here, right? >> Costic, right? >> Okay. So we we've if I'm if I'm right we've do do we have boarding remington uh have a contract for costic
to the tune of um what was it 10,000 gallons >> 10,000 gallons yeah 47,000 >> right right and then we got univar bringing in costic right 300,000 gallons >> no so again so univar will be sodium ium
hypocchlorite not costic. Those two got reversed. >> Okay, I didn't pick that up. >> Sorry about that. >> Again, that was a typo. So, sodium hypocchlorite being provided by Univa in the quantity of 300,000 gallons.
>> Okay. >> And that's a total cost of >> more than Remington is costing. >> Yeah. That's a total cost of $561,536. Okay. >> And then the cost stick is the low bidder was bought in Remington. Uh
10,000 gallons in the amount of $47,96. >> Got it. Okay. There we go. That clears that up. Um, now can we can we approve the list or do we >> Yeah, if if you'd like I can run through
and uh name off the chemical who was the low bidder and the amount that to be awarded towards him for the fiscal year and then you could take them all as one vote if you if the board so chooses. Well, >> or how however the board chooses to
>> I think I seem to recall I seem to recall that in the past um we found it was legal to take the list that's been provided right? >> Yep.
>> On a document dated June 12, 2026 that we can approve this list in total, right? knowing that it it represents individual contracts with these days. Right. >> Yes.
>> To save to save us some aggravation of having to go through it all. >> Now, I'm going to I'm going to leave that I'm going to make it a question to the commissioners. Would you prefer Andrew >> summary approval as described?
>> Would you prefer to do them individually or would you want to handle it in in the aggregate? I think it makes sense to do a summary approval subject to the um the discrepancy noted on the record. >> Meaning will you approve it all at once? >> Approve it all. >> Yes.
>> In the aggregate. >> Yes. >> Okay. Paul. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I'll >> And I'll and I'll go with that now. Do I need to make a motion to do that >> to approve >> to prove this? >> Yeah. >> But in the aggregate?
>> Yeah. Yeah, in the aggregate as amended because we made yeah for June 12 >> we made the amendment with the incorrect costic and sorted >> hypo. All right. Um therefore having said all that uh I will
entertain a moment a mo a motion to approve the list of chem of vendors providing chemicals for the fiscal year 2027
and approved as amended. and to be in the aggregate representing a total of of what's what contracts are to be awarded.
Having said all but that's a long emotion but um anybody want to just kind of like understand that and make a motion to say I >> I approve. I do approve, but the thing
is it's uh if we go by the date of June 12th as printed here or all the numbers. >> Yeah, >> they're correct. >> Can we do it as corrected on the record? >> Excuse me. >> Can we approve them all as corrected
orally on the record? >> Yeah. Yeah, I can see that. Okay, let me put it to you another way. We have amended this list uh with with corrections that needed to
be made. And as a result of that, we now have uh we have we now have a more accurate list of of what's what's to be provided and to be awarded. Therefore,
I would entertain a motion to uh approve the list of the items to be awarded that has been recently amended and
look for approval on that basis. I'll second that motion. >> Anybody second it? >> I'll I'll second that motion. >> Okay, >> I'll second it. >> Yes. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I >> I >> I >> I >> I motion passes. Okay.
Thank you. Through that. What's that take us to? toxicity. I guess the bids came in and Pace Analytical Services LLC um came in at the low price at $21,874.
Are these PACE got any history with us? Uh yeah, you know, I think it bounces back and forth between bioc and pace. >> Yeah, >> I think this current year we're with biosci. Um but we've been with pace in
the past. >> Yeah. Okay. All right. >> Um >> Oh, we are with PACE this this current year. Okay. >> We're with PACE. Okay. So, they're they're just going ahead and we're in another year. >> All right. If anybody has any questions. >> Yeah. Bus is back and forth.
Um, I'll turn a motion to award uh the toxicity testing contract to Pace Analytical Services LLC in the amount of 21,874. >> I make a motion to accept item five,
Paceical 21,8757 $74. >> I'll second the motion. All >> in favor? I I motion passes. Thank you. Gentlemen, that takes us to
let item number six. We're looking at um a work authorization number four and the amount is $61,45260. Um so the floor is yours. >> Thank you very much. So this is work
authorization within Mark. Uh so essentially a uh an amendment change order to their contract. Um when it was identified, we always used to take our vacastors, dump them into uh speciallymade uh dumpsters that were low
to the ground. Um and they would need to be emptied very frequently. When we switched uh our operations for sludge disposal and grit disposal uh to Epic uh which is a cost savings for us uh they also allowed us to be able to send any
of our back to de debris through the same route uh through one of their rolloffs their standard high their higher rolloffs uh that are designed to be mounted especially designed to be mounted on a rail car. Uh so the vectors would not be able to dump into them. Uh
so what we did we actually uh had infam go out in get a contractor to make a vector dumping area. I don't know if you've seen it out back concrete pad with you know surrounding block so that way vac can back into this area dump uh
there's a catch basin in that area so they allow what gets dumped out to dewater a little bit to reduce the weight uh and then they put it into the dumpster to be hauled out by Epic. Uh so that's what this change this uh amendment is for is for that work that was done.
>> So this work's been done already. >> Yes. >> Okay. So because I saw the invoices and so I kind of summized that it was um isn't this all part of u we got rid of the process of shipping water out of
here, right? because we >> we upgraded our our processing equipment to be able to hold, you know, get more solids to go out and so forth. And this isn't this this is all part of that, isn't it? Is it like it trying to
improve the step of it? >> Yeah. So, this is specific to vector. So, the things that are dumped out of the vector after the vector goes out either cleans the sewer or cleans the manhole. Uh, so it's more grit. Could be trash debris or something like that. not
necessarily dealing with the sludge. >> It does go to the same end spot as the sludge goes to. So when they take those cot those uh you know rolloffs out of here, it goes to the same disposal location which is a cost savings to us from where it used to go before. Uh but
uh but there's no real change in uh you know in the actual sludge operation. Um what I get the impression that these these dumpsters you're talking about would they have eventually like dug up
the the cement or or the or the ground in which they roll off on because of their size and stuff like that? >> Yeah. So the old ones that we had again they were smaller low ones to the ground. Um, we used to have to get them custommade um because it wasn't a
standard roll off size which was a cost to us. Uh, disposal of those was a cost and the area where they were going was uh was definitely in need of uh uh need of repair. So, you know, this helped take care of cleaning that area up. Uh,
it makes it better for our staff and uh cheaper on the disposal. Jonathan >> sir, >> you satisfied with the work that was JDM did for you? >> Very. >> Okay. Have you used them in the past before? >> We have.
>> Okay. Okay. Good. Glad to hear you're satisfied with that. Um, anybody got any questions about this? >> No. >> No. >> Okay. So, we'll need a motion to approve um work authorization number four in the
amount of 61,45260 to be made payable to Infamark. Am I correct? >> Yes. >> I'll make that motion to approve item six, worth work authorization number four. >> I second.
>> All in favor? I >> I motion passes. Thank you, gentlemen. Um, okay. Takes us to item number seven, work authorization number five [snorts]
in the amount of $170,5642. Um, is is this something that's already been done as well or are we looking to do it? >> No, this is something that's to be done. Okay. >> This was held off because of this because of the size. >> Um, yeah. Um, and we're looking at
rebuilding and re repairing two big wet weather pumps. >> Yeah. So our influent wet weather pumps at the headworks of our plant. Uh prior to the B prior to our bus screens we have uh these uh well excuse me just after the bar screens we have these
large uh wet weather pumps. So uh there's two two dry weather pumps uh and there's a total of three larger wet weather pumps uh that helps uh lift the water up to be able to pump it through through the facility. Um, wet weather
pumps are primarily only used again during the wet weather whenever we get rain. Uh, both of those pumps failed uh well, one was inoperational. The other two failed pretty close uh in time to each other. Uh, so we pulled those out.
We had them evaluated. Uh, we got uh multiple prices uh to repair those. Uh, their flight went where the pumps uh they've been good pumps historically. Uh but they're just at the point where they needed to be rebuilt. >> What do you think the life on those babies are?
>> I mean I mean they're they're workh horses if they they're always going. They're always going and >> uh you know again they're wet weather so it's it's just when they kick on and when they kick on they really draw that well down. Uh you know my guess would be you could get 7 to 10 plus years out of
them u in between re in between major rebuilds. So by repairing and having these on site ready to go, you know, we we eliminate a certain amount of downtime and so forth to the process and everything, I would think.
>> Well, right now these pumps are out. There is no pumps in there. So these aren't even spares. These are the ones from in there. Right now we actually have our diesel Godwin pumps set up at the headworks. So during wet weather, we kick on the diesel Godwinds to take the
place of these wet weather pumps. Now, there's a company called Sea Coast. >> Yep. >> That's going to rebuild these. >> Sea Coast Supply. >> Yeah. Where the Where are they located? You know, >> they're just north of here. Um, >> I can find out for you. >> Okay.
>> I think the Brazil that area. >> Okay. >> Boston. >> Very good. Um, anybody have any questions in regard to this? You know, there's definitely a need for it. Um, I'll obtain a motion to approve work
authorization number five in the amount of $170,5642 to be me payable to Infamark once this equipment has been repaired. >> I make a motion to item seven, Infamark work authorization number five,
$170,5642. >> I'll second that motion. All in favor? I >> I >> motion carries. Thank you, gentlemen. >> Thank you. Okay, this takes us to item number eight.
Excuse me. Um this deals with the bio cleaner sludge reduction program. Now this is um from what I was put some eyes out of this whole thing.
Infamarket is in a program I believe or are you in a program right now with Bio Clean? >> Not yet. >> Not yet. Okay. So we're looking to set up a program with this company that would deal with uh reducing sludge as I
understand it. >> Yes. And there appears to be um some monetary value to doing it that could be pretty significant. I don't know that yet, but I get the impression we
wouldn't be doing it unless it was. Um and that uh we're looking to you guys to set up the program and get these people in here and so forth. I guess my question now is do you are any
of your other plants dealing with them? >> This is the first. >> This is the first. >> Okay. Um do you happen to know if any of our neighbors such as New Baffford uh is in with it?
>> So where is going to be as well? >> Okay. All right. So they they have some they feel some significance. Um just what's the what's expected in terms of
possible savings in terms of of a plant our size or the amount of >> Yeah. >> the amount of what we push through it and everything else. >> If if you want I'll give you kind of my simplified breakdown of what this whole entire thing is and we can get into the
technicals of it. Uh so Bio Biocleaner they're a company that that essentially uh came to us at Infamach. Um they are uh they used in many different countries around the world. Uh there is some
operational uses within the United States right now in lagoons uh on on farms uh and I believe they may have one location in a uh lagoon situation for for wastewater treatment. uh we would be the first in the nation to potentially
use their product uh in a wastewater treatment facility. Um so talking with them essentially what they do they're going to be taking uh these baskets of a pro of a pro probiotic or some type of um some type of media that's going to go
and hang within our uh thickened was tanks. um that will essentially eat up the sludge inside of that tank. Uh the reduction that that I was told could be up to 80% sludge reduction. Again,
that's why that gets me to the table. That hurts my ears. >> And what time frame? I mean, it must I I would think it's going to be a slow process. >> So So they say so you know, you got to think about our sludge. Our tiwis sits in that TWA tank anywhere anywhere from
3 to 7 days. So, it's going to have to act fast to be able to get that type of reduction uh out of it. Uh you know, the overall system again is kind of is kind of uh in my eyes I look at it as almost
an experiment to uh see whether this is going to work, see whether it's going to work. Again, we're going to be the first in the nation to be able to pilot them with us. Uh and that's understood. So, uh, you look at the amendment in in the agreement, uh, that that's that's in front of you. Uh, it's it's not really a
standard agreement. There's right, you know, right up front, there's going to be no cost to the city. So, there's no cost for them to bring the equipment out, no cost to install the equipment or anything like that. Uh, we're going to work with them, get the equipment set
up. the only uh the only operational thing that's going to be done, there's a small bubble up uh inside of their equipment that they'll have to plug in, but it's it's not going to be a large drawer or anything like that. Um once that's all set up, it's supposed to be
about a 3month ramp ramp up time of their of their, you know, things starting to work. And you know, again, I'm not getting technical. I'm just calling on their their things to start to work to reduce the sludge. Uh once that's done uh then we're going to be going into uh an evaluation period. How
this whole cont contract is structured too uh is uh so essentially we if we see any savings uh of sludge reduction and reduced amount of sludge disposal uh then we would share that cost savings with them. Uh so essentially we would
get to keep 50% of that cost savings. Um the uh Infomach would get 50% which they're going to share with uh with Biocleaner company. Uh Infomach's going to take 25 of that 25% of that reinvested into our facility. Things that need to be done in our facility. So
really you think about it, we're getting 75% savings. Uh and 25%'s going to the biocleer company. After a three-year period, uh if we decide that these things are working and we want to keep them, we have the right to be able to buy buy the equipment at the end at the
end of the three-year period. Uh if if it's reducing our sludge, you know, again, this uh this has shown to work in uh package treatment plants and other type of treatments plants. Uh it's shown to work in lagoons. Um so uh you know I
don't see where it's going to uh negatively impact our system. Uh we are going to have a third party consultant uh watching the process uh monitoring the process um evaluating to see a if
there's any disruption to our process or b if there is any sludge reduction. You know, I didn't want us to be the ones to say yay and nay. I didn't want them to be the ones to say yay and nay. I said, well, let's get a third party totally independent company to be able to sit
there and evaluate it to see whether there's any sludge reduction. How it's going to be calculated really too, we're going to take a rolling average of past year's sludge production, use that as the basis, and then work from there. Uh
it'll be a three-month rolling average. Uh so you can't say you know well this month was 10% reduction the other month you know we were 10% more uh so you can't play with the numbers you know monthtomonth um so you know I think that's that's good we work that out
within within this agreement um >> and you're going to have right pierce be the referee on this >> yes they're going to take the monthly figures and so forth and >> yep >> certifi basically certify the numbers and say yeah this is right >> yeah Okay.
>> Yeah. So again, you know, at this point there's really no risk, no no cost to us. Um if anything, we would have to just share the savings essentially that that we have, you know, so essentially we'd end up going if when this does
work, we're going to be able to uh you know, pay less for a sludge disposal. So I know inform has has been has worked on this agreement has worked on with BioCleaner on on crafting it and pulling everything together. And there is a
representative from uh from Biocleaner here today if there there's any uh any questions or anything like that. >> So once we approve this, how far down the road are you from starting? >> Uh so that that's one of the things that
we talked about. Uh, you know, I would need to get this full approval through the whole entire city, all signatures involved, which could take us a couple of weeks. Uh, but I think they're chomping at the bid. Probably within 30 days to 60 days, we would have them uh in place. And like I said, it's they in
here they said there would be a threemon ramp up period of, you know, the things starting to work in in the sludge. Uh so you know we could be we could be four months to five months away from actually seeing whether it is going to work.
>> Sounds sounds like something that um could be beneficial. >> You know if if we see 80% reduction if we see 50% reduction in our sludge you know we spend 22 2.42.6 million a year
in sludge disposal. uh anything that we can do to reduce that cost because that's a huge cost to us. Uh and it's it's something that's and I talked about it here and talk about it all the time. Uh regionally it's becoming a bigger issue of where to dispose of sludge, how
to get rid of sludge. um you know and uh you know one of the other reasons that I kind of wanted to bring in a third party person to look at this uh you know we're the first in the nation to do this you know if it gets kicked off and it actually is proven to work then we you
know I think it's good to be able to say it wasn't us saying it worked but somebody else total third party independent person saying that it worked for us. Yeah, we definitely could use something to put us on the map. That's for sure. >> Yes. >> All right.
>> Something positive. >> Yeah. Look, that's that's exciting. I'll tell you, it's very good. And um yeah, just once you start, just just keep us posted as how things look. >> Yeah. >> 100%. I I expect in future in future
meetings, we'll have updates on on how how the process is going. Good. >> All right. Um, anybody have any questions of what we're trying to do here? If not, um, how do you wanna how do you want to um
propose this? The motion make the I'll attain a motion to approve amendment number three um with >> two >> two >> number two >> within for mark >> two >> number two >> I'm sorry.
Oh, I'm sorry. I've got the right number two. I'm looking at the wrong item. Uh item number eight, approving amendment number two, uh that deals with the bio cleaner sludge reduction program.
>> Anybody want to make that motion? >> Make that motion. Uh for item eight, infam amendment number two, bioclean sludge reduction. >> I'll second that motion. >> All in favor? I >> I >> Thank you, gentlemen. Motion passes.
That takes us to item number nine. Uh amendment number three which I believe uh deals with um the industrial pre-treatment services being um
transferred out of the SW commission office into the services to be provided by Enter. Yeah. So, so essentially what it is is adding an additional FTE for Infomark. Um, we in their base contract it was
that they would assist us with the IP program. Um, as with this u many regulations, change expanded stuff like that. Uh, the IP industrial pre-treatment program is something that we need to do out of the system. uh and
they've expanded it as far now as uh dentist offices to make sure that they have proper uh disposal of uh of the certain types of um certain types of things that they use in their offices and stuff like that. So uh as uh that
happens a lot we're burdened with more time uh of a person. Uh the other thing that you know a person that that needs to do a specific task. Um the other thing that this uh person will also be doing is the MS4 program. Uh so
municipal small small separated sewer storm water system. Um that uh permit is uh they just issued the new second general permit. uh it's a 5-year permit and there is uh a lot of requirements within
the new requirements within the MS4 permit uh to be able to move forward. So having a independent person that's able to concentrate on the IP program uh and the MS4 program uh just as we did years ago I I'm sure President Alita
and I'm sure member Souza you guys probably remember back when we uh added in a storm water manager down here at the wastewater treatment plant when we were under the seam uh consent order from EPA. uh you know we needed to add in another person to input all of our
collection system information and stuff like that and maintain it and keep it up to date. Uh this person will primarily be concentrated on the IP program uh as well as the MS4 permit which has kind of up to date been piled on other people
you know that are here already but it's you know not their main job. we need somebody that's able to focus on it, make sure we meet all the all the requirements within the guidelines and stuff like that. Um, so this amendment, um, I talked about it briefly when we
were in budget hearings as well. I brought it up to the commission because this was part of the budget. Uh, this was in the, uh, in the, uh, line item that was proposed and approved for this additional FTE within the contract.
>> All right. So, I think this is good. Um the Jonathan the the person that you are going to designate to do this work. Um I can always remember it when I I was I
was one of the IPBs uh yeah industrial pre-treatment sites and the person that used to come into my site that represented the city um I always remember you he had to have certain qualifications.
Now, this person that you you've got, I'm assuming he's he'll either be brought up to speed on on the qualifications for it or maybe has it already. But, um, I would I would hope that whoever you're bringing in only
because the this knowing the companies like I do that has to face the u the requirements of of what this is all about. um they're going to look for look
they'll look for any excuse not to do something and if it's a case maybe where uh who's ever telling them to he's got to do it and if there's some question about his qualifications to do that u it's
something that you may want to you you may want to check you know hit it before it's a problem and And I say that only because of my experiences with it. Um, now the other thing though, once once
you're in play and this whole thing's going out and working and it and there be there's a company that let's say is non-compliance whether it's for PH flow or suspended solids or whatever the case may be.
Um, who's going to put out the the notice of non-compliance? Is it going to come from us? So, so Jonathan's going to provide the information to us saying this person or this company is in non-compliance for
this reason. Therefore, we have to notify them because we are the governing factor on this whole. >> Correct. The governing body is still the foreign sewer commission or the design. Uh so we will still be the one issuing permits, issuing uh
>> notice issues or anything like that because we still are the governing body. >> All right. Good. Um the um the cost of doing this with respect to informal um is that in the budget for 27?
>> Yes. >> Okay. So we've already we've already made provision for it. >> Yes. >> In the 27 budget. >> Correct. Very good. Anybody have any questions about anything which you want to do here? >> Do you remember the days? >> I remember that. >> Yeah.
>> We do. >> Yeah. Um All right. So unless anybody has a questions, um I'll obtain a motion to approve amendment number three for
the adult pre-treatment services being to be provided by Informant. >> I'll make that motion to approve item number nine, amendment number three. >> Second. >> All in favor? I. Motion passes. Thank you, gentlemen.
That takes us to item number 10. The deals are returned earnings and how we want to spend them. Am I right? So uh within your packet you have uh
recommended spending plan for the retained earnings. Uh again you know a couple couple of years ago we got away from using retained earnings back within our within our budget. Uh so what retained earnings is and just for a little bit so we're an enterprise fund.
Uh so I kind of explain it to people like we are our own bank account. The amount of money that we take in is the amount of money that we can spend if there's any money left over. So our revenues exceed our expenses. Um you can't have it the other way. You can't
have your expenses exceed your revenues. So you always need to make sure that your revenues exceed your expenses. whatever is left over gets certified by the state and is called a retained earnings. So that's kind of like your leftover money at the end of the year.
Um so what they do is they certify in FY26. So they did this back in the December time frame. Uh they went to the state actually might have been January or February. They they did it a little bit late this year, but they go to the state and the state goes through the
whole balance sheet and everything else like that with the auditors. uh and they come up to see how much money is left over with your incumbrances and your liabilities and stuff like that. Uh so we have our retained earnings that's left over. So the uh the amount that was
certified in FY26 for FY25 was $4,971,921. So that's the top line. Uh so I've kept come up with a spending plan. So some of the things on here are things that we should do because it's good budgetary practice. Some of the things are
projects that need to be done that we uh would either need to fund from our operational budget uh but we don't have the enough capital within our operational budget or we would go out for loan authorizations for these. So since we have available uh retained
earnings uh I feel the best financial sense would make to go out and uh be able to use the retained earnings for these. Uh so the step for the process for this is I go come to the sewer commission. Uh from here I will go down to city council. I expect it to be uh
probably on the meeting next Tuesday. So I'll if the board approves this tonight goes up to the mayor's office, mayor's office will send it down to the council for approval by the council. They would we would need their approval. So just the rundown on the on the retained earnings here and uh what's proposed. Uh
so first off, I'd like to do a transfer to our stabilization fund of 1 point uh $1.5 million uh within our stabilization account. Right now, I believe we have about $800,000. Um it's recommended by the state that we
uh carry 10% uh at least 10% of our operational budget within our stabilization. Uh and our operational is uh 35 and change. So >> yeah, we're getting close. We're getting close. We're a little bit below. So, uh,
and you know, we have we wanted to do a 100,000 per year. We started off doing that. Uh, when we got into some tough budget times, we stopped doing that. Um, so this will help make up for some years where we did do that $100,000 a year
transfer. So, $1.5 million to stabilization. Uh, then some projects around uh around the plant here. what we'd like to do uh weather influent pumps. Um so that's paying for uh rather than going to capital for what was
approved earlier in the meeting uh we'd be using this retained earnings for to fund that. Um so uh we could use capital but I feel it's better used to be able to use this uh dry weather influence pumps. So, as I mentioned, there's two dry weather influent pumps in there as
well, uh, that have passed their useful life. Uh, probably, uh, I don't want to get to the point where those are where those are down, and we're just stuck with just the large wet wet weather pumps. Uh, so whether it's rebuilding those or, uh, providing a spare and rebuilding one of them uh, is something
that we're going to do. So, that's $75,000. Uh, biological treatment upgrades. So, this is treatment of our biological reactors. So, contract one of the wastewater treatment plant, we upgraded and changed all of the mixers,
gearboxes, and motors in train uh train three. Um, since then, we've had uh train 4. We've lost two uh two gearboxes on that train, and those have been unrepaiable. So, we
want to take and rebuild uh rebuild one possibly two of those trains. new gearboxes, new motors, uh new oxygen mixes, uh the same thing that we did during contract one. Uh that's at a cost of $500,000. Uh chemical pump upgrades, we want to go
down. Um the last time that the sodium hypocchlorite was updated, uh was the 201 contract, I believe, uh upgrades at the wastewater treatment plant. Uh so the sodium hypocchloride pumps uh are
definitely out of date past their useful life. Uh we want to be able to upgrade those. Uh we also want to be able to upgrade those and link them into better pacing uh with the flow of the plant. Uh there's new technology coming out with
AI and predictive modeling uh to try to to try to optimize the chemical usage. Uh so the pacing of those pumps with the plant uh is something that will potentially allow us to be able to uh dip into that realm, see if it's
something that would uh that would help us. Uh so that's pretty much all the upgrades that we want to do here at the plant. Um [snorts] the out at the pump stations, we want to uh upgrade President A and Cove Street. uh what we want to do out there. So,
President AB screening and disinfection plant as well as the Cove Street uh screening and dis the CSO plant down on Cove Street. Um what we want to do is add in full uh effluent sampling. Uh so
right now we're out there, we have staff doing grab samples in the manholes during rainstorms at those facilities to adjust the chemicals, the dosing and stuff like that. Uh we want to and we've devised a >> Huh.
We've we've devised a way and developed a way to be able to um get it where we can uh where we can possibly route all of that in through a pump uh so that samples can be taken internal to the building in a more controlled space uh
and environment. Uh potentially going through a meter itself. So it's continuous metering uh and then possibly make chemical adjustments by itself. So I think that's going to be a good upgrade. >> Is that something that's done be done? This is a whole new
>> This is all all new all new stuff. >> New new stuff. Yeah. So, you know, I think that's going to save us a on safety of our guys out there cuz, you know, you're out there in the middle of a rainstorm, 2:00 in the morning down on President A, you know, grabbing a a
sample grab sample out of the manhole, you know, in the middle of the road. It's it's >> So, uh, that's a $200,000 cost. >> Uh, the other two things that we're looking at is a new back to truck. Uh so the uh current back to truck that we have is vintage 2006, the older one. Uh
we have another one that was uh [snorts] 2021. Um but the older one is from 2006. So, you know, we're talking 20-year-old truck that is still in operation almost every day. So the to me the beauty of this whole
thing is is that I mean the we consider these probably as capital projects but we're not going out to have to put them out in the bond market or anything of this nature. Am I right? >> Correct. >> Because we got the money we got the money in the bank to do this.
>> Yes 100%. Now, um the the plant operation stuff, which is a good chunk of it, uh I'm assuming we're going to go through infomach on this stuff like we like we just did on a
couple other things, right? >> Yes, that's what's proposed. Now, is there is there any requirement of us to give Infamock any any cash
upfront to get these projects going, >> you know, >> or is it or is it a case get it done uh you know, get it done, get it done right, we'll we'll we'll approve what you want to do and everything else, but
when the invoices come in, we give it a go. >> Yeah. Again, so you know, that's not what we're approving here, whether we use infram all these or whether we uh do it independent with with whether we bid on a project, you know, that's that's
undetermined 100% at this point. So, whatever whatever we do, we're going to follow mass procurement. Make sure that we follow mass procurement so that all procurement laws are followed uh through this. Um so whether we develop a project, design it and and bid it out or
whether uh you know we do it with infoarket through work authorization through their existing contract is another option that we may have for some of these. So there's no guarantee that you know either way but if there is any so as it stands right now most of this
funding is going to get >> uh turned into a capital project. So it'll be just like we went out for a loan authorization. it'll be put into a fund and we'll be able to issue POS from that fund for these specific projects. >> Sounds good. Sounds like a plan. So, in
in the final analysis, if we do all this, there'll be um Are you saying that there'll be a million three down at the bottom? >> Yeah. So, there'll still be a million three. So, we don't want to fully deplete our retained earnings. We want to leave some. you know, the way that
our enterprise fund works, um, essentially the general fund backs us for the cash flow. So, you think about it, when we [clears throat] go into a new fiscal year, all of our bills up front, we haven't collected any money from our customers for that year yet. So, all of our bills up front, somebody
needs to provide the cash for that. Typically, we we go on the back of the city, but we don't want to fully deplete ours because ours is also used to. So, that's why we don't want to fully deplete it. Very good. Uh, is this forformational purposes or do you need a
motion? >> A motion, >> please. >> Um, okay. >> And again, this will go to city council as well for their approval because they're the ones that need to approve the transfer. >> That's next week, you said. >> I expect that to be on next Tuesday's meeting.
>> Okay. Um, anybody have any other questions or any comments you want to make about this? >> No. >> Okay. Um, I'll entertain a motion to approve uh approve the use of retain earnings
um in the amount of approximately 3,471,921 um for projects designated uh for both plant operations, pumping stations and collection systems.
Anybody want to make that motion? Did you get that, Paul? >> Yep, I got it. >> I'll make the motion to approve the U fiscal year 2026 retained earning spending plan. >> I second. >> All in favor? >> I
>> I >> I. >> Motion passes. Thank you, gentlemen. Last item on the agenda is other business. Anybody here any other business? If not a motion to you want to make that motion >> make the motion to adjourn.
>> I second the motion. All >> in favor? I. Thank you. Gentlemen Roach.