Meeting of the water commissioners is called to order. August 21st, 2025 at 6 PM and is being recorded. >> Chairman Ed Johnson, present. >> Commissioner John Kaine, present. >> Richard Bozac, supervisor, DPW, present.
>> Barl Wagner, uh, DPW office manager, present. >> And we have John's dog. Okay. >> Okay. >> Present. >> Is there any public comment? There's nobody in the waiting room. >> Nobody in the waiting room. Okay. >> All right. We got to review the minutes
of the May 15th, June 26, and July 17th. I looked at them all. >> So, we can't do May 15th because I wasn't here. >> Right. I can't do June because I Or July, I was >> We can do June. Yeah. M can do June.
>> Yeah, you can do You can't do June or May. >> No, May or July. And we'll table both of those. >> Yeah. The only one I can So just table open please. >> Yeah. So this June 26 we've been review.
Okay. John and I were both here. Yeah. We can do the 26. Yep. >> I have a motion. >> I make a motion to accept the minutes from the June 26, 2025 water commission meeting. >> I second that. All in favor Johnson. I >> John Kane. Yes.
>> Okay. Let's consider that. And we have a whopping 26 elderly rate applications and they all meet the standard requirements. >> I did not include copies of them in the binders. Just >> I looked at them all. They're all they're all been cheat. So we have need
a motion 26. >> Make a motion to accept the 26 elderly elderly rate applications. >> Second that. All in favor Johnson I. >> John Kaine. Yes. >> Okay. And then we have one that we approved when was that last month. I wasn't here though, right? >> Um >> July.
>> Yes. >> 463 College Highway and Barl did some investigating. Come to find out it's a duplex. So we got to >> the resend. >> We got to rescend that >> for Moren Gerard 463 College Highway.
>> We got to resend that. >> Have a motion. I will make a motion to resend the elderly rate for 463 College Highway due to the fact that it is a two family home. We second that. Favor Ed Johnson I. >> John Kane. Yes.
>> Okay. Motion carries. Okay. Commitments to sign afterwards. >> All right, John. >> Here we go. Hi everybody. >> How you doing? >> Fantastic. Hope you're all having a great week so far. Uh >> yeah, I came in.
>> That's good. Uh morning water commissioners. Uh in this uh monthly report, I wanted to circle back to both a couple of topics we've touched upon in the past um as well as try to share some of our um ongoing business work um as a way for
both um of us to or I should say all of us to catch up on our ongoing discussions, make sure that we're all on the same page. So, anyways, I want to first uh flip back uh to uh the well outage that we had uh back in July. Um I mentioned that I didn't want
to fly by the seat of my pants in terms of uh we're going to call it control technology and power uh uh delivery to pumps. And sure enough, it was the variable frequency drive uh cooling fan that had let go. And it was on well number two, not well number one as I
previously indicated. Um, so Kevin Soer, he uh took apart the old fan, found a pinched wire in it, and the reason why I bring this up is that he's uh able to get the um if you will, the original manufacturers's information off of it and and so we'll have a couple of uh
backup fans in stock. Um at the same time, um we are improving, uh the ventilation capacity within the VFD, uh enclosure. Uh so hopefully we'll have a little more durability uh for that unit moving forward. Um we Kevin and I looked
at water usage during that u period of time. Yeah. I I observed that the well itself I think produces 70 to 90,000 on average at least prior and of course uh as Murphy's law has when we enter a an outage the demand is is rising with the
season. Um and so we were we're pulling fairly heavily from our 200 connections with sewer and water. Uh I did want to share that we met with Joe Pabalaric and Dan Holmes from Titan Bond. Um Joe was kind to give us a
status report on their lead service inventory uh project. Uh their goal um which you know I'm I'm kind of a big picture guy. Um but I wanted to share that you know their the goal in their work is to get us to a point where we
can lessen our burden um for reporting uh for both frequency and uh number and intensity. Let's see uh water sampling notices sent on August 12th uh to key households preparation for bottle distribution
retrieval and laboratory analysis. Uh we're scheduled for sampling on August 26 and September 9th. All 20 samples will need to be collected uh by the end of September, but Barl and Kevin are according to that effort as today. Um well, let's see. On the 15th, that was I
guess we were still waiting contact from uh another 10 households. >> Yeah. >> Um okay. Oh, I'm sorry. Did I interrupt you? >> No, go ahead. >> Okay. Uh so then looking towards uh well, our water restrictions. Um, I think we all saw that we kind of bounced
in and out um early or um I should say I guess it was later in in July. We're firmly uh in it now. Uh flow levels uh plummeted. I think today's was the first rise I'd seen in some time back to 120 cubic feet per second. Um but we're
still well below the threshold um for the river. Um and uh as a few folks observed it was a rather we call it inconvenient restriction that we uh saw um earlier on uh our frequency can be as little as uh you know 10 days three
qualifying days and then another I think it's seven is that right Barl to bounce back out of it. >> Yep. and then seven days out. >> And for sure uh I think we we all uh experience some we'll call it degree of pain uh every time the notices um um go
out and we enter another period of restriction. Um but I'm happy to discuss uh we're going to call it the parameters surrounding that and any policy adjustments we uh we might want to explore uh internally moving forward. Uh let's see. Mr. Johnson reached out to
me. Um, uh, oh, I'm I'm skipping ahead. Excuse me. That was that's not the action item. The water systems regulations, I mentioned that the last month. I've distributed those to Kevin um, Soer. He's going to be performing a technical review um, uh, for the update. What we have right now, I'm going to
call it as a redline version from Randy uh, with his thoughts on it. Once I get Kevin's uh feedback um and I implement that into the regulation, I'll share it with the water commissioners to u well for your input as well and we can
highlight those changes and discuss any that u uh you might have some concerns with. Uh so let's the other action item I mentioned coming out of the last meeting was uh the ADU uh regulation and um I
think the intention from our last discussion I know this began also under uh Ry's um tenure was to firm up a policy. Uh my language here unfortunately is rooted in zoning. Um when I crafted up a couple paragraphs here under zoning were prohibited. Uh
but as I believe the commission has correctly identified in the past uh the water um commission as as utility can um mandate certain connections. If I recall correctly, and please I do
entertain any, um, input from commission members, uh, that we were looking for more of a performance-based, uh, scenario rather than a mandated separate hookup. Is that right, uh, commission members? >> Trying to think what we
>> Yeah, I think it was a long ago. >> We were Well, we were kind of back and forth on it, too. >> Yeah, we were. Yeah. >> Nothing set in stone, right? And I think we were we John had mentioned about the the zoning and stuff and the being by right having an issue. So we had gone
with I believe letting it go through the the one connection but if they wanted what this is saying you know to have it >> the option to do either or depending on >> if it wouldn't be as cost effective or just you know all around convenient to
connect separately. Right. Yeah. So, >> so I think that that means that for the time being we're looking at I'm going to call a performance-based requirement if they can show that adequate water uh flow and pressure can be provided using the existing service.
Um then for a buy right scenario that seems to make sense to me did I interpret that right Mr. Kane? >> Yeah I think that's what we agreed on. Uh so then the only other uh option available under zoning today is a uh
special permit ADU and that's when they move uh to a second um accessory dwelling unit. So this is one that is not protected um under state law. Uh but certain properties may uh have that option if they're able to obtain a special permit through the planning
board. Um, now I recognize that we're we're adding yet, you know, further we'll call it burden um to an existing connection that was sized for well, let's just say at best a single family household. Um, and
there may be I guess the thought that I was having is that the performance standard would still apply, right, if they're able to provide adequate flow and pressure. Um but uh wanted to just mention that
unprotected circumstance uh if to see if the uh commission members may develop an opinion over time or if you had one at this evening's uh meeting. So >> I know one of the things that we had talked about was that it the elderly
rate that you know get that >> a discussion point you know kind of a move thing >> we weren't going to allow any elderly >> right >> to supersede and if it was an ADU to connect separately they wouldn't be eligible for the elderly rate >> right >> regardless if the person living there
was >> u elderly but I The problem is if if they can't provide it, is that on us or is that on the the ADU owner, you know, to make up the shortfall?
>> Yeah, I know that >> of the of the flow and pressure, you know, because >> it might >> is there a legal standard? I I'm not sure. >> Yeah, I don't know >> that because we're supplying it to the >> dwelling, but the additional additional building, right?
>> Yeah. I think you asked a good question. My uh simple non attorney head uh even when I put my attorney hat on tells me that the burden relies on the developer or relies on the developer, excuse me. Um but
unlet and I don't see that falling into jeopardy under any of the protected circumstances but I think you ask a question worth having us uh advance up the food chain a little bit uh and make sure that uh it's defensible to say that all right if you
if you can't provide you know adequate flow uh test at you know a minimum pressure then you know a new water connection would be mandated and it would be their burden. That's how I'd see it. I'd like to see it panning out. I'm sure everybody agrees. >> I think that that would be the way to to
approach that for sure. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Because it probably won't be, you know, it's it's not necessarily the person like we had talked, it's all, oh, my my grandparents, my parents are going to live here, but it's then that next, you know, when they sell the house, >> right, the next round, >> we allowed them to put in a water
service that's not adequate for, >> right, >> for a habitable dwelling. So, I think that that would be a caveat we have to put in there that if you can't provide it, you either can't connect it where you have to upsize. >> They could upsize their water service.
Maybe that might be an option. >> You could do that, too. Yeah. Yep. >> Yeah. But there Yeah, there definitely has to be something in there because I think further down the road, that's where we're going to hit these issues. >> Yes. They fill the property and they get elderly. Yep. >> Yeah. Yep. >> Okay. I I appreciate that feedback. I
think that's meaningful. Uh why don't I So I think this will give me enough room to get a couple of key answers uh and I can uh draft up um a rough policy uh for us to chew at um at a September meeting
>> because I think that's the ultimate thing is the flow and the pressure. If they can abide that >> that gives them the option to use their existing connection. If they can't, they will be required to either upsize >> or whatever >> or, you know, or meet that flow level, whatever that might be, which could be >> an additional connection,
>> right? >> Excellent. Excellent. Thank you. Uh, let me wake up my crib notes real quick here. Here we go. >> Okay. And let's see. Uh, that brings us to demand for unpaid water bills. They were due uh June 22nd. Total of 80.
We're still unpaid as of this week. Uh the treasur collector's office sent out final notices warning utility shut off for the unpaid accounts and Barl's working with the treasur collector's office uh to coordinate the shut off efforts beginning in September. Uh Jeff Bey remains um with us working with
another ground backflow inspections this fall. >> Oh very good. >> Thank you. >> Very good. And what else did you have, John? You had something else you were going to bring up. >> Yeah, you know, I was just trying to
remember what that was because we're talking water withdrawal permit. >> Yeah. So, I'm sorry. Thank you very much, Mr. Johnson. Uh, so chair uh chairman Johnson. >> Fair. Fair enough. There there's a wall of formality when I'm speaking through
this little computer screen here. Um, so Ed was kind to uh bring up the topic. Um really it was a couple weeks back. Um and I had to scratch my head a little bit and try to recall where Randy and I last came into contact um with what I
believe the task before us is a permit modification. The last effort that I collaborated with Randy on was to quantify to identify and quantify uh infiltration credit for anything that
the town owns or manages on our properties. Um so anything that was frankly greater than a single dry well. Uh anything that had if they're either linked ones or if they're infiltration chambers or surface basins.
um we looked at there's a there was a calculation that we worked um through according to DP standard to come up with a volume of water um and I if I recall correctly I think when Ren
is winding down his work in early July he mentioned ah yes we haven't gotten to this so this will this is one of those things that we're that he's that he's passing along to those who remain Um, Ed, John, uh, I'll welcome any comments
you have to the contrary about your awareness um, for status, but I think that's where we need to pick up. And to be honest, uh, after a quick review of the documents, I think my next call needs to be um, to our contact over at D and pick up on some discussions that
Ry's had. >> Okay. Okay. >> Is that consistent with every what everybody knows? >> Yep, that's fine. Yeah. >> Okay. I want to keep on this. Okay. >> Absolutely. >> This has been going on for how many years now, John? >> It's been a long time.
>> Four years, please. >> Yeah. This is this has been going this been going on, you know, we got to get that resolved. >> Okay. >> Anything you can do, John, I appreciate it. >> Oh, it's it's our pleasure. Uh I know I'm speaking on behalf of Rich and Barl that we want to make sure that we uh uh
we take good care of uh both the town and the water commission and in our needs. So, right, >> I'm happy to to try to fish out those answers and and keep you a breast of developments. >> Yeah, you can keep me keep me posted or whatever. You know, I get a hold of me. Yep. >> You got it. Thank you.
>> Okay. All right. Now, got here summary. Okay. Developing ADU policy for old business that we just talked about that barrel select board sewer rate update. >> Yeah. So, when we updated our uh elderly
rate to include the 180 days or more per year language, um Diane came to uh my office and let me know that on the sewer application that did not apply. Um and so we wanted to uh discuss with the
commissioners if we wanted to keep the two applications separate, one for water and one for sewer or combine the two into one effort where an applicant would uh at the top they could mark off water or sewer on what they are applying for. >> Okay.
>> They would fill out um the same format that it's been. Um I just reworked it so it would be on one form. >> Yeah, I like that. >> Right. I kept the the top consistent and I just I changed the language to be more fitting in the middle section. I put two
approved or denied um signature blocks down the bottom. So hopefully that will uh make it a little more efficient. I don't think that um a lot of people even know that the sewer elderly rate is an option. >> We have uh we've seen a lot of elderly
rate applications lately. Um, and I think this would help with efficiency greatly if we have >> like I like this. >> So I I put this together to get your opinion and if we like it um I could present it to uh the select board and see if that's something
>> you're good with that John. I am >> Yeah. The only thing um >> they wanted us to change >> I'm just thinking just put an asterct this property is my permanent full-time place of residence >> to draw attention to the 180 day. >> That's full. >> Oh, okay. That's a good idea. Yeah.
Okay. So, >> just to just, you know, as that, >> but they know to look at that. Yeah. That >> because they might not even look at, you know, some people don't read the whole thing, you know, they just >> Yeah. Exactly. >> They just evidence. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So, just put an aster there so they can asterisk.
Um >> Okay. >> Or some Yeah. Some way that >> Yeah. Just something so they look down at the next paragraph. >> Yeah. Their concern um was that our uh application references
uh that any actual use will be build at the lowest possible rate and their application >> um is an exemption from the minimum. Um so that difference I made sure the wording was was clear and consistent. Um so I wanted to
>> just point that out. Two different >> Yeah. go ahead and submit that to them. And >> yeah, I'm also try to I'm going to try to make it fillable, just a fillable PDF and put it on the website. A lot of people print it out and then they have to bring it to me or mail it to me. It's a a convoluted process. So just I made
it fillable and I can put it on the the website easier. They fill it out and submit it right there. >> Yeah, it's a lot of technology >> and a lot of time for just for you to go through the paper and Yeah. >> the trees. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah.
New business. Anything under new business? >> Do we need to vote on this or anything? >> Do we need to vote on to what? Present it to the select. >> I don't think it's to present it. No, it's not a >> We're just changing the application. That's all. Yeah, we're not changing the
>> We already did that with 180 days. We So, this is just a change of the form. >> Yeah. >> Not a policy. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. It's not a policy, right? Just updating the form. >> Hey, nothing under new business? I haven't got anything. John, you got anything under new business?
>> Oh, that's John. Uh, no, not this evening. >> Okay, we're good. >> Next meeting is what? The 20some. >> See, it is September 18th or >> 18th, right? September 18th. >> I'll be at camp, but I'll come home.
>> Yeah, I'll see. I can't go with you, John. >> Yep. Okay. Next meeting September 18th at 6:00. >> Can I have a motion for adjournment? >> I'll make a motion to amend. >> I second that. All in favor Johnson I. Johnson. Yes. Motion carried. Meeting is
adjourned.