All right. Now 4 pm like to call the board of water commissioners for the town of Kingston to order. We got bills signing up there. We have minutes to approve. A motion to approve the minutes. >> I'll make a motion to approve the minutes of June 23rd.
>> Second as written. >> So voted. [clears throat] First appointment. We have Mr. Rigo, you guys. >> That's us. >> All right. Just come and grab a seat. Just introduce yourself for the record.
>> Okay. Uh, my name is Claude Rico. uh Riverhawk Environmental civil engineer for the project. Uh we've been in front of the board once or maybe twice beforeice >> talk about uh the waterline size serving
the um the facility and its location. Um during our last meeting I believe we talked about doing a um flow test of the hydrants in the vicinity of the project. that has since been done I guess under the supervision of the town. Um we got
the results back and um [snorts] everything looked great. Certainly it shows uh more than sufficient uh water supply to the subdivisions. Um I resubmitted a memo which I'd be happy to go over why you know we request and
think it's a better option to use an 8 inch line over a 12inch line. So if the commission wishes I they certainly can go through that the technical justification for it and maybe put it in a little simpler terms but um the basic
idea is there's a 10-in main in road and our furthest connection points that we can get uh the two connections are are about 220 ft apart. So we have a
1980 foot loop which would be either the 12 inch or 8 inch as requested [snorts] uh connecting into this 10 inch. So because this main is 10 in and it's it's shorter there's less resistance in it than
either an 8 in or even a 12 in when you put the 12 in. Um so the water still tends to flow within this line. most of the water flow occurs within the 10-in main and not here. So, it's kind of like if you have a a
road that's a country road and you're going 200 ft and you add a four-lane road that goes around 1980 ft, most of the traffic's still going to stay on the two-lane road and and and you know, it does it's not going to help traffic to
to ease the flow in this section of the of the roadway. Um if we were expanding into a future development uh where we're connecting into a um you know increased flow through a much larger development than this or we're connecting to another
part of the water system then certainly a larger cross connection that allowed the water to flow more freely from one side to of the system to the other would be more beneficial. But that's not the the case here. This is an isolated loop that really doesn't do too much for
pressure or water. It's still all within that 10-in line. Um, by putting in a 12in line, what we do is you create a much larger storage volume of water. So, um, the water sits stagnant for much longer. The 12-in main holds more than
twice the water of an 8 inch main. So, you get a stagnation in the water. you can boost chlorination. Um you know it's it's not ideal to have that much water stagnant. Um the uh it does not increase
fire flow. Um it doesn't increase pressure to the houses in the development. It certainly doesn't increase pressure on the um outside of the development of of any significant uh level. And um
that's pretty much it. I think >> I'm unfamiliar with what's over here. What prevents development from taking water from there? And >> um it's tough to I I don't really have a
scale plan that shows it. Um we could probably look up there best and find our site and then I could show you what's going on, but we have to first find it. Do you know? >> I know, but I do know it's surrounded by what was a town land that can't be
developed out there. >> Yeah. Yeah. So, I'll do you mind if I walk over here? We'll try to point to it. >> So, there's a ring. >> Oh, yeah. So, this is our site, right? This this right here.
>> This this right there. So, this land the land to the north is what? Jones River. Is that protected? >> That's the town's land. Well, the town's behind it. part land >> and then the power line ement goes through that on the whole side power line that runs along. >> So the [clears throat] town owns that
big piece that runs your small trees. >> Yes. >> That's town land you're pointing at now, right? >> And there's essentially a a river that runs um through this section. There's a there's a small tributary to the Jones River. So it's, you know, you're not going to cross it
to [clears throat] make a connection development. you got the high tension lines that are about the property going out to to the right. >> Didn't we have this discussion before and basically say that you know we changed our rules and regulations to
basically be more consistent throughout what the town was doing and what improvements may not show up today but may in fact be part of a overall improvement program somewhere down the line. >> [snorts] >> And if we were to replace something on
whopping road today, we would replace it with something that's substantially larger than that. >> Okay. But we now know just so we just say we don't let me finish simply. >> Okay. >> Okay. I thought when we talked about
this before, one of the things we talked about was staying consistent with what our rules and regulations say and not pick me uh picking out individual projects and making things more difficult and less consistent throughout
the time. We need to sort of look at not only what this particular devel development needs today, but what does it do as far as what we may be doing or the water department may be doing in the future and that's why we want the 12 in
12 in >> uh that's my memory of it too. >> All right. Can I speak now? Because I mean >> yeah no but when we finished last time all right now this and it took from Joe November of last year till now we got a
flow test in May or whatever to to get to this point. But how we left the meeting on the last one was if the flow test showed that we had adequate flow for the 8 in main is we're going to allow that to go through because it didn't affect any other properties or
any future development in that thing because we wouldn't have went through all of this to do this because that's how the last meeting was left. >> There was and we went through this whole conversation then with the 12-in main and this stagnant water and your engineer chimed in and everything. So,
it wasn't it wasn't like wasn't like this was left up in the air. It was left that if the flow test said that it was adequate and it didn't affect anything else and you have no areas that this line would ever come into play with the rest of the thing that we'd be allowed
to do the 8 in rain where it is a 40B project and we're giving back eight affordable units to the town. making it more costly for me to do the development unless there's a reason for it does not make sense and that's not how we left at the last meeting. >> Kristen, what's your memory of this? I'm
I remember us talking a little bit about the what Bud just mentioned. What was your thought on the engineering side of things? Um yeah, I remember um you know B bringing up trying to have some consistency with the 12inch line
uh more on main trunk lines though and recognizing that some side developments wouldn't warrant having a 12-in main. So that's when we talked about wanting the
evaluation of, you know, could you deal with a smaller size main? So that's what they went through and did. >> And you saw the flow test and everything. [clears throat] >> Um, yeah. Yeah. And what they presented
is a logical analysis. uh no issues with what they presented to justify doing a smaller man. And they're right about the potential water quality. Like you wouldn't want to >> inadvertently cause yourself a water quality problem by having an oversized
main. So, if there's really no potential to have some sort of loop, um, you know, you have a essentially a a dead end main that you don't want to have a whole lot of water just sitting there not moving.
>> Okay. Chris, you have anything to add in? No, I would agree with uh what Kristen says that you need to have some movement in there and if you don't have the movement, you're going to have water quality issues, not just limit to aesthetics, but also develop odors and things like that. So, in my opinion, I
think that Rio is on the correct track of downsizing that main to squeeze more water through through there to get that movement through. >> How many houses total? 32 units >> 32 units being being fed by an 8 in.
>> Yeah. >> As opposed to a 12 inch. >> Right. >> I think the potential for stagnation of the 12 in, don't you? >> That's why I said I think the 8 in is size more appropriate. As Tristan says, you're going to have the volume of water moving and the flow through consumption
of the resonance is there. and you want some movement, but I think with the 12 in, you're not going to get enough draw demand from the new construction to get the adequate flow for water quality. You can create further problems in the system with water quality.
>> Well, you satisfied. >> Yeah. I'm if Christian fields that appropriate times, you know, you don't have a problem with it. I want to make sure that yeah, >> you know, it's recorded that, you know, it's a very specific location on a
>> a loop that can't be expanded beyond that because of ownership of other land. >> Yeah. Okay. I guess I I'll move that uh to ensure um clear portable water
that we allow the petitioner to install an 8 in main throughout the development that that he's building. >> Yep. A second. >> Second. >> So voted. Right. Thank you gentlemen for
>> bring that to us here. Yep. I guess my question for the board then is do we have a standard of 12 in we're looking for for the future? Is that going to always be the case then or are we looking at you know individual examples of this rule rules
and regulations state that with an exception by the border water commission is you can allow different size pipes and I think that's an exception that you need to allow. We've done other mean look at Royce and Drive. Royce and Drive they put a 12-in trunk line going down with future expansion to run out of road
to loop through. >> Yeah. >> But all his branches going off. I believe those are all 8 in branches going up to loops around his building. >> So as long as the main stays at 12 were not >> and and that's basically what you're doing right here [clears throat] on Royce when they did that development that industrial park they ran eight
around their building within their confines of their properties. Be a similar situation here. >> All right. So since in the future is one of them right >> things are bother me when people put in in their letter you know because it's
more costly to buy larger val cost in it of itself should not be the reason to downsize or minimize you know improvements to the system you know that's part of doing business you know
and they need to accept that and Yeah, I think in this case the engineering does defin go in their favor, but I agree with you that cost shouldn't be an issue compared to quality. So, all right. I think um Kristen. >> Okay.
Um just some updates. The Cell Street well cleaning project. Um when we last met the board you had signed the contracts and those were going up to town hall to get signed. So not sure
what the status is on those um at this point but the actual work planned for October. So it's not you know it's not holding anything up if the signatures are taking a little bit extra time because of the holidays.
All signatures have been completed on the contracts and it's been fully executed. So I have your final copy here. Uh I mailed the other copy back to Mark uh for their records. So >> great. Excellent. >> Everything's complete with that. >> Good. Um so we'll just follow up with
Mar then um towards the September time frame just to make sure we get on their schedule. They usually are kind of a a you know few weeks out on scheduling the work.
The uh new well project uh some updates on that. Um again the Kleinfeld is working towards getting the pump test report completed by early August. Uh they have made progress with the environmental
notification form permit. They provided a draft to me and Chris to look at. I gave them some comments on that. It overall was it's very thorough and is in good shape. Um Chris is helping with the
doing the legal ad getting that posted. So that that whole process is moving forward. And they're still working on the pump station design. They're looking at getting us their 75% design documents
this month. Uh, regarding the zone one area, um, since we last talked, uh, Meepa provided some feedback. They basically told Kristen that they'll evaluate
the land ownership type situation that we talked about before with that part of the zone one area being town owned property, but it's conservation article 97 property. They said that they'll look at that as part of the ENF process. So,
they weren't willing to say one way or the other. Uh meanwhile, um Chris reached out to the town conservation to talk about getting an easement because D indicated they'd be
satisfied with just having an easement. you know, something on paper that said, "Yeah, we're you know, this we recognize that this is part of your zone one and won't try to do any other land use as part of the the conservation such as
recreation and what have you. So, we'll find out uh what Meeper thinks once they look at the ENF." Uh, any questions on the new well project? Sounds good.
>> Okay. Um the next item on my list, that unaccounted for water compliance plan. Uh that's still pending pulling together once we get the findings from the N36 water audit. Chris, have you heard anything else from the consultant doing
that? >> I have a Zoom meeting scheduled for uh Friday morning with them to review their findings. So >> Okay. >> Would you like to be part of that, Preston? I can reach out to uh Molly and see if you can spread that invite to you
if you'd like to be part of that. >> Um, sure. Yeah, let me know. Um, I have a another meeting, but hopefully I'll be able to participate. >> I believe it's at 9:00 on Friday morning. >> Okay, that should work. Yep. >> All right. I'll reach out to Molly
tomorrow. Um, >> yeah. And you know related to that I went there's no urgency on that right now. I went back through the revised draft/final consent order to check dates and they
did update a bunch of the dates recognizing that um some of the deadlines that they put in there would be in the past because there was you know the time it took to just do the legal review and all that. So, um, there's
more realistic deadlines on meeting some of these different features or items that they put in the the consent order. So, that's not going to be a problem at this point. >> Good.
>> That's all I have on my list. >> Uh, Chris. All right. So, I've been in touch with um mass installations on the supply of new meters. I've also spoke to the town administrator and town council
and following the procurement laws. Anything that's over a certain value needs to have an an RFP. So, it's looking like we're going to have to have an RFP for the meters until we can proceed uh further forward. So, I've been working
with the vendor um on templates and documentation, supporting documents that we can take and put together uh to put out there as an RFP for the meter replacement program. >> Uh talking about that, you know, an RFP needs to be broad enough in scope that
more than one vendor can bid it. Uh whatever you put together needs to be comprehensive enough that other vendors can bid on it and bid on it effectively. We cannot use MI's
specs and installation processes as the only method of installation. We need to make sure that it's documented. It's in writing. And I'm going to insist that prior to putting anything out to the general public that we as a board have a
right >> to review it, wrap ourselves around it so that we don't end up with egg in our face and then having to come back and do it over again. I'm very thankful that they're willing to help Chris put it
together, but Chris needs to put the together a document that we can review. Um, since there's probably going to be three weeks to the next meeting, hopefully we can get something within the next couple of weeks that can be forwarded to us so that we can review it
and have a real discussion about what's happening at our last meeting in July. Again, we need to keep going because if you look at this last piece of paper or this piece of paper that we have from DDP, >> which talks about the consent order, it
talks about some very specific dates on on when meters are supposed to be replaced or checked and and we need to make sure that we stay consistent with trying to make those dates realistic and not having to ask for extensions. And I
believe the large meters is the end of June 2027. >> June 30th. >> June 30th. >> Yeah. >> Can we do the large meters under the $40,000? >> It's still it's it's still
>> Oh, because it have to be part of the whole >> We can't jump on with that right now for that meeting with the RFP. We need to get the RFP out. >> Mhm. >> Go through that process before we can really advance any further forward. >> We need to be careful because if you
look at the comments that Carol talked about, we only have roughly 40 plus,000 that she thinks we can allocate to whatever meter project we're doing. So we need to be careful about how we write the staff uh so that we stay under that
limit because if we go above that limit that's going to kick it off until the fall town meeting. >> Again this is something that you know we keep talking about and we just >> there's no closure to this. You know, someone Chris needs to put closure to
each and every one of these items so that we can move forward as a board and as a town to do it mindfully and respectfully as far as the res. >> Yeah, I was going to open those. We had the three groups come in, but that wasn't the RFP. That was just us getting
>> just a discussion. That's all it was. >> And [snorts] and rightfully so, we probably chose what we thought was the right way of doing it. Obviously, town council and the town administrator is saying that's not the way you do it and we should and we should have known it
ourselves and Chris should have known it as well that you just don't go out with an open-ended contract with. >> Well, we got fortunately we got it in time. we can get the documentation in place for them to bid on it kicks the can down the road a little bit and I
think we should probably be proactive and contact EP and say well we're going to be a little bit late on this because >> we don't know that we are as far as the large meeting >> still next year June and the year after year >> okay so wait till that >> wait till it's apparent that that's going to be the case
>> so if it's now January February we're still in a in a box we need to be able to give them some realistic time frame Okay. >> Mhm. All right. In terms of funding form then I mean
obviously if it's more than that we have the funding lined up then >> just I think we do right >> that's that's all we're still talking about and then in as part of this RFP is there going to be anything extra or just this one what we discussed last time.
It's got to be the whole plan to >> the will be the the whole project to replace the meters. >> That's that's where we get the lump project discount is by doing it as one lump. So if we do peace meal stuff >> and then the first piece of it will be what the 40,000 that we have
>> money to be determined later. Again, if that's what you're doing, you need to remember that if you're doing an RFP to do the entire project, even if you're doing in phases, that project needs to go to town meeting because it's the kind of monies that you're talking about.
You're talking about, you know, >> so you think we have to go to town meeting before we do the 40,000 for the big meters? I don't know that that's something that town council >> I think we should get an answer council >> if we can do it under a phase one and then you know any [clears throat] phase
beyond phase one keeping phase one and under 40 but you know we need to know what's the best way of doing it >> could you um make an appointment with town council and talk about it >> I've been speaking with them and it's
it's I need to get more documentation from the vendor which I've been working Once they get that documentation, solid numbers of what we're looking at for total figures or meter numbers, then we can move forward from there, where we're going to land to be able to put together what we're looking at in a spec to for
it to [clears throat] go to RFP. So, and town council says because of the cost of it, regardless it's it has to go for an RFP, unless the vendor is on uh the OSD list, combis comb on state bid list, then
>> then they give us state bid price. Yeah. >> So hopefully they are. >> I asked him today. He was he couldn't recall who they were. They were off and didn't know that they were submitted to get back on. So he didn't get back to me in time prior to the meeting. So
>> might be enough evident to get back on. >> You don't [clears throat] get on after [snorts] the fact. If he's not on it already, you don't get on now so you can spend the money now. Of >> course it doesn't work that way. So that's that's it's been a lot of time
spent emails, phone calls, and conversations. So making headway and just trying to document everything, make sure everything is done appropriately with procurement laws. >> Make sure it's documented well enough so that each of us can look at the documentation and [clears throat] see
the progress that's being made, please. >> Yes. uh pump operator positions been posted internally. Uh currently we haven't received any licensed applicants. So once the time is up on that, it'll be
posted externally. >> Did all the evaluations and reviews of the men that are still left uh get completed and sent up to the uh pay rates were >> Yep. right now and there's still some
confusion with the town administrator was on vacation be able to sign their pay um pay sheets. So that's been processed now just working with the U payroll to get that all >> when were they supposed to be done
>> by the end of the month. >> End of last month. >> Yes. [snorts] But we were waiting for answers for everything was done, but we were waiting for the pay sheets, the new pay rates to come out from HR and from payroll. And there's been a lot of confusion on that with contracts and everything else.
>> But Scott hadn't signed off on them. >> We couldn't submit it without the pay rates. So, we're going back and forth. Pay rates were wrong. So, it's we've been working on trying to get that resolved. Now, >> the last >> that's outside of our office. >> Last thing we Well, it's not really
outside of our office. so that it affects the men and women who are working for us. We should be more than diligent on making sure that we do that before we're doing other stuff. So that in fact we keep the morale up as best we can. Wounds people like to do the wind
changes and we [snorts] hate to see it because of something that we didn't get done correctly in in appropriate time frame. >> Sure. So moving hand with the uh received the final draft of the acco
finally got that back. The state had it. Kristen and I reviewed it. Uh we didn't see any concerns. There were adjustments with the dates as Kristen had mentioned. So I think we're in a position to move forward with signatures on that. >> Yeah, I think it might be a good idea.
The sooner the better. I don't want them to take a song. >> Signed by Bob. Thank you. All right. So, done. I've been working very diligently on the chemical contracts to get those all done
signed and reviewed by town council. The final one was signed today. So, the three contracts for the chemical co-op are all enacted and we're in good shape with those. So, just took time to get signatures done with people that work remotely and the life like that, but
that's all done. And the crews have been busy uh working on leagues. They did a fantastic job on June 24th [clears throat] uh I mean, yeah, June 24th replacing a failed te at Frank Street in Smith Lane.
Worked, you know, a long day on the hot sun. So, they did a great job with all that. Um, I heard some stuff on Prospect Court. What was going on up there? Had a a person contact me about a leak that happened on the 26
25th [snorts] and that leak came in. I think it was just after the uh Frank Street and they had another leak that came in that while they were doing Frank Street, one of Winter Street that was pretty significant service leak. So, they fixed that. they were trying to prioritize
things and get things that were more severe. So, replaced the service line that was leaking on >> because the the guy who came out there, I don't know, it doesn't say who was, but he said that um there was no overtime to allow them to fix it over the weekend. So, it sat over the weekend
until Monday. and he actually measured it with a he got a pump because he actually took all the water that was coming out, put it into a a trash barrel and was filling up a 44 gallon garbage can every 5 minutes and that was on that
Friday. Um and it leaked at that at least at that he says even more was coming out of there as well but that leaked all weekend long before they came out. >> Where were you getting that data from >> the the resident who lived there? >> Well, they didn't contact the office and make those statements. So I don't no
wasn't aware of that. >> Well, so here's that. One gentleman came out Thursday and said they might fix on Friday, but they had another leak to fix first. So it sounds like that's what's going on there. Call on Friday again to see if they're coming out because they're starting to cause a hole in his driveway. Um
>> leak was in the street. >> Yeah, I I drove by it and I saw there was a spot in front of his drive. Um one other water department gentleman came out on Friday to see the damage and said he would be back on Monday to fix it. Um, and he said that uh the gentleman
who fixed the leaks was very nice and said they would fix it over the weekend, but Kingston will not pay them overtime to do it. >> I'm not sure who I said that. >> Well, this is what this is what was told to the town residents, which I don't think has any skin in the game. I'm just
really concerned that with a unaccountable water issue, we had a leak going on all weekend long. Was there any crews available over the weekend to do that? the severity of it like that being measured and I don't know I mean if someone had those great concerns they should have come to the office and not been on social media I mean I don't want
>> it's not social media this is I don't know where you're getting your information from >> I heard this from a person who knew there like hey this guy was was irrigating his lawn with a water leak all weekend long >> and she was like [clears throat] he was kind of like a little astounded with that like I didn't heard about that so I was just kind of concerned do we have a
policy where we don't pay overtime over the weekend >> was there a crew available over the weekend if we needed it >> there was always a crew available >> but Yet we still allowed a leak to go on all weekend long over 100,000 gallons. It sounds like if I do my math right. I'm just I mean that that looks makes us
look pretty freaking stupid out there. Um >> that's your personal interpretation. I don't I don't I'm not aware of that fact but wasn't brought to my attention to that severity. All right. >> So, I don't know who from here would
have made a statement saying that uh there's no over. >> He didn't catch any names, anything like that. Did you go out to see that leak at all? >> I drove by and it was not a at the time it was not a severe leak that was warranted. We need to go right now. >> When did you go by and look at it? >> I think it was the 25th
>> on Thursday. I >> think so. I don't know. No, because that was the winter street one that went by again to check on when they were fixing it. >> I don't recall because it was a pretty strong little raptor leaks right there that the guys were triaging [snorts] and working on trying to get them fixed in
an orderly fashion by severity. >> Right. [clears throat] Well, I mean, I would think any conversation with the crews to make sure they realize overtime is allowed for for the especially if it's a significant leak necessary
because we're already on D's short list of people they're looking at. Last thing we need is a big big leak that doesn't get I mean, big leaks happen. I mean, but but that doesn't get get resolved quickly. Like I said, they the crews go
out, they check on the leaks and they base them on severity and safety wise. So the one I went to street was right at the edge of the road and was softening the ground and that was more of a priority than when it was weeping up out of the asphalt in the middle of the road.
>> All right. Well, if something changed over the weekend and they didn't make the on call person aware of it, they don't know that. So, >> moving on. Um, level two drought stuff. We'll be u we changed our watering plans
out here. Uh, was that this is the recent one last May 1st, right? >> This came out June. >> Now, I'm kind of curious. Um, we just we're getting about two inches of rain right now. Does that have some impact on the drone?
>> I mean, I'm certainly not longlasting. >> Doesn't solve it, but >> does it drop it back to the level one? >> Recharge [clears throat] takes a long time. Do you want to address that Kristen? >> How long it take for recharge? >> Um, well, I'm not sure with that, but
the the state drought task force meets pretty routinely and they look at rainfall and other metrics. So this while this rain is beneficial, it's unlikely to
create a a dramatic shift in the drought declaration. >> I think my concern is we we we basically we send people's right to water without any handheld hose the same day that we get two inches of
rain. It doesn't doesn't sit well with the public. I I understand the science involved in it, but it doesn't sit well with the public. They're going to they've probably been pumping water out of their basement and now they're going to find out that they can't water their lawn because we're in a drought and it's going to be a hard sell. I think you're
going to get some calls. It's going to be one of those hard cells, but I we we don't really have a choice. I think we are under the gun. we have to put a a complete water restriction um with the exception of handheld hoses and with what are the other exceptions
Chris is it um passive supporting crop growth or establishing new lawns I >> I don't I don't think it says that you know in this you know documentation work you know other regions you know level three
critical drought quiet affected non essential oil doesn't say talked about level three critical drought requirements down water management permit we have specific
wording in there on water management we have >> can we see that I didn't know that you know significant I didn't realize level two basically you know restricted all you know Yeah. And those restrictions are what
they're requiring statewide. They're not singling out Kingston as when it hits level two drought. You need to have this severity and nobody else has to be that severe.
um they are being much more restrictive um these days with when a drought does start increasing in severity that they essentially want to see no non-essential outdoor water use >> and pretty much every community I drove
around through today I saw >> if you look at what Dutch did they basically are in the same level two but they implemented level three restrictions with so many caveats and exceptions that it makes absolutely no
difference with what they're doing. >> They're following the letter of the law, not the spirit. They can say anything they want, but if you do what Dubrey has done where you can you can water if you put in a new lawn, you can water if you
you know uh you're growing crops, you can water if you replace your septic system, you know, you can water if it's a uh um playing field or a golf course, you know.
>> [snorts] >> All I'm saying is that if the state has requirements then shouldn't unless we require we were required by D to exceed those requirements that I would think our
requirements would be the same as anybody else's requirements in those map areas where they're to they're orange not yellow or red. So, there's another piece to this um
that I didn't print out and I apologize, but it does say for regions in level two significant drought, minimize overall water use, follow local water use restrictions, um fix indoor leaks, blah blah blah larger buildings, conduct
water audits, um limit or prohibit washing of hard surfaces, personal vehicle boat washing, establish water use reduction targets for water users. Um So, you're gonna have to go to the local
local plan. It doesn't give it just says follow your local water use restrictions. >> And that's what I'm saying. If we've got water restrictions now, I would say you can water one day a week. >> We can I didn't see here anything or read anything that says that's not appropriate.
>> I know ours. >> We did the same thing. And as soon as this went to level two, they went to handheld hoses only before 9 and after 5 p.m. >> Nothing else. As long as we adhere to what our
restrictions say, which is before 9 and after 5, one [snorts] day a week, you know, until the state says we're in a critical need, are we putting an artist out there that isn't
justified? >> I think you might be right because that's what I was looking for here. When I get this, I was looking for the level level two. You just read us the level two and nothing there says that the level three which is where you have just handheld hoses etc necessarily
activated. >> It's up It sounds like it's up to us. What I heard sounds like it's up to us. I I would highly recommend that we try to get the highway department to use the two BMS boards plus the one at the dump to put out a message in the center of
town and somewhere up by the elementary school or two good locations plus the dump emphasizing the fact that we do have level two >> a level two drought drought conditions. Please adhere to the one day a week.
>> Is there [snorts] anything in the ACL that says the changes we have to change? >> 8B talks about level one um stuff there. It doesn't say say anything what happened to level two. You know, we already have the level one condition stuff that's met [clears throat] there, but then they
really don't get into anything more than that from what I can see. Um well we could leave it in place as it exists and adjust it according to what we if we get push back that suggest
you put your bag at any point but you know I haven't seen my trips around town I haven't seen a lot of people wandering inappropriately. >> I've seen a few but you're right I haven't seen a lot. I've seen a couple
of large visions. They don't really care, but we sent one a letter to one of them. >> And I was just looking at the water management act permit and they don't they in the permit that you have from
2016, they don't break out. Is it a level one state drought, a level two state drought? It was your permit was geared more at the time more towards stream flow, but they at this point that's really not an option because the dam removal completely changed the
stream flow information. So, um the other option was to do calendar, but that's what you're doing with the limiting, you know, one day a week watering based on the calendar. and they appear to leave it at that and they
don't say, "Oh, if the state issues uh drought level two, then you have to move to this." >> So, we're in compliance with the level two right now >> for Yeah, you're in compliance with the existing water management act permit
that you have. They may in the future when if you get a renewed permit um put in some additional provisions, but for now you're in compliance with that permit. >> I think for the next two weeks, I think we're fine where we're at because if something changes between now and then,
obviously with, you know, two inches of rain coming in or more, whatever it is, you know, probably not going to be too much of an issue with people watering the next couple weeks in here anyways. And then once we get to further in the summer, we can revisit and see if there's anything changing or if they go to level three in the near future, we
can then make those choices then. So I think it's fine to wait. Well, >> yeah. >> All right. [snorts] >> Okay. >> Bmont's going to become residential. >> They can [clears throat] just make it all apartments. >> Yeah. >> They've been changing footprint.
What's up with the Baymont? Do you know what's going on here, Chris? >> So, I have a set of plans here. They're looking to change the uh use of it from a hotel that had previously 108 units to 97 residential apartments.
>> Same. >> They want to have 80 studio apartments, 12 one-bedroom apartments, and five two-bedroom apartments with extensive interior renovations. Right now, they're working through some issues with parking. Not having enough
parking spaces to meet the criteria that's set forth by the number of units. [clears throat] Interesting. I'm surprised. I'm I'm glad to hear they're doing it, but I'm surprised they've got the number of units [snorts] they've got.
>> None of those rooms were really that spacious. Think that you're going to turn a uh hotel unit into a one-bedroom condo or studio apartment
with cooking facilities and all the rest of that. I'm surprised they're only reducing the number from >> by about 10. But >> but from our perspective, the amount of water use probably is going to go up, but not substantially. >> Yeah. people in there >> and um certainly the the the area is in
need of housing which is not our job to provide but still >> no I >> seems to be a a solution >> the partial solution >> partial solution >> what's what does this have currently for rooms 180 >> 180 going to 97 I think
>> it's 108 transient rooms >> they're going to go to 97 >> so what they have to do is they'll have to put in kitchenets in every one of those units. >> Yeah, >> that's their >> Yeah, that's their issue. Not mine. >> Yeah, I was just going to say we don't need to we don't need to engineer it for
them. They'll figure it out. >> They got a plan as far as I'm concerned. I don't have an issue with it yet. >> They basically have just the one meter then and then there's just one master meter and it's apartments. It's apartment building. No different at the mall. >> Apartment building. It might it might be
very advantageous as one of the first meters that we start replacing. >> We just replaced that meter. It was we had replaced that with a modernized meter like a year ago. >> 10 years ago and about a year ago we just replaced all the in inner workings
on it because it battery life had failed on it. >> What size is the meter? >> That's a 2 inch meter. >> 2 in. Well, no. All I'm saying is if we go to the new type of means that we're talking about mass installations >> since they're vacant now, that's the
one. Since they are going to be changing >> the use, which will increase the use, >> take out the old 2-in meter, put in a new 2-in meter, rehab the old meter yet again so that
maybe we can use that at someplace else that has less of a demand. >> Totally agree. Perfect opportunity since we're not going to be inconvenience any residents do. >> And the best part is make total sense. >> The best part is we know that there'll
be increased probably increased usage. Let's account for going in rather than trying to catch up on the back end quickly. >> How long what's the usual turnaround time for a remodel like that? That's going to be >> there's still only approval phases right
now >> within after you won't get it done this summer. >> I mean I I don't feel we have any comments to submit >> back to them. I mean it's >> seems pretty straightforward until they give us plans.
>> There's plans right here. No is this plan >> for for the single meter? >> That's what's now. >> That's what's there now. There's nothing nothing's going to change. >> So So there's no plan to modify that. Just nobody just changing interior walls. >> Yeah,
we make a note on it, you know. And we do with their own bathroom. >> All right. Anything else? Um I just saw in August, I don't know if it's too early to say, but August 11 meeting is that time I'm going to be out
of town. Um, yeah, August 11. >> Let's see. >> Fourth would be better for me. We have it on the 28th already. >> Oh, okay. Yep. >> But,
>> uh, no, we would we >> Well, that's the that's the third one. >> We would actually have the 21st. Well, >> yeah, because we're not going to meet next week because we met this week. >> Yeah. So if you want to make it the 21st, you can do that. Go off schedule again
so that you get two meetings in the month. >> Well, the advantage you vote me up for. >> Oh, okay. What I mentioned earlier was thinking we'd go back to our regular schedule, which would have been the fourth Tuesday,
>> would have given Chris some additional time to put together documentation so that we can look at what we're talking about as far as >> I think we can wait till the 28th. It's not a busy time of year for us. the 28th
and then maybe um >> maybe the [clears throat] >> I could I could zoom in. You could run the or you could run the thing. I'll be I'll be down in Virginia, but I can easily >> Do you zoom in on the 11? >> Yeah, >> that's won't be your person. >> We can do that. That way we don't have
to disrupt anything and >> and might have some appointments that that that >> I'm sensitivity to them. >> Okay. So, so we're going to keep August and September. I will probably be
missing the last in August and the first in September. >> Probably somewhere in Croatia somewhere. >> Yeah. Yep. I'll be right. >> 11th and 25th are still in place. >> Huh. >> I will make sure they're not they don't
they don't put me on the schedule. Fair. >> So August 11th and 28th uh 25th rather is still >> Yeah. Okay. 25th I might be able to make but >> we need to go 26
>> move to have a second. >> So voted. Thank you very much. [clears throat]