All right. Good afternoon. Today's uh October 8th. This is the Bloomberg Water District Commission meeting. I'm going to start off by saying the pledge of allegiance. >> I aliance 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. Okie dokie. We have some warrants. Look at look at commissioners are all >> we don't mess around. >> Good to have Mark back. Keep
>> it was tough last time meeting that that's uh Mr. Bur does not >> you for the last month. So there's something out here. >> Same lights. Same. >> It's the windows open. Noise that's affecting the visual.
>> Is that must be it then? Huh? Maybe that's a reflection. It >> could be a reflection. I'm getting a glance. the right way. Some light on >> perfect. I need some light.
Give me the location of 361 Mass. >> Yep. >> Okay. I thought it was done here somewhere, but you never know. >> That's the lettuce where we going to put the lettuce bars. >> Is that still that same spot where you talked about in the past? >> Yes. No one knows if it's going to actually happen. It's been a couple
years, but >> yeah, but they had that they had that and then before that there was a development proposed out there and we considered we considered. So that's >> Yeah. So the housing envelopment the open space was set up to encompass that
>> and that was conceptually what capacity >> no idea >> well yeah we were talking like I don't know by the minute or by the day. >> Uh we typically say gallons per minute
but those are >> 16. Yeah, that's what I thought. They're smaller amounts. >> Okay. I'm going to make a motion that we accept the minutes of September 24th, 2025. >> All those I >> I was in here. Can I read those over
real quick? >> Just in case I have any questions additions. That's okay. >> I'm back to my English language. >> All right. Next thing we have was to review and discuss time bonds pilot study proposal for combined treatment plantings in Lancaster Ever Walls. Okay. So they
didn't they didn't give a proposal. It's a very simple plan, but they just gave a budget number. >> Yeah. >> And the budget number they came in much higher than I thought it was going to be. Uh they reduced it to reduce laboratory sampling. They done 86,000.
So to me, that's pretty much double what I expected for a number. And uh we we just got this uh yesterday afternoon. So, >> uh, so that's where it gets tough when you're looking at the money side of
things. >> Spend it now or spend it later. >> So, my opinion on that, I mean, we get complaints like I just had complaints just like 20 minutes ago, the guy can't wash his car because his car turns white. You know, you get the shower heads and the impacts and all the other
stuff. This is on the system. Okay. So, what's it going to be where this initial mixing of these waters going to take place? To me, it's still unknown. I don't want to spend $90,000, but I I my opinion
direction we have to have to head. >> How would we fund it? >> Uh we'd have to call a special meeting appropriate money for surplus. >> I guess the the idea of this is it going to be
required by D? Well, I they're they're talking now uh Taiwan and DP uh discussing the the uh pilot testing data because the pilot test for kings hasn't been submitted yet. So DP is not aware
of aware of all that yet. So discussing things. So there's communication going back and forth now. Um but in my opinion, irregardless of what D says, I feel that we need to do this test. So, uh,
speaking of Italian bond, the test is going to be, so when we do pH adjustments, it's not always, you know, you don't always set it 74, it's going to stay 74. So, the pump starts out, it's going to spike. It's going to go to 84 and it's going to drop down and go like 64 and then it's going to like work
its way and and hit its set limit. So, that's one of the concerns for Tai B as well. What's going to happen when it does that split? What's going to happen when it drops? So that they want to do this this test thing uh and and do all those different ranges. Run the pH at 84 for two weeks.
What does it do? What what does it do at at 8 75 or you know multiple parameters? >> How do we control the pH out of Lancaster AB? Now >> is it is it does it all go to one spot? We control the pH and go out. Is there
different levels of pH in the different well fields that we have? >> Uh each individ so Lancast has its pH adjustment. So all four wells in Lancaster are in the same spot. They all pump through the same distribution. It's 12in main that exits Lancast the wells.
>> Okay. >> So we have one injection point. So when well number five turns on it turns on this chemical component. When wall two turns on it turns on this one. Wall four. >> That's what I'm saying. So they depending upon how much we run each source determines how much we treat what
goes out. You have an individual pump for each >> each individual well >> for each individ. >> Yeah. I mean I and you're you're saying you want to test because of the how they may interact with each other
once you start mixing both of those supplies together in one one location. Uh well yeah well yes so the what they're talking now is Kings well the whole thought process is to combine Kings with high pastorality and uh time
one is uh thank think thinking we continue with the same process we we treat the pH at kings as it is now >> so then all that precipitate and calcium buildup state stays there and then we we use that as we run a raw water
transmission main to Lancaster grab and then tie it and then go through the PA fast filters. So that's what they want to see. What when the pH does this up and down what what is it going to do to the P fast filter? Is it going to build up more precipitate calcium or is it
not? And this is where I don't know. No one here knows. No engineers don't know. DP doesn't know. You guys have no clue. So I think we need to know that. And to me, 90,000, like I said, I almost spent $90,000, but $90,000
is nothing when comparing to 20 million $40 million. >> Is this on top of a pilot test or is this the pilot test be able to run them both together? >> So, if you have nobody has no clue where you going to find out the information, >> we're going to find out from
>> That's what this test That's what the That's what the 90 grand, >> so that's what you got to do. >> Yeah. cuz no one no one really knows, you know. It's >> until we get the study back, the testing back. >> Yep. And this is this is only part of
>> Okay. I got a question for you, friend. Um, how is how is this pilot study going to affect Hickory Hills? Or is it? >> There's no part of it. >> Okay. Why not? Well, >> I've been sitting here at these meetings
for the last two months and I haven't heard anybody come in here and say anything, including Hickory Hills and this whole deal. >> Hickory Hills isn't even talked about. >> My opinion was still doing Hickor Hills. Hickory Hills basketball. >> I want to make sure everything we talk
about here, I know it includes Lancaster and and Keings. I want it to be I wanted to include Hickory Hills, too. I'm not giving up on Hickory Hills. >> I'm not never Hickory Health is gonna go online someday. >> So, we better include it in what we're
talking about here. So, when we do this other pilot study where we don't have to go back and do this whole thing over again because we forgot we didn't forget because we didn't because we didn't include Hickory Hills. Y >> So would Hickory Hills tying into this
system make a a difference or have an effect on how this system is going to operate or this test going to give us the data that we would need if we incorporated Hickory Hills? >> Uh this will give us the data no matter if it's Lancaster or Lancaster Hickles.
>> But the best solution for Lunberg is Hickory Hills and Lancaster have tied with Kings. That way you can control the hard water, can dilute it much more. And no lie, I just had another complaint uh week ago. Same thing. Guys say I I I can't can't
wash my car. When are we going to build this this treatment plant? When are we going to >> do the treat the hardness at Ke? Well, that's not going to happen. >> Will any of this testing include something that will tell us how we can mitigate some of the hard water issues
by mixing >> or blending? No, not none of this. Well, this isn't >> directed to treat, but that that is easy for us to say. We can >> if we have more water, we can dilute it much more. You know, we can say, oh,
let's let's run uh two/ird of capacity out of out of these sources and only a quarter out of kings, you know, versus right now it's it's more than half out of so pretty much because that's >> and then if it's all going to one central location, everything's treated.
The only downside is it all comes out of one location. So when we have an issue where we we don't have redundancy or do we have a the means to bypass? So if we put a transmission main from Keings to Lancaster A and there's an issue with
Lancaster A, can we just the transmission main and run direct out of Keings? I I don't know if that would be allowed PAS and everything else. So we have no we have no redundancy at that point because that's considered our main source, >> right? But we could like I we mentioned
I'm not sure if you taugh that some of the wells in Lancaster are below the PAS, >> right? >> So maybe we somehow do a bypass feed, but those could go directly in the system. >> Okay. >> And that could buy us >> a day or two, you know.
>> Okay. This is not going anywhere until we get this study done, right? The 90,000. Well, that's No, I I think I think as as Mr. Mk has stated, you know, we probably could fight this and not >> You're not going to win. >> Oh, well, >> but but I I don't want to >> I think more information when you're
talking about the the the amount of money that we are looking to spend. I'd rather I mean, we thought we were going to treat hardness and it was going to be easy. >> We got a stack of problems this high, >> right? Well, I if you >> and if we don't start spending money on
it, no money more than we have to. >> Yeah, >> we had a ton of money a couple years ago that was all thrown away. $17 million. I can't I can't get over that. $17 million we had in our pocket and we threw it all away. Now we're worried about $90,000 to
move forward. >> All right, I have some questions. Okay. Yes, if you don't mind me interrupt and then I only have one final question when you're done. All right. As part of this $80 90,000 plan or I shouldn't say plan, this study they're going to do, would it be able to
give us some sort of uh annual maintenance projection? >> Uh they're actually working on that now. Uh confirming the bed volumes. >> Yeah. >> Which is the maintenance cost. >> And I did discuss to them the the the
different media the floros. Yeah. which can go like years without uh needing replacement, but it had its side issues, you know. So, I said, "Could could any of those be addressed?" And uh I threw some different ideas at them so that
they'll see if they can do something different. Uh Grafton, uh Matt Pearson, >> they're putting in a a plant with the floor. >> Oh, they are. And uh because they had other things going on that were messing up the med the GAC that was plugging it
up very quickly and it didn't affect the floors. So in our case the floors are wasn't affected only at keyings. It it was affected because it was building up some something was building up on the top and causing the pressure to rise. So meaning
you need to backwash and that's not a favorable thing from D backwash. What's this next step would involve here as far as the testing and stuff? I mean, an annual meeting to appropriate the
money. >> Well, this would be just a a special meeting, appropriate money for this. >> Okay. >> Um then that would that would begin this step. And then the next thing is that survey to see what direction the town wants to go in. and we kind of held it
off just to to to possibly use this as a possible. >> Well, why don't we get on a stick and get this meeting underway so we know if it's going to pass or if it's not going to pass because if it's not going to pass the 90,000 the people don't appropriate it. >> Well, I I don't I think we'll pass that
easily. You think so? >> I Okay. >> Well, that's kind of kind of go off of my my last question. You you're recommending that we do this. It'll give us better information to move forward. >> Yes.
>> And you're doing this off of your two years experience as a superintendent of the Lunberg Water District. >> A couple years. >> Okay. I'm I'm I go off of Fran's recommendation that we I would I would recommend that we move forward with a
meeting to put this out to the public. If they if if they want to gamble with not having this information, then then that's that's that's the gamble they want to take. But I would go off of Fran's years of experience and
expertise and and >> the complaints I hear. >> Well, all right. >> Based on the complaints, >> if if we're going to try to treat hard water, >> well, all right. So, I think this is kind of just a little bit multi-levelled, right? Yeah. What we're looking to do here is with this, let's call it a pilot study because
technically it is, is to see basically how the effects of Keing combining Keing and Lancaster Rav together and how that treatment plant's going to look, maintenance cost, uh, possibly even come up with numbers what we think this this
whole kitten kaboo is going to cost looking down the road. All right, that's what this has done if a summary. So that to me is is we need to do to get out to the town to be like, "All right, this is an option. This is a co-op that we can take and see
what everybody see what the town life wants to do." That's basically the stages that we're at with treating PAS right now is is this now if we don't do this study, is there any is there any option to not do it? I don't see there's an option not
to do it because I think we need that that that that data from DP Bill. I got you and I'll get to you. Let us get through. >> I mean, you could you could you could not do it, but and do the treatment plan and maybe it'd be great. Nothing nothing would happen.
>> But would D even let you do that? >> If you submit if we submitted a proposal saying this is what we want to do, run Keings in Lancaster. Would they look at it and say, "Well, >> well, that they're in discussions right now, >> but they're trying to discuss it. You know, I think they're trying to work it
that we don't have to do it." uh that that we're going back and forth and but that's that's what my opinion is. I I don't care what DP says. >> Okay? >> Uh I don't care what Ty Bond says. My opinion is my opinion. I don't like you guys can come with your own. My opinion is we do the test.
>> Okay? >> And whatever you guys decide, we do. And >> well, I'm not as knowledgeable about it as you are. Nobody here is. >> Well, I mean, I don't really know anything about the chemical side of the stuff. I just see that we got engineers.
>> True. Right. No, no, I mean, so I just want that's that's just kind of so we all are in agreeance that that's why we're doing these things and just so everybody knows that that's what we're trying to push forward to to see is is this a viable option and we'll end up with costs and everything like we did
before and then we'll go to the public and be like this is an option for this and we'll see see what they want. Right. >> Right. And hypothetically if let's say that you know test no test whatever we do end up putting a plant on
Lancaster A it does incorporate Kings >> and there is a benefit to blending what you get out of Lancaster A with Keings to reduce the hardness. It is still not going to 100% guarantee
uh >> a satisfactory rate of the hardness without possibly using another source hills or another source to blend. We'd still be at what we have now. >> Well, you you might get So you have
those people that are on reservoir road. >> So they'll get they'll get better. where you could almost increase the hardness other spots in the community. >> So this this still isn't and and I agree with with with our chair about hardness
is a is a pretty good issue that we we should try to address if we can. But >> I definitely don't want to make the hardness worse after whatever we do. Well, you you don't >> sometimes you don't know like I just I I not saying I'm I'm a hydraologist, but
you're going to take the hardness from Keings now and you're going to bring it to Lancaster A. You're going to increase some of the hardness that now used to go beyond Lancaster A because it's not >> Can that over the years get worse the
hardest in the water? >> It stays. >> It stays pretty consistent, I think. >> Yeah. It goes goes by how much water you pump. The the more aggressive we pump it that it'll drop slightly. Uh so we tried that a couple years ago. We increased the capacity to full
thousand gallons a minute and uh we just didn't run it long enough for it to to help. Like when we did the pump test, it dropped significantly because I ran,000 gallons a minute for for weeks and uh the hotness dropped off quite a bit. >> But yeah, you just
>> But what do we do with that water, >> right? Yeah. You can't. >> Yeah. Okay. Uh Okay. Does any other commissioner have any more input on that subject? >> Yeah. What are we going to do? >> Are we going to
>> Well, I mean a meeting or >> do we do you think we have some time to wait and see what D says? But I know you're you're thinking we should do this anyway. Why don't we all I don't know. At least >> I almost I almost want to just wait one
two week cycle here to see what D says, get a little more information and then >> and then Yes, I I do believe that we should be putting this out to be like, hey, this is >> right away. >> Right away. >> If it makes it >> uh two weeks, Christie,
>> yeah, the 22nd will be in. Um and then and then you try to give the public a better uh >> paragraph of exactly what your our tentions are. >> So I mean so we we could pursue that survey and add add that as an option.
But if we do add that we're adding Hickory Hills Lancaster A. >> Oh yeah. >> Because if you do a treatment plan for Hickory Hills and Lancaster A >> the only added expense is a transmission made to to Kings. So you're talking if we did a million dollars, that's all you're talking to added to this plan
>> before we start to do it. >> Hail is the one that and Lancaster have well Hicks mostly is the one going to get you that money. 0% HR's got it. No one else has it. No one's going to >> I don't know if we should do the survey quite yet. I feel like
>> I want this information to be solid >> to put on. That's how I feel about that. I think that would give the town a better like these are different courses of actions. Bam. Bam. >> I'm just hesitant because it's like every time we try to do something it's
well you didn't give us all the information. You didn't get all of it. >> Yeah. What is all the cost? You didn't already get this cost. So I don't want to put this out. >> That's never going to happen because you don't know the cost ahead of time. >> I I know. We got to have a >> trying to do the best we can
>> educate guest or or something. But yeah, >> you know, >> look, at the end of the day, we're not doing anything unless the public says do. >> That's the bottom line. >> That's why we should move on to see what their opinions are. Cuz if they say no, we're wasting our time.
>> We can always cancel >> the de uh we if it goes through if you're waiting for the D, we can always cancel the meeting. Let's get it in movement. Let's get it in progress. Let's get going. No, that's not it's not
I mean it's gonna it cost money to cost money. >> I say let's let's wait. >> On top of that, I don't have it to vote for the date of a special meeting on the agenda as right now anyway. So we can >> How about this all these >> for next meeting? Let's try to get all
those ducks in a row. So if we want to execute on that, we can on next meeting. >> It just seems like, you know, we sit here and let's wait. Let's do it next time. Let's do it next time. >> I agree with you. It is a little frustrating, but as sitting here, I sometimes feel like we kind of have to.
>> Okay, I'm gonna move things around a little bit because I know there's some public out here that's dying to talk. So, uh, I'll open up some public questions here if there's if it pertains to to this topic that we just discussed. >> Well, Bill's writing. Go ahead.
>> Yeah, I got to go quick before Bill gets >> Oh, yeah. >> Paul Grundit, 35 John Street. That's a lot of money, but I know that it needed to do. Is there any help out there that we can get a grant or fund? Can we
apply? Can we look at least look is you know the state is >> we did apply for that ring for those. >> Yeah. And they just nothing happened. Just so I'm trying to help you. I'm on your side. >> I'm on your side. I'm not >> Well, yeah. I I got to say Christiey's been fantastic at securing about any
free dollar that we can get. We're constantly on that. >> So, you're on it. Okay. Good. All right. I thought so, but I was. >> And just so you know, for the public, you guys go to that waterworks thing, like that's where a lot of that information can come out there. That's why we go to these events and stuff like
that because it's a a networking, you know, of who's who and that's where we found out about >> the ARPA funding, >> the ARPA funding and stuff like that. So, you know, so yeah, we're we're >> okay. >> We're on. It's on your side. I'm on your side. >> Yep. So, but we did apply for one for the beginning startup phases
>> and uh we applied for it. >> The they said that only a few people were going to apply, but I think it was like 500. Sorry. >> So, we we get we tried. >> Okay. All right. Bye. >> John Fortune 50 drive a couple of
comments and a question if that's all right. >> Sure. Um, one, when you said the number, Fran, $86,000, I had just been looking through some of the reports and I just find it coincidental that we added the update for the PAS master plan. That was also
$86,000. The number just stood out in my head. It just seems funny that we keep getting things that are $86,000. But that's just a comment. Just a comment. Second comment I'll make is um I think you're right and you have to you have to
include all three wells because if you run just Lancaster and just Hickory Hills, you're only at 1.7 million gallons a day. I think you've told us that we needed to be at 1.8 million gallons a day for what that was um number we had in August
or whatever at some point in time. You' used that in the past. 1.4 >> maximum ever pump was 1.4. typical it's 1.1 to 1.2 max max. >> So it's a little little overhead but not a lot especially when we have another 1.4 million gallons from Ke. Right.
>> Y >> lastly uh Commissioner Woodward you had said in the $86,000 there were several things that were going to come out of that from and I didn't get that from Fran reading what what little you said about the $86,000. you said was a
summary, but does it really include all the costs and the maintenance budget and all that stuff? Would that all be part of the 86,000? >> Uh, no. That that'll be part of the original design of the Well, actually the the pilot test has already been done for Kings and and done for Lancaster. I mean, in Hickory Hills.
>> Yeah. >> So, we actually they already know what the maintenance cost will be based on what they what they've tested. They just want to confirm that the pH adjustment of kings uh going through the PAS filters after pH adjustment which was
never done during any of the process all it was just raw water running through. >> Yeah. >> And what we saw was when the pH is adjusted is when we see that precipitate the calcium buildup and that's so that's what they want to just assure that that isn't going to be a problem with the pest filters. So, they're just going to
run multiple levels of pH, high, low, medium, and just because it fluctuates. Uh, so like when we start a pump, you'll see 84, you know, and then then it drops off. So, they want to make sure that A4 isn't going to plug up that filter. So, because the filter means the most
expensive. And the last comment or last question I have for you is you mentioned when they were doing the pilot and they were running at 1,000 gallons a minute, sorry, thousand gallons a minute. Um that the numbers went down the hardness but but that wasn't during
the pilot. That was during the uh pump test when that well was put online the not >> reason. Not not for the the pilot test we ran at much lower 250 gallons a minute I think it was. >> Okay. >> 24 hours a day. >> Okay. All right. Thank you.
Okay. I um yeah, I have a I have a couple of questions and comments. Um you guys have been patient with me. I appreciate just like you said, I I'm my comments are really for the town and and for for the
uh uh water district too. Um the cost differential you the uh if you look at the the latest spreadsheet or uh or the the box score if you will of all the
different cars um and you compare the uh Hickory Hills and Lancaster to H to Lancaster and heating that difference is about about 15%. Whereas Hickory Hills has I wrote it down
something like six times the level of PAS. Okay. Um the the cost is is like should be several times like three times. So maintenance operating. Did you run that? Did you run that by them? And in particular the very specific part was
when they put the the the spreadsheet together they had the uh number of bed levels that's is that bed levels >> no you know you know what the issue bed volumes the bed volumes >> for uh uh Hickory Hills to be comparable
to the number for Keading and and uh that and remember at the meeting we had with them I said it should know that uh it should be four it should be based on breakthrough at four uh uh parts per trillion and not 20. And remember he
brought his laptop over he said no no it's it's up to 64. So that's a factor about three and a half between 20 and 70. And yet and that's that should be more than three and a half times the operating cost. But they >> but see Bill with with the PAS treatment
it's not a linear graph. >> Exactly. It's it's not linear. It's super linear. Well, no. Just because something has three times more PAS at this doesn't mean it's going to be take three times the amount to cost to treat it. Treating something at 20 or treating
something at seven may be a very similar cost from the the information we've gathered. So, >> okay. >> Does that No. Yeah. Yes. I'm exactly the same wavelength in the office. Yes. the is so yes the question same
wavelength namely the the difference between PAS uh that you have to remove as the number as the amount of PAS you have to remove by a filter goes up say by a factor of two >> the efficiency of the filter doesn't get better it gets worse it gets worse and
so it's not two times the cost it's more cost >> I disagree with you >> well that's I mean I >> I engineer. >> Well, no, I'm not an expert on this, but I did read this. How does it how does it go? And they said it gets worse. It gets
it because it it goes like two. >> I'm not going to disagree that it gets worse. obviously does, but I just think that the cost difference is is that that's what we're talking we're talking about the cost >> that that >> from all the research that I've read from them and I'm not an engineer
>> is that you know just because something has three times the more the amount of PAS does not mean it's three times the amount of cost. >> So I I did speak to them on this. I said if there's much more PAS to be removed is that because we're talking a a small
pen head versus a tiny pen. I mean that that's what we're talking parts per trillion. >> And I said is it is it is it the PAS that is having a higher number cause the extra cost. And they said no it's it's all the other stuff that's in the water that causes the problem that the TOC's
which we never even tested for part of our water. And then the concern with the heating well is how much CO2 is in the water. That's part of their main concern which they're going to see part that's why that's part of this test if there's CO2 that that causes the the plugging of the shower heads and and when it hits
the air. So that's what they concerned about at this. >> So but I agree and I did mention the bed. >> So what what did they say to that that to the fact that their operating costs are I think I calculate 15%. Uh, so they're bed bonds. I meant exactly like
you just said. And I said, "You need to go and >> confirm these are accurate or adjust if they're not." And uh, they agreed. And they they I said because I I said, "From what we are interpreting is that you went to 20 parts per train, not the
four." >> Yeah. >> And they said that's pretty unlikely, but they they're they're going through it. They they're they're working on it and they were hoping to get it for this meeting. >> Yeah. I wish they would because that's what that's the kind of stuff you do owe to the public because I mean and they should do a a line item like replacement
costs uh disposal of and do and mirror and mirror >> and mirror the uh the Keing one to the Hickory Hills one. So So every so you can look at at every single labor and see labor and they didn't even put manganesees and iron in in the Keing uh
uh report and see >> we didn't Yeah. because we didn't do any kind of removal at the >> Sorry, not keeping Ecles Hills, but it's not in there and they explicitly said it's not in there. So, that's not even incorporated in there. So,
>> well, uh yeah, see the INMAS that that one other than the capital cost that that's pretty much what you buy. >> Capital cost is part of it, too. And also, there's time and labor there. there was no >> I mean how much labor do you need to to
replace it you know twice as often >> or maybe a little less or maybe a little more uh so that that is that the cost number I'm really concerned >> I agree that >> okay um then
when u when I asked Lou about what is it what and you asked the same question why do you want to do the key the additional keying pilot You want to see what the pH increase in Lancaster water if that will cause CA
precipitation. And the only reason for additional heating pile is to see the effect of pH on the precipitation and P deficiency of the effect on a PAS filtration. So why does why do they want to increase
the pH of the heating water before it goes in to the filter? Well, because if if they if they do the pH at the new treatment plant, then we know that uh the precipitate is going to be the calcium is going to destroy every
whatever's after that. And so as soon as you do the pH there, so that was the thinking if we do the pH at the heating level, the problem >> before going into the filters. >> Yes. So we treat it atings and send the pH adjusted water to to the treatment plant. So all that precipitation, the
precip the buildup we need to clean out of the pipe is at the keynwell as as it has been for the last 10 years, 15 years. >> So that so let's let's leave it there because if we bring that raw water which is going to be fine through the water means wherever it goes >> to wherever say the nutrient plant and
then you you you modify the pH now there's your problem. >> Okay, let's talk about that. Can we talk about that? >> We can try. Okay. >> Um, so the Keing raw water,
>> yes, >> goes it go gets mixed with the maganese treated Lancaster water and that goes into the PE treatment and then you kick up the pH afterwards to go out to the town. >> Okay, that >> Okay, hold on. Okay, >> so to do the iron and manganesees
treatment, you need to raise the pH of that water. >> Yeah. So now you got raised pH water hitting Keing's raw water. >> Yeah. >> And not boom, there's your calcium. >> Do you? >> No. Okay. So So I I sent all these these Okay. So let's start off. Let's start off the Keing the Keing uh water all by
itself. Okay. Keating raw water going to the filter. No problem. They ran that test. >> Correct. When you add manganesees treated uh Lancaster water to it, you're going to reduce the calcium. You're going to reduce uh the the uh
what's the other one? Uh for you going to reduce the calcium. Uh you're going to also lower the alkalinity. So if the heating water by itself was no problem, it's going to be less of a problem if you add this this Lancaster
water. it's going to drop it further from saturation. Now you pH will increase but using the numbers for pH for Lancaster and the numbers for pH of uh um it was it was used the it was 6.68 that was used in a pilot study and I
forget what it was for Lancaster. It takes it up to 6.9. That's what's going into the filters. You there's no problem. And then you kick it up afterwards. >> Yeah. I'm not sure what those number Lancaster have the pH is like 56 kings is typically 62.
>> What's even better? It's even better. You got you've got you've got a factor more than a factor of 10 to play with. You're not going to get any precipitation in the filter. It's it's it's literally impossible >> when you afterwards when you add just as
we talked when you add the costic later when you put it in at a pH probably a 12 13 maybe 14 I don't know what it is what you're actually dripping with it what you're going to get like I said it's going to snow you're going to get carbonate but that's after the filters
the only thing they're interested in is how it affects the pus filter you're going to have a much better situation ation when you add the Lancaster water and and the the LSI curves show that dramatically, but you can even hand wave it if you
want to. It's really clear. You're going to reduce you're going to have a better situation when you put the manganese treated Lancaster water with the raw heating water much better than pure heating. So if pure heating raw water went through without a problem, it's
going to be easier. It'll be less of a problem when you add the manganese street to Lancaster water. >> It's all right. All right. Let's everybody think about this. Okay. So, we got heating water pumping at a pH of 62 raw water. So, we're running it up goes
into this new treatment plant. We have uh iron and manganesees treating water from Lancaster, wherever it comes from of pH of 75. So, now you got these two going together, 62 and 75. >> What's the pH? Uh I can calculate it for you. It's uh
it's less >> 68 69. Okay. What what's what are the two numbers? >> Uh 75. >> Yeah. 6 and six. It's not linear. It favors a higher number which is actually lower number because it's negative exponent. So it' be closer to it'll be
closer to the Keing number than it will be to the Lancaster number. >> For argument sake, let's say 6669. That's okay. So So >> and that's and that's fine. That's fine. In fact, the the curves that I showed and sent you guys was for an end result of 6ix9ine. >> Okay.
>> Okay. So, so like so kings with a pH of seven, >> it has this massive precipitation calcium buildup >> and the a massive amount at the well, but we see it all through the system. >> You said heating water at a pH of seven
has a massive buildup. It doesn't. >> I mean, I've never been there. When you No, I know. I've been there. You see it? Yeah. But I only can fit my finger. That's how built up it was. >> Okay. So you have heating water at seven by itself.
>> Or is this after you add the costic? >> Of course. Of course. Keing water at seven does not precipitate. That's what you have. You don't it >> doesn't have quinoa. Quinoa is like low sixes >> for I'm talking about for this this combination thing. It'll be 69. Okay.
That will not precipitate after you add the after you add the costing. Wait. Sodium or potassium hydroxide, whatever you add to it. >> It's going to precipitate like crazy in locally like adding food coloring to water. >> We see it all.
>> Oh, well, it's going to when especially when it hits stuff that's hot. And look, hard water is a problem. Hard water is a problem for people down the line. I mean, I'm not talking. >> No, none of us are talking about hot water. >> Okay. Yeah. So, it it's it's a problem down there. What I'm saying is the reason for this test and I'm getting
loud, but I don't mean to get loud. I just I get excited. >> Uh the reason for this test is to see whether or not the magnes combined with raw or heating water will cause plugging or clogging on a piece
filters. And I'm saying it only gets better than the heating pilot test. It can only get better. And I use by the way the and I point out the last meeting the very worst numbers I could find for the Lancaster.
You're going with the LSI stuff. >> It is LSI. They said you had a few things are off. So, you're pretty good at it. >> All right. So, >> to move things along once again, >> I appreciate your patience, but I've been thinking about >> Well, I mean, we're just I I appreciate your passion and man, your your your
commitment to doing this because I explain. >> All right. But after all this, and I do appreciate the input this So, are you not in favor of doing this $80,000 uh test or not? I mean, because >> tell you what,
>> that's a yes or no question. Second hand. >> It should be a yes or no, right? Yeah. >> But I give you a couple of buckets of heating water, a couple of buckets of uh >> I still have >> Lancaster water, and I'll do it for free. >> Okay. So, you >> for what this for what he's saying he wants. Okay. I won't clear showerheads
>> if if that's a problem, but it's a simple what he said he wants to do, right, >> is simple. I I understand, but from the town's perspective, from a D perspective, I I'm not going to agree or disagree
with all your math and numbers. I've read some of it. It definitely some of the things you bring up makes my head go, "Huh, that kind of makes sense." And this, that, and the other, but I can't I don't I can't comfortably present this package off to the town with a because
Bill said you you know what I'm saying? And and I don't >> I totally I no I agree with you. I I would I mean I I agree with you. You shouldn't make decisions based on >> right >> without Okay. So if that's the case then I hate to say but but Hickory Hills um
is is almost in a comparable position that was never tested. >> You know what I think >> it was never tested. Let me let me say where where I'm coming from on that. >> Well >> yeah it was never tested. the test that Fran's talking about that that they want to do for some reason jack up the pH of
the heating water and then send it through. You know what happens when you jack up the pH of heating water? It calcifies, right? It precipitates. Why they want to do that? Because you don't have to treat it from manganesees. So you don't have to you don't have to increase the pH of keing water. You you
just don't have to do it. That's not theory or anything. It's they showed it. You don't have to do it. >> Okay. So once again, kind of in like I said, I do appreciate your input on it. But back to the kind of my original just thought proc thought exercise here for you. >> You're sitting on this board.
>> Yeah. >> You know, we need to present to the town viable options of how we're going to go forward. >> I would I would be comfortable with with not doing it. Just more comfortable, by the way, than not doing it for the Hickory Hills test. That was not done for Hickory Hills. Well, I I could
explain why >> if you >> We don't probably want to get into all that, right? >> Well, I mean >> I mean it's the PH the the PAS treatment plant was done after pH adjustment. Correct. So, it was >> it was full distribution water,
>> right? >> So, the raw water from Keings is not we are not allowed to put it into the system. We need to raise the pH. >> And DP requested 72 to 73. They wanted it higher because of the the copa samples are failing at the schools,
>> but that's after that's after >> but that's when you go and so they all make >> I'm seeing good valid points, but I'm I I agree with the chair that we still need to look at this to do our due
diligence for the public to to give them the best >> absolutely >> plan moving forward. So, um that's So I think I think the cost analysis is important that we just talked about. You really got to in my view you got to
really line item this thing and and justify it. >> So I agree on line item but there there also is I hate to say this is it's not an exact science. I mean it sounds like it is but like when it comes to that line item stuff we're going to I think what we try to do is give our best uh projected forward. You know in the last
run through this we kind of like got through run through the ringer on a little bit of like you didn't do x y and z. And I feel like we're really trying to cover all the bases and all the lessons learned from the last go around. And personally, my fear is that we'll go through all this again and it's just
going to be a new batch of questions of why you didn't do this, that, and the other. So, what I'm really looking to try to do here is get all the information put together, put out to the public. What do you guys want to do? How do you want to combat PAS here in the in the future? And go from there. So the
the math that you and the science that you're coming up with, I kind of agree with you. There's definitely some some stuff there, but I just don't think that nixing this this this pilot study is really much of an option. And more for
if something goes wrong, man, that could be like millions of dollars playing backup afterwards trying to adjust and fix. That's what upsets me because there's too many. >> There aren't any. I just don't I'm
sorry. I just don't see it. I I I mean really >> you're entitled to your opinion on it and like I'm not I'm not even disagreeing with you. >> I guess Mike, why why wasn't this a concern the same concern you're expressing now when you activate Victory Hills and go to and combine it with
Lancaster? There was none of this discussion in in the pio study and and none of it here. Why isn't that a concern? Well, we we never had any calcium buildup, but when Hickory Hills and Lancaster were running in independently, they did the PAS pilot study at Hickory Hills, transfer the
whole exact system to to Lancaster app, ran it through that system >> and there was no builtup and it was pH adjusted water through the PAS filter. So, it's going to be exactly as what we're talking about. That's >> the report the report actually says they
don't have they they don't have a solution. I I copied that and sent it to >> they don't know how they're going to do it. >> Yeah, they said they don't know how they're going to do it. >> Do to which which part? >> The uh I don't >> you said it was predicted. I remember
you predicted. Yeah. In that paragraph, in that paragraph, they predicted it would work with Lancaster and the very first uh is this the one? Yeah. The very first uh comment on that
I it's a critical statement and it just kind of blew my mind when I read it. Uh, and let me let me read it for the record here because uh I wish I thought they were going to be here today. Uh, Italian bond folks. So, >> well, that's what we got to do. We we got to get somebody in here that talks
the same way that Bill talks over here. >> Well, they the superintendent and Mr. Empi had a conversation with Tyenbond. It precipitated some questions. We're going to continue to have these discussions back and forth with other residents, with our engineers.
We need to keep moving moving forward. And that's a big report, Mr. Mk. Correct. >> No, I haven't. >> See, I'm looking for the yellow. Yellow. >> I I will go back to something that I stated probably a year or so ago. In some of these giant reports, people tend
to take one sentence of about eight words and that's their whole report. >> You You have to take everything in context. >> See all the yellow? So, uh, Ty Bond said they they wouldn't they wouldn't attend. And I said, "Well, this just for a
budget discussion, see what you guys thought. And if you would like them to come, they are fully willing to come." Yeah. >> So, >> you want to set up for the next meeting, then they'll be >> I I would and I'd love to know what the Okay. The pilot data from Blue Leaf in and I was was inconclusive in
determining the best treatment alternative for PAS removal using water from the Hickory Hills wells. >> What? Again, that is a that is a sentence. >> They leave it open. Am I going in the the right way? >> Well, they they they they Yes, they they
they they submit the report to D without saying GAC. Correct. They they go with GAC, the ion exchange or the flor. So, they leave it open for for the design to take place. So, when it comes time to go to bid, GAC is this price. The floros
through the roof and they do the the initial cost. So they kind of leave it open like that >> it's available. >> That wasn't the reason. >> So other issues with hickory rails was because we had such all the appeals and all the difficulty of the toxic water
which is just as toxic as the lake uh dumping it on the ground which mean we were dumping lake water on the ground. So anyway that was a problem. So when we when we had the frack tank the frack tank caused issues with the pilot testing. So that's their concern. So it
that mostly messed up the iron and manganesees removal. That that's why the biological wouldn't couldn't develop the bacteria. So that's why they're going to the green sand because the green sand works everywhere. And they they even put in there that DP approved the green
sand, but we could do further testing to to go for the biological. >> So here's my concern with their explanation. And and again, I appreciate your patience, but but uh I have to go into a little bit more detail. We talk
about hard water and hard water itself is a kind of a in quotes a red herring. I'll tell you why. The way you get your hard water number is by adding two components. The concentration of calcium and the concentration of manganesees.
>> Magnesium. Thank you. magnesium. You add those two up and you get this number. But they're not added up with the same weight. It turns out that the magnesium component is about 1.6 times
the weight that the calcium component has. And the only concern with our system is calcium. So we really shouldn't be talking about the hard water. We should be looking only at the calcium. That's the only problem
calcium. Why is that important for these considerations especially to look at Hickory Hills is a Hickory Hill uh uh Keating has seven times the magnesium did I say magnesium level as Hickory
Hills and that gets multiplied by four in coming up with this hard water number. That's not you shouldn't really be talking about hard water because although magnesium can can precipitate, it's really the calcium carbonate that's doing the problem. Okay, that doesn't dissolve unless you put it in low pH
water, meaning like under seven or whatever. Uh, so you should really be talking about calcium. So I said, "All right, so what's a calcium deal?" So I went back and looked at all the portal data and that DP has the highest calcium
of heating was 277 milligs per liter and the highest calcium I have it here uh for Hickory Hills was 20.2 2 the the pilot study was higher but I'm just saying like I got this from the
data so those guys are comparable are comparable at the highest values the lowest values Hickory Hills has okay but when you look at the highest values you have to deal with they're comparable and I read also in a report about a pH
excess or something like that so I said in my note to you that I'm seeing pH flags even at Hickory adults. So my question, am I comfortable with with saying that they should don't have to do this test uh that as described by Lou?
Absolutely. Especially if I'm comfortable saying I don't have to do it at Hickory Hills in Lancaster. So if the team is ready to say, "Yeah, that's good. I don't have to do any more tests here." Then definitely you don't have to do any more tests at Keading and Hickory at Keating and Lancaster. What
what I think I'd like you to tell that to our engineers and see what they say in regards. I mean, we're listening. I I don't know what you're talking about. I I don't think any of these other guys. Nobody else in here does either. >> We need somebody We need somebody
comparable to your intelligence about this process to sit there and you tell them what you just told us and let them tell you what they're supposed to tell you back. cuz you're talking to the wall here. You're just wasting your breath. >> No, you don't know what the heck.
>> No, I'm I'm actually I'm getting pretty educated by some of the stuff that Mr. M. >> Repeating what he just said. >> But that's that's actually that's actually why so originally >> there was a meeting between Mr. Mk, the superintendent, and the engineer.
>> I still have no problem with it staying there because honestly, I would agree with Mr. Espazito that even if the engineer was here and this conversation was going on most of the people at home including some most some of the stuff myself I'm
not getting it >> but we're going to have a little rebuttal maybe back and forth >> what I what I get is we we have to try to make a decision based on the information that we get from the professionals that we hire and what our regulatory authority will tell us we can do.
>> That's what I know. >> I want him to sit here with with the engineers and go back and forth. >> We did. It was actually a really good meeting. We did and I enjoy that. I I think he's awesome at what he does. >> What have we learned? What did we come up with? >> Well, that's where it gets difficult. So
So Bill looks at all his stuff and then uh present the engineers. The engineers don't have they it's not like it's it's right there on, you know, they've already they have it all in their head, you know. So it's it's it's presented to them. It's like, oh, I I got to look into that. I got to figure that out. Whatever it is. So, so it's not like
everything's like bing bang, here's the answer. It's it's more of a a work in progress. So, I I think that's how I think we're still at that stage where >> questions come up and and uh >> did you do that? Did you do that? >> Yes. And and you know, it's it's not
like we are Ty Bond's only client. So, I mean, you know, they probably have a hundred of them. So, all right, we'll give a little his a little back. You know, the rest is his the other town. So I mean I mean I D bond's been excellent with us compared to other firms. So
>> uh but they are working on stuff you know. So >> what does D say? >> Well that they we're in discussion with them. The original with a with a phone call they were like yeah you should you should do a P. They're always in favor of pilot testing. >> Sure. >> Uh so this one they're in discussions.
are talking about the LSIs and and uh other other matters to see if if if in their opinion we we should do this test. So it's not set right now that DP saying you have to do it. Uh but in in my
opinion with just the stuff that's gone took place in town I I don't think I'd be comfortable with >> you have an idea of it timeline when D is going to weigh in. They don't they're talking about I would say by the next meeting. >> So then I I agree with the the chair
that we basically >> make make movements towards the next meeting to if we want to at least be able to have a special meeting vote on this. I think we've >> belabored it enough and I think we've branched off enough. >> I think it's time to move on.
>> I agree. >> Just say one more word. I don't know why he your concern about the town get your concern about town. I know you're I know you're preoccupied with that concern. I understand it. I know there people who are unhappy. It
doesn't have anything to do with this pilot test. Nothing. Nothing. >> Well, it's got to do with whether we're going to appropriate the money to do it or not. >> So that's that's a big thing. >> So if you're saying no matter what, I don't want heating water out there. That's where your argument comes in. You
don't want it out there. And and all I'm saying it's not going to get any worse than it is now. And for those people on reservoir roads, it's going to get better. >> My when this whole thing started, I didn't know treating the hot water is going to be such an issue. >> I I I thought this was going to be great. We put the PAS plant there, treat
the hard water, and boom, we're set forever. >> And uh then when when that came around that that's not possible, then then it kind of changed my my opinion. But again, it's just that what goes out to the community has nothing to do with this pilot test. It it doesn't
>> I I I agree. I agree on the pilot testing, but I mean the ultimate goal for me is to do whatever we can to give the town better water quality. >> That's separate. I mean, >> but I agree that's not part of the I mean that's that's not I only have one
more question. when we go to DP for something uh is it and it was in that letter that I had sent out this question uh what is it do they approve the effect efficacy of the system and also have to approve the cost the estimated cost for
it or is that up to the board up to your commissioners on the cost if they if if they say yeah that'll work and and you and we can afford it don't worry is that your call or they force you to meet a certain price right uh cost nothing with
price it's all just mandatory water quality standards >> then the the uh the data shows that you got the the standards and but one of the things I said the object he said the objective was not to do uh Lou said the objective was not to find out whether it
works he knows it'll work we all know it's going to work okay it's to determine the price well the or the cost if the cost you own the cost you therefore should own with the DP the decision about whether to run this pilot test. >> Okay. So, but but the cost is tied to
how the treatment plant operates. So, let's say that the pH adjustment or the pH water, the mixing of the water, whatever somehow affects a p fast. Let's say it does. Well, now your cost went up. I'm just saying what what if it does your price went up. If it doesn't, your price just went down. So, that's that's
all based on the cost. They need to know they they can't give us, hey, the maintenance cost could be this when there's unknown effects. There's no reason to keep the heat in water before it gets pieces. No reason at all. I mean, maybe they know something because it's not my business that I don't know.
But we had a discussion. The plan was rock heating treated Lancaster. What happens with respect to saturation or when it begins to to uh precipitate it goes down? It just does. >> So, I'd like you to tell that to them.
So they but he's telling me they want to treat the they want to treat the kidings. Uh I don't I don't know why >> there may be a reason and that's why >> they're the professional. >> Yeah. May maybe there is a reason. I >> they'll probably bring that up if you bring that up.
>> The main reason is is what the the the calcium buildup is right there at the well. I mean with within 20 ft of where we >> inside of the pipe looks like that paper towel roll over there. >> Yeah. Yep. So, so it's right there. So, that that's why they that same problem
is going to take place wherever we do the pH adjustment. So, their thinking was let's keep it right here. >> We know how to deal with it. That was the only reason. That was it. >> Instead of spread it out all over the place, keep it one. >> But I I agree. The raw water proven will pass through the the PASS filters. No
question. >> Uh hickory and Lancaster iron and manganesees pH raised will pass through those PAS filters. No question. So, but what what happens when >> once you get out of that >> that that was
>> once you mix everything together and you throw it out in the system, what's going to happen? >> If after that you start adding in the costic, you're going to get localized uh calcification. You're going to get your white your def. But that's not not PIFA.
It's not the PE localized now, but the localized >> but but everywhere else. deal with that. You know, that's the thing. So, we know how to deal with >> they'd have to incorporate the fact that you would have to shut it down. Like we doings, >> you're running here. All right. If it's
localized, you're going to have to shut that off to clean it. >> Not do that. >> No, I I >> just for reference, the buildup at Kings was so bad because we didn't know. It was 5 years and uh we couldn't even pump water out of it. And we took the pipes
apart and all I could fit was my fingers on the top. That's how small. >> So there are there are again I I hear that but it doesn't relate to the problem on the table. >> Oh I okay I >> but there are ways uh I I read three different ways that you can prepare your
costic ahead of time or separate little systems prepare it ahead of time and then put it into the water so you don't get that localized buildup that you're talking about. That's a common what you're talking about is a common problem apparently throughout wherever. It's a common problem. So there are ways and I
I think what what it does you you there's a separate container one is and you put it in there and you get this all this localized stuff and and the uh uh the calcium carbonate deposit at the bottom you can remove it now you've got water that is not going in it at a pH of
12 or 13 and then you put more in it you inject more increased the pH and you don't get that localized I'll I'll send you I'll send you what I found on it and that might be a solution for it >> because time one tried some different things of, you know, what's the what's the uh calcium levels before pH and
after, we didn't really see any changes. >> So, what we're seeing for precipitate is really nothing compared to what's in the water. So, there's a lot more there that can come out down somewhere. So, >> I'm surprised when you're adding Hickory
Hills and Lancaster that that you raise the pH um you didn't see any calcification. That actually surprises me. But >> you see any >> we're gonna we're gonna move on to move on. As much as I appreciate
>> you, thank you for your patience. I appreciate that. >> So, I'll get time here for the next meeting. They can present the because I was just supposed to run over the budget numbers with >> I'm going to be away for two weeks. >> Well, there's no sense of having it if >> Is it better Is it better for you to set
up a meeting with Fran and and Tai because it seems like >> I can do it again. I mean, Whatever you think. >> I liked it. I enjoyed it. I mean, >> I mean, he he knows way more than I know about all this stuff and and you learn, you know, everybody learns, you know.
>> Well, let's see if we can set that up. >> The cost, right? >> I mean, this cost thing has me really concerned. What really was concerned when they brought these laptop loads? No, no, he said it's not it's not uh uh 20, it's 64. And I thought, wow, they
really screwed up. actually driving home. I was like, "That doesn't make any sense." >> Yeah. I wonder if he looked at uh Kewell. I think he might have pulled up the wrong well site. >> Look at I'm all about Let's try to get this meeting together. I'm with everybody. Let's try to save cost. Let's try to make sure we're comparing apples
to apples and all the numbers are right. >> Moving on. >> Moving on. >> I'm not available for Monday until the 24th. So, Thursday or Friday, it's the only time until the 24th. >> 25th. All right. Commissioner,
superintendent treasure additions. What do we got? >> Uh, I just got my rolling anchors. Uh, we have broken man last night. >> Yep. >> Uh, >> not the new section. >> No, the old section. We We have We have We have two houses left to tie in and
then to tie into the the old section and then shut that old line off. >> So, there's only two more tieins to do. >> Well, they're all done now. >> Oh, okay. >> So, they're done today. >> 17 that you were doing. 17 tie-ins or >> Yeah. So, those are all they're all done now. Now, tomorrow we're going to tie in the main
>> and abandon that. >> Correct. >> And it was just it was too much work to not fix that and just say we got to do all that today. It would have been crazy. So, >> so we fixed it two couplings. >> Yeah. >> So, it cracked a whole piece. >> Yeah. All right. So, >> we should be able to wrap. So, do you
think >> what do you think we're out of here? Rolling acres. >> Uh well, tomorrow we're done. We're actually lose seat around the first turn. >> Uh so yeah, pretty much moment seat. I think two driveways are paved. >> Y >> uh we can do it pretty quick.
>> Probably would have already been done. We had last Friday to get all them done, but then a car get a hydrant, so that got set aside and then now we have >> Yeah, the main break. >> A main break. Yeah. So the porn rain. >> Yeah. >> I mean, we've had a little hiccups, but I I still I'm so glad we did it.
>> Yeah, I am too. Do you think by next meeting it'll be done up? Yes. >> Do you think by next meeting you might have some like just some G was comparative numbers for us? >> I'm sure I mean we got numbers of what we're paying. >> I started I start I've been keeping track of >> I'd love to have that for next meeting. Not putting pressure on you or anything
but you know get it done. >> Next meeting. Um, >> do you want me to ask I think we may have even asked him, but we can ask Don. Give us a hypothetical and this many feet, this much pipe. >> Uh, he didn't 700,000.
>> 700 was diamond bonds. >> Yeah. Budget number then I don't think that included the engineering >> 700 without engine. >> Well, which we can do that because we didn't >> and no. Yeah. >> 2.8 million. >> Yeah. >> Okay. We have some old business to go through, but we'll come back to you.
Okay. >> Uh, do you have anything, Kristen? >> Oh, good. >> John, you got anything? >> No. >> All right. Uh, old business NASA water, man. >> Okay. Yep. Got a little bit on that. Uh, I met with Mass DOT. We have one drive
of the puppet theater. Yep. >> We we had them pave it three times. Uh, and now we got to go repave it again. We cannot leave the water in the road. >> What do they want us to do? It's got to go in their property because the the state guy said always run their
property. This is state land. It's going there. >> I I was went I went and looked at this this morning. >> Oh, after the rain. >> Yeah. After the rain, I went over there and I was like, >> "Yeah, >> so we're going to we're going to cut out that whole BM that's holding it on the
state road. It's got to go in and we're going to uh grade the driveway so it pitches away and we're going to do a little ditch down the side. >> Now, that's up to what? >> Well, MDF. So, I met with MDR and >> Okay. I mean, they're paying for it, though. >> I I told them we would help. I said,
"We'll get we'll get the stone for you. We'll, you know, we'll help them because they they've already paid it >> for us three times, you know." So, >> wrong three times. >> No, they did it too They did it too good. They did it to to make the people happy. >> We're not there to make the people
happy. We're there to make the state happy. >> That's the luckily the homeowner came out, you said, right? She spoke to the DOT guy and understands that >> we have to do it. >> It's just I it's just the nature of the road is there's a dip there. >> You'd be better off to put a small catch basin right there.
>> That would the state guy said you had that option cuz the catch basins are up high. Driveway's down low. >> But even still, the catch basins are so far that it's not going to catch anything. >> So that was you'd have to add another one and and divert that. And we're like, "Yeah, no, we're not done with that." >> That's the craziest thing ever. Okay.
So, so we got it set mass DOT MDRI Jason from MDRI. So, I know exactly what to do. Okay. >> And the mass DOT guy says his uh maintenance guy we'll schedule it. He'll come out and and be with us. >> Yeah. So, we can be like happy. And then
there was a couple other little things we'll touch on here. >> We'll take care of all that. >> All right. >> Uh rolling acres. >> Yeah. All good. Zone one activities. That's you. >> Oh, all right. Oh, that Yeah, that's me.
Zone one. All right. So, as far as the Woodlands kayak rack, um, basically, you know, we sent a letter to their attorney requesting them to move the kayak rack. Uh, we've had conversations with Mass D. Mass D has
talked to their I'm not sure if it's their >> it was their hydro consultant or something. So, uh, basically the DP is not approving them to keep the kayak rack in there. So, we've sent them a letter and asked them to with the >> email, not an email, just a brief email,
uh, just, you know, trying to do this on a neighborly basis from the beginning. I don't want to try to get a bunch of lawyers involved or anything like that. So, that's where we're at with that. >> So, what did the email say? >> Generally, just uh, you know, we're requesting you to move the kayak, right?
when >> are they going to give us a plan? Are we requesting? >> We haven't heard anything back from them. I just want to >> reach out to them and let them know that that's you know after you know we initially met back in I believe it was February on this issue. Yeah.
>> In which I met with some of the residents. They brought their lawyer there. We discussed a couple of things. It was a great meeting. Uh there was a couple of small violations. They took care of the kayak rack. That's when they asked like, "Hey, uh, if we got approval from D, could we keep it here?" And I said, "Yeah, if if D says that's not a
violation." I don't see how they would, but if that's if you got some letter, yeah, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Um, and then this >> uh it basically got they they asked for extensions, extensions, extensions all the way up until I believe it was
September 1st, 31st, that they just called. And so, but they had a >> I don't want to call it a hydro geologist. >> No, it's like a consultant, >> a hydra, a water consultant type of individual, I guess, submitted something to the DP. Once again, that was all on
them. I'm not really sure why they did that. Um, but basically DP had come back and contacted that hydro consultant and say, "No, you can't keep the kayak racks there." Um, so >> what did they say? >> You can't keep the kayak kayak racks in the zone one. So, we've just asked them,
you know, not >> can you let us know just what's your plan? >> Please move move the why don't we tell them what our plan is? >> Because what I'm trying to do is just do this in a very nice and >> you've been trying to do it for seven months. >> Well,
>> 7 months you haven't got anywhere. >> I understand. But now the ball's over there. If we don't hear from them, we'll take appropriate action after. >> All right. When are we going to give them how long before we're going to wait before we hear from them? >> A month, a year, 6 months, two weeks.
>> The email is out there, right? >> I am one of three on this board. I'm I'm open to suggestions. I would I would follow up if they if they aren't if we haven't asked them to tell us their plan. We've told them they need to move it, but
>> you know, there's no definitive. We need to know their We need to know their plan. >> Should I say would you like me to put our next commissioner's meeting is on I gota look the calendar the 22nd. >> I would like to provide >> we we need a we need a we need a plan
and and that we are looking for it to be removed ASAP. >> Yes. And then then if if >> if not I don't know what are our options. Do we can we I don't want to
This is the whole thing. I try to do this in a way that it's just >> Yep. >> I had a good meeting with them. I just want to I just want to make sure that we're clear of zone violations. So, if you could just reach out to them saying like we're looking for a response or your plans of action to remove those
kayak racks. Uh we have a meeting >> whatever date more than welcome to come and discuss it. But we need you know this is a violation and we need to clear it up. >> Tell my opinion. ask them to come to the meeting the 22nd with a definite plan of
what their plan is >> or >> not not come in and talk about it. >> They can send they can they can send it they can send us something I'll send it to you before the next meeting. We'd like to know their plans to to correct this violation. >> Yes.
>> Okay. >> Uh okay. That's >> I got one more thing. >> Oh yes, sir. >> Okay. We got a lot of one more thing. >> So when when the hydrant got hit >> Yes. >> we used the JCB to dig that because the caterpillars over there rolling anchors. >> Y >> it was awesome. I bet that was
>> from what I hear is they wanted to dig a hole and bury the JC. So they said it's a piece of junk. Uh and it it is it's pretty tough. Anyway, so I really think it's time we step our game up and and
what you know because we've been using the excavator. You can actually see out. You can see what you're digging. You're not looking by a big boom. >> Do we still have the wheels on here? >> No. >> No. >> But that that's my my suggestion to the board is we step up and and really give this some some thought. I've always been
on the >> What are we thinking about? Ruby excavator. >> No, you didn't say that. You said you're having a lot of trouble with the JCB and what you want to step up. >> Step up to a new machine. But >> yeah, I agree with that. >> I've agreed with that for a long time. >> Oh, yeah. I agree. So like the the
catback ho is our new one. That's a 2009. We got it 2008. So I mean that that's that's pretty old too. >> Now it's not the leak and >> but I mean Jason you don't want to drive it down the road. >> Yeah. Well,
>> so Jason will put up auction wants to buy put in 100 bucks and have it. >> I got you. um >> when you want to do like by the annual meeting or what is your what's your thought process on it? >> I'll tell I'll tell you I'll tell you
this. Why don't you guys sell and pick uh whatever it is that you feel is the best machine to suit the needs of the water department and put that forward to us. I'm a no and we'll we'll we'll roll through that
and see how that fits into uh budgetwise uh etc etc. you know, why don't you just get something together and be like, "Hey, we're looking to buy this." >> Okay. >> She She's been on that. >> Oh, I got my folder. >> Would you Are you dead set against any
any purchase or are you against buying a wheeled excavator? Because eventually we have to replace the backo or you're saying that we're just going to string them on the machines that we have with duct tape and balance line. >> I've been doing that for >> I know.
years. It's served me well, but I used 2:00 in the morning that stuff's got to work. >> Look at I I completely understand. Look, I just I'm just a little more uh maybe conservative on that than maybe you guys are. And I'm not I'm just >> Look at this place. Everything here is old. We're all pretty conservative.
>> Yeah. Look at Fran. >> Obviously, this was expensive. >> Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I understand that we need to be able to function as a water department and I get it. However, I'm sure the JCP is a backpack, but put something together and look at once again
>> next time we dig. >> I'll show you. No problem. I'll show you. Right. Yeah. I'll be like, "This is perfect. Something broke. Fix it." >> See, now see now you're a no. He's a yes. So, that leaves the decision up to me. Why this?
>> I'm a I'm a yes for different reasons >> cuz I think capitalally spending the money on the machine >> I think >> rolling acres you wouldn't have rented a machine. >> It already paid for itself. >> Once again I >> We'll get there. We'll get >> the capital improvement thing. I'm
definitely all in favor of looking at those numbers. I I think there's other things that we could buy to make ourselves, you know, but there's that that capital improvement plan is a great idea. we just need to kind of just go through that to make sure that everybody's on board understanding uh
how is it actually going to flow out through the say five years etc. >> Um so that is something that that definitely could get tied into this conversation if that's the route we're going but >> I'm not disagreeing with you Fran. I'm
just saying half an hour. >> If it wasn't him, it was PJ. So, and this >> Oh, aren't you glad we had a JCB? Did it get the job done? >> Yes. >> Oh, load load trucks and stuff, but you
can't load a truck. You lift it up and the bucket just falls down. >> You got to keep lifting up. >> So, you Okay, just do >> I I understand. We'll uh we'll definitely maybe it's time to look at some options there.
>> So, you agree with the capital plan deal? >> I I agree that I want to see the capital I'm absolutely conceptually it's a great idea. You talked a little bit about it, but I think before we just say, >> hey, let's start buying a bunch of
stuff. We need to just, you know, >> get it all just kind of, you know, just >> this isn't necessary for the capital, which would be good for too, but I mean to me it's just a >> correct >> because I had asked I think it was before you on the board the uh the cat back was 10 10 years old and I thought
we just rotate. So they're all >> we wouldn't have had to worry about it right now. Right. If I was you already have, >> you know, I don't know what you can get out of the capital plan >> without buying a machine. >> No, we we can't. We we can't. I just Once again, we don't need to do the
capital plan for this purchase. >> I would just ask clerk treasurer as you, you know, as a comparison, >> replace the backho. What's that look like? >> Yeah. >> You know, >> you're going to have all the numbers and everything. >> Well, I've been that the rubber timing actually. I did get a couple back ones.
I mean, they're half >> 115 versus 180. >> Oh, really? Was it? Oh, I thought it was too just for Okay. Look at I I did get it. If I was a water man, I'd want to be in the next. It's just me. But would I do it in an old
triple nickel for pick? Yep. >> Different. Different. If you're in the machine where you're nice and dry or you standing out near the truck, then you pick up the puck and all over you. >> Once again, you're barking up the wrong.
>> Okay. Anything else? That's all, >> Mr. Chairman. >> That's all >> public comment. >> Oh, yeah. >> No, no, we have been through public comment. The only one that's Do you have any public comment, Mr. Rogers? You >> got the car. I've typed it all up. There's 27 pages. >> All right. Well, so
>> I I do I do have just one thing. I I had occasion to to go down to Hickory Hills and um on the right hand side uh I I looked in and there's standing water. Um and then I went down a little further
where uh the dump used to be. >> Remember that? >> Probably not. No. >> Oh, you're on the other side. >> Yeah. >> Huh? >> On the other side. >> That's probably pretty dry, >> huh? >> That's probably pretty dry. >> Yeah. >> It's red. There's stuff coming off of where the
dump was into that area and it's seeping into uh the lake. So I just uh mentioned >> Yeah. I I haven't been buying for quite a while. >> Do you remember when they did that, John? >> Oh, yeah. >> Pand
when I spoke to the uh hydro geologist, he said back in those days the the landfills weren't as harmful to the groundwater because they burnt everything. wasn't good for the air, but they burnt everything. So, not not a whole lot. >> They didn't burn down there. >> No, there was stuff there was stuff
buried. >> Oh, buried in the end. But I remember going there and they burn. >> I just mention it for, you know, >> I don't know what to do. >> I appreciate your comment, >> Dave. Do you think you and I going to really have to worry too much longer
about that? Well, how much money did you >> My I went to the cardiologist today and he said, "Do you have any uh uh long-term CDs?" I said, "My my wife can't have all the money." And uh he said, "Don't go alone." >> No. And don't buy any green bananas.
>> That's it. >> So, John, you're up. >> I'm up. >> Yeah. >> Um >> what's the jur I heard. enough for me. >> I had a hard time trying to think of what I was. >> We're done.
>> Okay, I'm out of here.