May 19, 2026 – Board of Public Works – Video & Transcript

May 19, 2026 - Board of Public Works

Autoscroll:

We'll call to order. This is the May 19th, 2026 Board of Public Works meeting. It is 6.01 p.m. This meeting is being conducted via remote access only via Zoom. Let's see. The meeting may be recorded, and I believe it is being recorded. It will be made available to the public on Wacom as soon as possible after the meeting. The public will be excluded from executive session. We don't have any planned tonight. As we went to Chapter 2 of the Access 425, this meeting is being recorded or being conducted via remote access in accordance with applicable law. No in-person attendance is permitted. If this meeting has remote access, which it does, you may watch or participate via the link that's in the agenda. When required by law or allowed by the chair, persons wishing to provide public comment or otherwise participate in the meeting, they do so. And if you raise your hand during public comment, we'll admit you so that you can provide public comment, which should be limited to two minutes per person. So with that, we'll have a call to order, and I'll just do a roll call. Spellman. Here. Soar. You can just say, here, John. Is it Jonathan or John? And you're on mute, by the way, if you're trying to speak. Yeah. Right. I go by John typically, but he can call me whatever. Sounds good. Perfect. Ed? Yes. Great. And we are joined by Matt Abrahams to help us with the water financials, Joe Doucette, and our director, Tom Holder. Is there anyone else that I should? I don't see Carol here, which is unusual. I spoke with her, and yeah, her husband is in the hospital, so she's tending to him. Okay. Sorry to hear that. Okay. So that's our call to order and announcements. I think we have, I know, at least one announcement. We have a new member, welcome aboard, as Mike mentioned earlier, to John Storer. He comes to us via the Board of Health, where he is still a member as well. And, John, we want to say hello and welcome you. Thank you. Sure. Tom, do we have any other announcements? Staff have none. Okay. With that, we can move on to public comment. Hang on, Mike. Do we have to officially announce you as the new chair, or do we have to make a motion to make you chair? Yeah, I'm filling in as the vice chair, because we don't have a chair right now. As vice chair, I'm beginning the meeting. We have, at 615, an item where we have to select the chair and the chair and the chair and the liaisons. That's okay. I missed that. No worries. But thanks for asking. Okay. So, let me see. Do we have any public comment?
Trying to see if we have some attendees here. We should. There were some emails that came out today. Yes, we have a couple of public comments. I'll just start from the top of the list and go down. Okay. Bonnie Marion, I believe.
Yes. Hi, everyone. My name is Bonnie Marion. I live at 25 Hazelbrook Lane, and I sent in a letter today to the Board of Public Works, was also present at the Board of Health meeting yesterday that I think John was also at, but wanted to raise the concern about the dust conditions on Hazelbrook Lane and Lincoln Road. It's a dirt road, so we know we expect some level of dust, but over the last maybe two years or so, and even more so recently, we've noticed kind of finer dust, and it seems to be worse and kind of sticking the surfaces in a different way. And there's a concern that the material being used is maybe not appropriate for residential use. So we're requesting some assessment of the material being used, whether it meets applicable standards, and also perhaps looking at records of what has been used in the past and see if this lines up with that. So I know it was too late to get officially on the agenda for today, but I sent in this letter, and we've also, again, had discussions at the Board of Health meeting yesterday. And I think there's some other residents also here that would like to make public comment. Okay, sounds good. Yeah, I haven't had a chance to read anything that was sent in today, but, yeah, why don't we move on to the next person who'd like to make a comment?
Thank you. Do we have a name? I see someone that says iPhone with their hand raised. Yes, can you hear me? Yes. Hi, good evening. My name is Connor Davis. I live at 17 Hazelbrook Lane, just a few houses down from Bonnie, who just spoke. So just wanted to say a few things in a similar way. You know, we've lived here for a few years now, and Hazelbrook Lane just very often has poor road conditions. For those of you who don't know, it's in the northern part of town. It's an unpaved road, and the same goes for intersecting Lincoln Road as well. And, yes, just to speak to the road management, we've experienced the poor road management, I should say. It just seems that it kind of comes down to two main things, you know, improper drainage and a poor balance of surface and subsurface materials. So we experience the negative effects of both of those daily, as do, you know, drivers, walkers, bikers. And it just seems they need to be improved, you know, the drainage issue. Hazelbrook Lane has slope on it and runoff associated, you know, with rainstorms and precipitation. The road has no crown, no ditches, no effective drainage methods. We experience major pothole buildup, and I'd estimate the DPW resurfaces the road five to ten times a year. And just to speak to the materials on the road, it seems there's just an improper balance somewhere in there. When it's wet, the surface is very loose and soft, and when it's dry, it is excessively dusty, as Bonnie mentioned. So, you know, a few of us went to the Board of Health just because the dust has really been out of control seemingly in the last two-ish years or so. So, you know, Hazelbrook Lane has about 300 cars, I'd say, plus or minus, that travel it per day, going about 30 to 40 miles an hour. And from what we're led to believe, based on some research, you know, we've gained as residents, you know, some of the road material probably contains the chuminous asphalt dust and crystalline silica, both of which are major health hazards. So, I know there's been some discussions recently about amending the road with magnesium chloride, which is great, but I'm just cautiously optimistic it's only going to be a short-term benefit as the road is regraded and resurfaced too often. So, just hoping you all can, at some point, find a solution, you know, for this beautiful and scenic part of town. So, come and visit it. Yep. Great. Thank you. And we have one more person here with their hand up. Janet Haspel? Oh, two more.
I let that go on a little longer, just so we could hear you out. But let's try and keep it to two minutes, if we can. Okay. Can you hear me? Yes. Oh, hi. Thank you for listening to this. We are, my husband and I have lived on the road since 1994, so we've seen a lot of different products used to surface the road. What Connor said is true. None of them seem to hold up for very long. They're very weather dependent. In terms of how long they hold up. And because there's areas where the water flows downwards, those areas tend to take a bigger hit. So, you know, I look at it as a two-step thing. It's a more urgent issue to address what's on the road right now. And that's why we started with the Board of Health to try to figure out, you know, is this a hazardous material that was potentially used this time to surface the road? And it's possible. It's been used, you know, each time that there's something that's put down, it's been slightly different, in my opinion, over the 30 years. And so, you know, what I said last night at the meeting is it's kind of a hybrid thing because I'd also like to see, can we come up with a plan moving forward that may have, you know, sort of be multi-stepped, you know, in terms of traffic mitigation, possibly figuring out the schedule for when the road is resurfaced. How do we do that properly? How do we grade the road properly so that we're not guessing anymore? We've kind of just all been sitting back, and maybe we shouldn't have for so long. But we've kind of now reached the point because of the dust issue to address it both from the health point of view, but also what's the best plan for the town moving forward in terms of maintaining this road? Thank you. Sounds good. Great. Thank you. I'm sorry, what was your location? I think you were on Hazelbrook. 33 Hazelbrook. Okay, great.
Thank you. And I think we had one more.
Hello, can you hear me? Yes. Hello, my name is Susan Dewey. I'm at 7 Hazelbrook Road, so just down the street from all my neighbors.
We've only lived, actually lived here in Wayland a few years. However, the house that we're living in has been in my husband's family for 60 years. He grew up here. He's unfortunately not able to be here tonight. But the conditions have changed over the last five or so. There's always been potholes, and we absolutely love the dirt road. You know, we can put up with the potholes. However, about five years ago, you stopped grading using the grater on the road, which is, however you were doing it. It's, I don't know, the potholes come immediately back after you've filled them in. However, two weeks ago, you did get out the grater, and we've had a couple of rainstorms, and then actually the potholes have not materialized. But the dust continues for about two years now. Those huge swarms of dust, if you come on a dry day, and we have video as well of just these plumes of dust, and that never happened in the past. So I just echo the concerns. I thank you for maintaining the road, you know, every few months or so. But we, the material has changed. So thank you. Thank you. And then we have iPhone again, and I'm not sure if that was just, we didn't, the hand didn't go down, if that's the same person.
Okay. All right. With that, we will conclude public comment.
Well, 615, welcome new board member. We already did that, so we're ahead of schedule. Selection of board officers and liaisons. But at this point, we have a discussion on who might, I think, I think we need to remove some of the folks that we added for the, into the presenter mode. I think we need to pull them back.
Oh, sorry, I disrupted you. Yeah.
I'm sorry, Tom, you mentioned we have a moderator here, or? Yeah, Abby is on. Abby. Abby, okay. Who needs to be promoted? No, no, no. Everyone's been promoted. We need to unpromote. Unpromote. All right. They should be all unpromoted at this point. Yep. Looks like it. Thank you. Perfect. Thank you. All right. So, I know that we're still meeting Judy, and I think we should have all the board members here when we determine who's going to take on the chair role and the vice chair role. So, let's put that on for a little bit until we see if she joins. And we'll move on to town meeting debrief. And on this topic, I don't know if you had anything prepared, Tom. You know, my comments are everything went very well. Thanks to the staff, the current board members, the former board members, our engineers, and everyone who participated in helping prep for town meeting. And things went very well with our primary article, the water article that was approved with a 95% approval. So, that was a good result because we need to move forward with that, with the construction of the Happy Hollow infrastructure and wells and treatment plant, as well as the permanent or long-term connection to MWRA. So, I think that all went very well. Did you have anything else in mind, Tom, to discuss here? I could just say ditto to your remarks. You know, that old adage, usually it applies to a family, but, you know, it takes a village. You know, so it did. It was this board, you know, a number of other boards, committees, the staff, board members, and the engineers. Yeah, so it really, everybody came together, and we put together, you know, an accurate and solid message. And thankfully, that was understood and was, you know, overwhelmingly, you know, supported, which was nice to see. So, we're prepared to advance the project on schedule, and we meet with the MWRA and the engineers regularly, at least once, twice a week. And we are on schedule, and all things are, all cylinders are firing at this point. But, great. Yeah. Any other comments? Ed, your letter was great. Mike, your support was great, and getting the message out to the groups in town.
Mike, your presentation was great, up at the microphone. Well done. Thank you. Thank you. I practiced my reading. I think the public forum was a big success. Even though it was kind of lightly attended, I think all the faces that were at the public forum were at town meeting, and they were all active at the microphones and for other articles. But they weren't at the microphones for our articles. So, I think it was a great success. Very good point. Yeah.
Okay. Well, with that, we can move on to, and Mike Spelman, I know that you have another engagement. You might have to leave a little bit early. If there's anything that you want us to get to prior, that's important for you to talk about prior to leaving, and it's on our agenda. Please let me know. We can move that up. Well, looking forward in the agenda, I don't see anything that needs to be moved forward. Thank you, though. Great. Water abatement. So, we have a water abatement that we'll need to take on next and review. Tom, do you want to present that? I can. I mean, I'm happy to do that. I was expecting the resident to be with us, and I don't see him on the panelist. And I guess I would ask, I think the folks that are in the attendees are, you know, from Hazelbrook. So, I don't see that person attending, which is surprising. We worked very closely a number of times with this individual to put all of this information together. I mean, I'm not sure whether the board is... Yeah, we'll come back to that if they show up. I think it'd be best if they're here when we review. And if they're not here or something's come up, we can move this to our next meeting, I believe.
Unless there's some urgency, Tom. No, it's just, I mean, it is a sizable. The value is sizable. It's $15,000, maybe even exceeds $16,000. So, I know, obviously, the property owner is concerned about that. If we do, you know, indeed, moving it to the June meeting, I can certainly, you know, remove, freeze any interest. They wouldn't be penalized for, you know, not making payment, that type of stuff. Sounds good. Yeah. Yeah. Okay.
Transfer station. Renewal outreach. I think in our packet we had... Yeah, the message that went out. Yeah, the message that went out. I don't believe we receive... We're transfer station members, and I'm not sure we received that message. Well, that's concerning.
Yeah. So, we just want to check to see if, you know, if we have a full list of contact information and if things didn't get jammed up and not maybe go through. Yeah. I mean, the only thing I can think of is that, you know, we did go through IT to, you know, to send that message through Sportsman. And, you know, so perhaps something didn't occur. You know, we've been getting some feedback from some folks. So, I know that some folks, you know, some households got it. But I will, I'll research why you guys didn't get it. Yeah, and if it went through Sportsman, maybe it got caught up in some spam filters, too. So, I'll check that, too, on our end. Okay. But we, if that's the case, we might want to find an avenue maybe directly through the town. Yep, yep. Okay.
Yeah, making a note of that. Okay.
And then, anything else about renewal outreach? Any other ideas or thoughts folks have in terms of reaching out to the existing members to say, hey, come on and sign up. It's a new year. We'd like to get ahead of the renewals. In the past, we really haven't had a campaign for renewal other than signs at the station. And we would typically see sticker sales come in in July after the new year has begun, when people show up for the first time after the fiscal year has begun, into August, and sometimes later. Isn't that the case, Tom? We actually see a fair amount of purchases in June. In June. Yeah. Okay. Because that's always caused some consternation with accounting because we receive the income in this fiscal year, but it's intended to be a service that we provide in the following fiscal year. So, I think we generally get maybe $60,000 or $70,000 of revenue in June. People just want to get ahead of it. They're on top of their household items or whatever, and they get right in line or they get right online, in line, either way. So, we'll see. We'll be prepared to actually issue the stickers June 2nd. Marianne ordered those. So, those will be coming in if they're not already here. So, in the message that's in the packet, you saw that we wrote that, you know, they can get online now, purchase them, and then can come anytime after June 2nd to receive them. We'll take off the old sticker, put the new one on, on their windshield. And then, like you said, it carries out. A lot of folks, you know, whether they've got kids in school and they're busy at the end of the school year and then they go away for the summer, the purchase is really, you know, a pretty steady July, August, September, October. They dwindle. And then we'll have a resurgence of folks that, for whatever reason, in January, want to get on board for the half year, you know, which is a prorated charge. So, we'll see a little bit of activity in January. But that's generally how you'll see sales, the sales pattern. Great.
Any questions on that? Any ideas, thoughts?
So, the electronic notifications, that's new this year. And we're hopeful that it will bring folks in early and we'll have a better idea of what we'll have for the year in terms of membership. I would think so. I renewed, it hit my inbox and I renewed that evening. Oh, good. So, it could make things easier. So, I expect we'll see an uptick. Great.
That's good information. And then, second, we talked about the idea that the transfer station has been struggling as of late and some concerns that maybe operating as an enterprise fund is not something that is sustainable long-term. As we lose members, prices go up, we lose more members, and the cycle continues. George Yuvigis, who we want to thank, he just ended his last term, had put together a draft letter. I think what we'll have to do, Tom, is there's been a lot going on with all the other article items. But I think what we'll have to do is include that in the packet for next meeting and we'll discuss it. We had discussed, John, for your information, we discussed sending a letter to the select board suggesting that this be moved back to a revolving fund. Simply because an enterprise fund is supposed to be self-sustaining. And right now, it's looking unlikely that we can self-sustain without support.
Yeah, I mean, I can share that letter. It was intended to be in the packet. It did not make it into the packet. I can share it now. It's a one-pager, but if you want me to do that? Yeah, sure. If you can do that, we can take a look quick. Yeah.
Can everybody see that? Yes. Yeah, so this is the letter that you were referencing.
So I think what we'll do is we'll include it in the packet for next meeting. That way you'll have a chance to review and provide any comments that you might have so that we can clean it up and vote on it and send it along. Yep. Can do. Sounds good.
Take it down. Yeah, thank you. Yep. And it does look like we have Julie Juicedy here. Yeah, so I think that is probably the Jeffrey Road resident using Julie's invite or whatever that tends to happen. So, yep. Okay. I'm not muted anymore. I might sporgish that here. And I'm not, Julie. Yeah. Great. So we can move back to the earlier topic for the water abatement, if you'd like to go ahead at this point. No, that'd be great. Great. Do you want me to talk or ask questions or how do you want to do it? Yeah, I think everything is redacted in the information we have, Tom, right? Yeah, that's correct. Yeah. We're just, you know, commenting. So I'm not sure who we're talking with. Yeah, so why don't you introduce yourself, give us your name, your address, and then just provide, I know it's in writing, the board members have it in the packet. But just provide an overview of, you know, how you discovered you had a leak and what you've done thus far to change that and what your request is. Okay. So I'm a sporgish that I'm owner of Tona One Jeffrey Road. And in November, sort of right where, you know, they had a lot of discharge when the hydrant were flushed. So there were all kinds of weird things going on in the house. And we had a plumber in, we had a heating company in a number of times. And people were guessing what the problem was. The boiler is an old boiler. We changed the mixing valve. But it was really a leak in the slab. There was a copper line or two of them going into the slab. And that's what the leak happened. There was no water around the house. There was no water in the house and damage. There were no clue other than the water meter going very quickly.
And that was not, the solution was that we got a call from the water department and said, hey, you're using a lot of water. Let's send someone out. And he, I can't remember his name, took a look and said, yeah, there's no sign of water anywhere. But he noticed that and then had the plumber come in and replace a couple of shutoff valves that were corroded. And so then we could shut off the water on two thirds of the house, including kitchen and laundry. And then everything, the system worked then. So the boiler was fine, hot shower again. I mean, all winter I basically showered in the, at the gym. And I've been carrying water from a bathroom into the kitchen, to the dishes. And so my water usage from the living was just very sparse. And I'm alone in the house. I'm going through a divorce. So as of May last year, I'm alone in the house. And this set the whole progress of emptying the house big time, because I was trying to keep the house safe, the extreme winter we had. So I had panels off the bathtubs and fans and running the fireplace 24-7 to just keep it, to damage as little as possible. And we had a water leak company coming in, and they said, you don't really want to fix the pipes in the slab, because if they're old, you're just going to get another break later on. And the plumber said, no, we don't know how to do it. But I was up in the ceiling. It's a drop ceiling in the lower floor with a bore scope and so forth, and said, I think there is a chase. And the water lines have now been replaced with packs in the ceiling. It hasn't been patched up or anything, but the whole house is functioning, which is delightful. Great. Slowly remember what it is to empty a dishwasher, have water coming in the kitchen faucet, let it turn it on. They're very, it's interesting how quickly you forget how coming.
I'm sorry to hear all that. But it could have been much worse. The house could have frozen, it could have tons of damage, but it's a huge water bill. It caused a lot of stress. I'm a sensitive person, so I don't take that lightly. But I was told that it's an abatement process, and that's why I'm here today. Yeah, and this is what it's for, those items. That you're unaware of happening, and they add up quickly. Yep, go ahead. The roughly $1,400 water bill that happened sort of right when the leak started happening, that was the first water bill I paid during the marriage. My wife paid all the water bill. So I was aware that that was already elevated, and I was under a lot of stress, and it's not as smooth as it was at all. So going on. So in hindsight, I know there's plans to have alarms on water meters instead of, yeah, this looks like a great idea. So that's the situation. Any questions? No, so just for, we have a new member here. So typically, abatements are for these types of situations where there are leaks that are undetected and result in a very, very high, well, sometimes very high, sometimes very, very high water bill. And so the abatement process is there to help owners out in those types of situations where they've shown that they've identified the issue, they've shown a bill that the issue has been resolved. And typically, what we do is we look at the three prior same season, because we used to bill twice a year, one would include the summer months, which usually had a higher water rate, and one would include the winter months, which usually had a lower water rate. So we'd use the same time period for the prior three normal years to get an average and abate to that amount. So that's just a brief summary, and we do have the repair bill here from Rodenheiser, and we have the information that's included in the packet includes the history of the water usage here so that we can use that to calculate. And a few years back, and a few years back, we authorized DPW director and staff to handle abatements under $5,000. This one has exceeded that, and that's why it's before us tonight.
What was the, can I ask what the bill was when he was notified? It was a little more than $15,000. So that was the first notification that you had a leak? That's when the water department called and said, your water usage is higher than, they didn't even say how much. The person to call, it was just saying, it's large. Let's send someone out. I understand.
And so the three-year process sounds great. In addition to that. Yeah, let me just, I was just trying to explain that for our new board member. And for you as well. But what I wanted to get to next was, Tom, can you give us your evaluation? Yeah, so, you know, what this homeowner is, you know, described is what we understand it to be as well. What we actually did, since it looked like it went over two billing periods, we actually used, it's the same philosophy. We used actually, you know, six, went back three years and used both the winter and the summer. In essence, just, you know, three more data points, average those. And that's why you see the 1900. So in that, what I call the yellow sheet, which is in the packet, you'll see that, you know, the abatement, in essence, is 14,869.08. And, you know, and the bill then is now down, you know, where he typically would have been as a single person in that home. During the three years, I'd have been, until May last year, it was two people in the house. But I am just grateful for the baking process, even if it's the normal one for three years. So, yeah, and so in this case, what we do is we take the usage and then apply it to the rates, the current rates. And do you want to walk through that, Tom, quickly? Yeah, yes. So, you know, if folks want to take a look at the actual, the yellow sheet, it'll show in the middle of the page, new build, water use. And it actually shows the breakdown amongst the different tiers. And it shows the rate. And then it also shows, you know, what the, you know, what that charge would wind up being. So it's a combination now of the water use and then the 7.5% for the PFAS remediation charge. And then there's the base charge. So all of those things, you know, combined, in essence, yields what you see at the bottom. So we would be abating just shy of $15,000 with a bill amount of $166.82, which is typical of what he would. So that includes the, so the $1,440 or so that was paid, is that part of that $1,600 or? Yes. Yeah. Because we actually, we factored that in as well. Okay. So I owe roughly $200, $300. I didn't do that in my head, but the order of magnitude. $270.17 is what I see on the form. That's a big difference in terms of stress, I would say. So right now we're evaluating this and we'll discuss as a board. Do we have any questions?
How long of a time period was this going on? It started in November and we were, I mean, I had heat issues. I thought everyone thought it was the boiler and couldn't keep the hot water tank hot. But so I was dropping hot water under the slab. And we're talking about the cold water is an inch pipe and the hot water was three quarter and there was a V-circ line that was half inch. So it was, it didn't start full force, but over some time it just started to leak a lot of water. But still no sign outside or inside that there was a leak other than the water meter. What's your heating source? Oil. So I have a very high oil. Were you going through extensive amounts of oil to heat up this water? Yes. So that is being dealt with in a different way. No abatement process, but it, it, one sign was, I mean, again, we thought it was the boiler because the automatic refill of oil has been working great. We moved in here in 2001 and, and same company. And suddenly I was starting running out of oil in November. So everyone was looking at the boiler because there were no other visual sign. And that's where we replaced that mixing valve for the radiant heat.
So, and everyone was very confused. I mean, I said a record number of times I had the oil company or service company in here to, to look at the boiler and figure out what's going on. And, and the plumber and eventually it was figured out.
And there was, there was no, there was no signs that there were any problems in your foundation or anything like that? No, the house looks completely fine.
So you said the water, the DPW came out and didn't notice any water around the, around the structure either. Yeah. I have a primitive drain around the foundation. So it, it, it, the house was built to shed a lot of water. I guess it worked. Yeah, yeah, it did. So I, as a acting chair for the moment, until we, until we make that determination, I, I cannot make a motion, but I can propose a motion that someone can move. Um, and so I would make a motion to abate using the average of the past six prior periods, waiving all interest in fees for the calculations, um, provided in the water abatement form, uh, in our packet, uh, dated. Do we have a date on that? Uh, there should be a date. I know I date it when I sign it. This one doesn't look to be signed. So, yeah, no, it's, it's, it's, it's signed by staff. Um, so I, I would sign this on behalf of the board in the morning. Yeah. So I don't see a date on that. Yes. Um, sorry, sorry, I'm late. Um, question I have, I thought we were using a different calculation because we're using emergency connection with MWRA. Is that going to be a factor in here? Um, I think this has happened. I mean, you can propose something along those lines. To me, this is, um, this has happened over quite a period of time, um, likely before and partially during, uh, not, uh, partially during, uh, the use of MWRA water. Uh, but Tom, can you speak to that? Yeah, I think you're, you know, we, we don't have, you know, an exact way to figure that out, but I think your philosophy that is, you know, it was a long duration leak. Part of that time frame was when the emergency connection was off and part of it when it was likely on. So it's, it's really hard to say how much the proportion would be.
And then in terms of history, this is just the classic case for why there are abatements in place. Um, the undetectable leak, you don't realize it's happening until you get the water bill. Um, and yeah, uh, we, we, we are happy. We're having our kitchen ceiling fixed from ice dams. And when they opened it up, we found a leak. Ah, so we'll be hearing from you soon. Yeah.
Yeah. We did try to do an insurance claim, but since there's no damage to the house. Uh, but we did try to sort of cover some of this cost of the bill through an insurance company to, to, uh, lessen the cost potential for an abatement from the town, but there has to be damage to the house and there's none.
So I, I, I can read it again. Um, but unless you want to change, uh, or make an amendment, Judy, uh, read what we have and then. Okay. Okay. Motion to abate using the average of the past six prior periods, waiving all interest and fees for the calculations and the water abatement form in our packet.
Okay. No, that's fine. I mean, I think there'll be a lot more work for Tom to figure out, like, when did we turn on the MWRI water? When do we turn it off?
But it's a good point. We're going to have to try and figure out how we adjust our calculations going ahead.
Okay. So if, if folks are fine with that, if someone can move that, um, by saying so moved, um, so moved, um, thank you. Do we have a second? Second. Thank you. Mike, uh, Spelman moved. Judy seconded, um, all in favor, um, Judy. Aye.
Mike Spelman. Yes. Ed. Yes. Okay. Thank you, John Storer. Yes. And I'll, I'm also in favor. Yes. So it passes and, um, good luck. Thank you. Sure. Yeah. You can, uh, you can work with. But it's, is minor. And thank you so much for having this process and reducing stress in my life at this point. You're welcome. Uh, yeah. Thanks folks. All right. Thank you. So let's, let's, um, move on, uh, Judy. We talked, we moved ahead to the, I don't know if you, when you joined, um, we moved along to talk about the renewal outreach for the transfer station and we'll come back to the revolving fund consideration. We'll put that in the packet, the letter, so you can review that in advance next meeting. Okay. Thank you. And, uh, well, we did the debrief, um, town meeting and we welcomed John Storer.
Welcome John. Thank you. Uh, and I think we can move back to, um, selection of board officers and liaisons. Uh, we skipped over that until you were here until we had a full contingent. Um, so does anyone have a motion for board members and liaisons? I think for liaisons, we just have CPC and we have the, uh, 20 South, uh, landfill has been, um, dissolved now that they've finished their work. Um, so I think the only, uh, great footwork, I can keep the CPC unless somebody else wants it. I don't, I don't mind. Okay. So I'll make a motion that, uh, Judy Ling, uh, continue to be our liaison for CPC, uh, from the board of public works, uh, actually I'll move that, uh, if someone wants to. Second it. Um, someone, if someone would move that and then we can second it. Um, yes, so move. Thank you. Second. Thank you. All in favor. Um, I, uh, great. Ed, I, John. I, Mike. I, Judy. I, Wiggebauer. I, and now we come to, um, chair and vice chair. Do we have a motion? Um, I had a motion that Mike Wiggebauer be moved to chair. So move.
Uh, and Judy seconded. Uh, second. And, um, do we want to also do the vice chair at the same time?
Uh, we don't have to, we can. Okay. So let's, uh, roll call vote. John. Hi. Uh, Mike. Mike Spelman.
Oh, I can't hear you, Mike.
Is he on mute? No.
I'm having audio issues here. I need to switch. Oh, there we go. Uh, so your vote there, right?
Yes. Okay. And, uh, Ed. Yes. Judy. Yes. And Mike. Yes. Okay. So we have a chair. We have a liaison. We need a vice chair. I may come work into, uh, nominate Michael be vice chair. I think Judy should be vice chair. No. That's what I said. I think Judy, I don't, I, you have, I don't have time. Not that any of us have a significant amount of time, but. I, I, I, I kind of had a little chat with Mike Wegerbauer about this. Uh, I'm, I'm already chairing something else. So I really appreciate not having to vice chair this. Okay. Um, but I would suggest. Ed. Go ahead. Okay.
Ed, are you okay with that?
He's not sure either. Okay.
All right. You can put my name on there as vice chair, but you better not be absent, Mike. Okay.
Okay. Thank you, Mike Spelman. Yes. Um, so, uh, do we have a second? Judy made the motion. Second. I'm sorry. A second or two? Who made the motion? Yeah. Um, did you, you made that motion, Judy? Is that right? I actually made the motion for Ed, but he doesn't want to. So I'll make the motion for Michael Spelman to be vice chair. Actually, I'm sorry. Ed, Ed made that motion for Michael Spelman. Yes. Yes. He started and then I interrupted him. Yeah. You, yeah. You sidetracked him, derailed him. So, uh, okay. And do we have a second? Judy, you seconded it. Okay. Great. All right. All in favor, uh, Judy. Yes. Uh, Ed. Yeah. John. Yes. Mike. No.
Yes. I saw that. Okay. Yes. Okay. Young gentleman. You will be holding the job. You got better. They're old men like me. A youngster like you.
Okay. Great. All right. So we, we've taken care of that topic and that brings us to water enterprise financials. Matt Abrahams, uh, he did send out, uh, uh, an initial spreadsheet for us to begin this, um, conversation, um, this is an initial conversation. We're not settling anything tonight. Um, part of the process is we have to have an open, uh, public hearing to hear input from the public, uh, uh, after which we would vote new rates. So this is kind of an overview tonight, um, to discuss the financial model as well as our, our typical retained earnings targets. Um, and with that, uh, I'll turn it over to Tom, to you and, and to Matt.
Yeah, certainly. Um, is Matt on with my screen? There he is. He got him. Okay. Very good. Yeah. So, uh, John Stora, this is, uh, Matt Abrahams, uh, with the Abrahams group. Um, his father, Mark, uh, had founded this, uh, this company has been used, uh, in Wayland for probably, I guess I can almost say decades at this point, but, uh, um, yeah. So, uh, Matt, if you want to share your screen and bring that model up, and I know the tab that you were going to go through and, uh, and walk the board through, uh, what we've got thus far for FY26 kind of status and the impact, um, that we're expecting on FY27. And it is an interactive model. So you can actually, you know, as we make suggestions and toy with, uh, with different percentages for different tiers and, um, and you can see the impact that it has on revenue and retained earnings levels and all of that. So it, it is a, it is an interactive model, which is nice. Uh, John, did you, did you receive a copy? I just, I'm not sure if you were yet on the distribution list. So I am not sure if anybody aside from you and I, Mike received this. Oh, okay. Yeah. So I, I think that this will likely be new to everybody tonight. I think everybody else knows the format where they've seen the format, uh, whereby this will be brand new to John, but I, uh, the actual, the figures, the numbers will be first seen by the board tonight. Okay. So we'll, we'll get this out to everyone so they can look at it at the, at their leisure and, you know, um, let us know what questions they have. But tonight, as Matt goes through this, if you have a question, please jump in and, uh, ask because it is complicated. It's complex. All right. Good evening, everyone. Uh, this is Matt Abrahams of the Abrahams group. Um, I unfortunately have a complicating factor right now because I lost power at my home with the storm that just rolled through here. Okay. Um, so I'm able to join via my phone, but I'm not able to join via my computer at this time. So I'm hopeful that someone is able to share the model and I can do the walking through that way. And I apologize for the inconvenience. I think I can do that. Um, except it's asking me to sign into Microsoft for some reason. Um, I am working on doing it myself here. Let's see. Latest water model.
Okay. I think I've, I think I've got it. You got it. Okay. Um, yeah.
Yep. That looks familiar. Okay. Good job.
Okay. So, um, I think it makes sense to just kind of go line by line. Um, but I will yield to you, Mr. Chairman, if you want to focus on certain things, I guess, as we go about this, what's your general approach here? Just get into all the details. I think what's interesting is just, uh, look at the actuals of the budget first actuals just so you, uh, yeah, if we can just walk through and show the revenue and the expenses. Okay. Um, and are the expenses in this? Yep. Okay. Yep. All right. All right. Yeah. Great. Sure. So we have a few years of actuals there. You can see it going across the top. So, so starting in column E, it looks that E. Yeah. E you got five years, I believe, worth of actuals, which is nice. Actually have more. Although we have more. Yeah. I'm not sure that the revenues and the expenses go back that far. It might just be the usage. So you can kind of look at it. Okay. So if you were to go downward just a little bit, maybe about halfway, about halfway down the sheet where you get to the revenue area, I'm guessing you don't have numbers in that. No, we don't. Uh, until fiscal year 20. Okay. So we have 20 through 25 is still, that's a good amount. You got six years of actuals, um, from both, uh, usage from a revenue, from an expense standpoint. Um, we have projected 26 in the column that has the oranges there. That's the current fiscal year. It's not yet completed, but we're getting close to the end of FY 26. So with some certainty, we can project forward to where we think that is. Now, we have a few complicating factors related to that. Um, number one being that the town has transitioned this year to quarterly billing, um, and therefore the bills that have gone out do not necessarily reflect what the timing of bills will be, um, over the next fiscal year, for example, once you get into 27 and you're fully on quarterly billing. So that's made projecting 27 more complicated than usual. We're pretty confident on the dollars part. The usage part is more tricky. And we're going to get into that a little bit more as we move forward with our discussions. Um, I am working with town staff regularly to try and make sure we're getting as comfortable as possible on the 26 projections, especially on the revenue side. Again, it's tricky, but we have a plan in place, um, over the next, maybe two weeks or so, we should get a little bit more dialed in with those numbers. Um, from 26, roughly 26. Yeah, Matt, if I can just say this, so we build by tiers, uh, and we have four tiers, uh, with increasing rates to encourage, um, conservation, which is part of our permit. Um, and this is all water build. And, and when you say usage, that's what you're referring to. Yep. Consumption by tier. Yep. Perfect. Yeah. Usage. I use usage and consumption interchangeably. Sounds good. Yep. So the top section that's being highlighted right now is, um, what we have for usage or consumption by tier for every user in town, other than river's edge. And we segregated river's edge in this model, also known as Alta, I believe. Um, we segregated it because at the time that we first started working together on this, which was a few years ago, we didn't, we wanted to make sure we were including projections related to, um, that property's usage. Cause it was kind of an important factor to account that, to account for that. And we just haven't updated the model now that we work, you know, they're probably a regular user at this point. Um, but we still have it, we still have it segregated. So that's why it's segregated like that. And then if you go down one additional section, that's where the, the two sections are totaled up starting on row 20. It looks like that's your total usage per tier. Um, and that's what we use to calculate anticipated revenue, um, for your consumption. We do it by tier. It's a different rate per tier. So it's necessary to get at the tier level from consumption for consumption. Um, so if you go down one additional section, that's where we get into what rate changes have historically taken place in the recent past. Um, you can see that starting in the 20 column and there were a few cases where the rate increases were not uniform. And what I mean by that is they were not the same across each of the tiers. Um, and that was a decision made by this board, um, for, uh, whatever reasons the board thought were best at the time. I think every year has its own discussion. So, um, whatever was being discussed at that time led to those decisions. But you can see the differences there starting in FY23 is the first year we see the, the percentage tied to the PFAS surcharge, which is on the next row down that was initially set at 6.21% and has since been increased to 7.5% starting in FY25. See how it increased there. What that number represents. And Tom, I might lean on you for this one. That's, that is an automatic surcharge. That percentage of what the user charges are on a bill. Correct. So whatever, whatever a user is paying for their water usage, the PFAS surcharge is an additional amount in that percentage.
And the board has discussed that in the past and decided to increase it in FY25, as you see there. Yeah. And then how this, how this differs, these are percent increases of the existing rates. This is an actual percent. So it's not a percent increase of prior rates. It's just a percent that we've, that we've voted on. Yes. That's a, that's a good point that it is. It does act a little bit differently in this model. Um, the next row down is the base fee that is charged per bill. And actually, that's the per year amount. That's a per year. It's $15 per quarter now. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Tom. That's a per year amount. Um, and that doesn't look like it's changed in some time. Um, then the next section are the actual rates. So, um, based on the rate changes, you see how the rates increase over time. This board decided not to change rates for FY26. That's why the rates show the same and FY25 and FY26. And then the next row down is your revenues. That's total revenue. There are items in my analysis. That's on a different tab that, uh, feed into that total. So that's not just user charges. It's, it's user charges. It's the PFAS surcharge. It's the base fee. It's liens. It's penalties and interest. Um, it's interest income. So the money that you have in retained earnings earns interest, just like a savings account would. Um, there might be one or two other items in there. If you want to get into the details of that, we can. Um, so anything that's in an actual column, um, is revenue that is, was actually received in that fiscal year. The projected is what we are currently projecting for FY26. And I would say that that number is slightly on the low side because, um, of the timing of collections. We're hoping to get a little bit more information. Um, I think that one of the bill runs that is, the due date is coming to this week. Uh, we need to, um, get a little bit more comfortable with that amount. So I think that number that you have highlighted there, Mr. Chairman, is probably going to increase just a little bit. Um, the next time you see this. Great. All right. So keep that in mind. And then as we continue to go downward, we get into the expense area. Um, the first row is your operating expense. X expenses. So that would be things like salaries, um, expenses, uh, the, anything in the regular budget that isn't salaries would be included on that row. Um, capital is, um, that row hasn't, um, nothing in 25, nothing in 26. That's what we call a capital outlay. So if the town were to authorize a capital purchase, um, out of retained earnings, you would see it on that row. And the town, I believe, has not done that for a few years now. That's why you see $0. The next row down is existing debt service. That is debt that is currently on your books. Um, not debt that's coming or for future projects. That is what has already been authorized and already been borrowed. And you can see right there that that number jumps up in 27. That's a pretty sizable jump from your current budget to what, um, has already been borrowed and will be paid back in FY 27. That was based on recent authorizations, the town, the town, um, that was, that were authorized. And that none of that has to do with the dual source option. That is all other stuff. Um, maybe Tom can speak to it. If you're curious, I think there might be a tank in there. The MW design stuff is in there. And also a, uh, the Reeves Hill booster station. Okay. Thank you, Tom. Yep. Um, but the, the other bigger things, especially the things that, um, were authorized recently for the MWA connection is not in that number. So that's where you see it coming down a little bit further. The next row of dollars where it says dual source, that is what's anticipated for the $38.6 million borrowing. Um, that is set to take place over the next few years. We anticipate that debt hitting, uh, no, so Mr. Chairman, not on that row. You got to go down a few more rows. Yeah. Give me a second. The, uh, there's something blocking that part of the sheet on my screen.
Zoom.
Okay. So, so where do you want me to go? Yep. So one more row down where it says dual source.
Dual source. Oh, down here. I see. Yeah. Okay. So that right there is what, based on information from the finance director, the timing of the $38.6 million borrowing. We believe that that's going to be your first year of repayment on that. And that is FY29. So that is debt that is not currently on your books. So if you go up three rows, that number does not include the $2.3 million. The 2.3 is in addition to that.
Okay. And then the next row, which is other, is anything else that's in your capital plan. None of that's been authorized yet. That's just, um, anticipated funding of the capital plan. So we've projected debt related to that.
Sounds good. All right. And then the next row down is where it says MWA water purchased. That is what the MWRA will charge the town based on our current estimates. Um, as has been the plan all along, the town anticipates that it'll use, it'll draw from the MWRA once it's connected, assuming that connection keeps going forward. We'll draw 15% of its needed water with the rest of it coming from local sources. So that, that dollar amount right there represents the MWRA's charging of the town for that 15% of water. Great. And that becomes an, that becomes an annual expense at that point. Go ahead, Mr. Chairman. Uh, just a quick pause. Any questions so far? This is a lot of info. I know. I have a few. Okay. Let's, let's hit those. So if you go all the way back up, probably line three or something, um, you'll see that in FY26 projected, the tier one went from 15 million to over 17 million. Yeah. I can comment on that. Go ahead. Yeah. I just, it struck me as being a big jump. Yep. So that is representative of the quarterly billing transition. And if you actually, if you hire, if you hover over that cell, I think I say that this, this cannot be used because it doesn't represent a true year. It represents, it represents what will, what we think will be billed in FY26 because of the quarterly transition. And a big, there is a big bill that likely is going to go out at the end of June for one of your districts. I think it might be T it's either D2 or D3. Um, that is a large amount of that. And that is not revenue that will be seen in FY26. That's revenue that will be seen in FY27. But we do, as has been the case since we first worked on this model, those numbers represent what we build in that fiscal year. So I wanted to keep it accurate that that will be a bill that goes out this fiscal year. But again, I'm not recommending those numbers be used. And I actually, since I sent this out, Mr. Chairman, I do have numbers. If you wanted to try and represent what a true year looks like once you're on quarterly for the FY26 billings. I had that. Not tonight. Okay. I have that. Okay. Good. For next time when we start playing with the model, I think that will be good. Okay. And did Judy have more questions than that? Yes. Uh, unfortunately. No, that's okay. No, it's good. So when you go back down to the dual source and the borrowing, or payback, I should say, the 2.3 million on line 52. Right here. Column N. Yep. Yeah. So that 2.3 million, does that represent repaying the principal? Because we don't know what interest we would have, right? Yeah. So at this point, it's just an estimate. The town is not borrowed for this. But that does include interest. It does. Yeah. If you're interested in finding out what that interest rate is, I can try and get that for you. It's either 4, 4.5%, or 5%. But I can get you the actual, if you're interested in that. Again, well, it's just, it's not an actual. It's an estimate. But I can get you what the finance director provided, which came from the town of Wayland's financial advisor. So the financial advisor provided a debt schedule. I see. Yeah. So it's based off of what's on there. Okay. So it does include interest. Correct. Yeah. So if you go down to line 69, column J, the 208, 615. Yep.
That is the difference in revenue and expense, meaning we're short. Yeah. So again, it's just a projection at this point. But we think that 26 might be short. Yep. And one thing to keep in mind here, and Tom, I might ask that you speak on this in case they're not aware. But we are assuming that the contingency line will be fully spent and will be spent, it'll be over because of a few factors. I think one is related to short-term debt, maybe, and then the other one being the MWA emergency connection, the bill head that the town has received for that, and there's also anticipation that another one will be received. So your $200,000 contingency that the actual is going to be greater than that. It's going to be about $327,000, actually. Right. So when the rates were set, I actually can't remember if we assumed that $200,000 would be spent or not. It may not. We may have assumed that it wasn't going to be spent when the rates were set. I can't remember, to be honest. Yeah. We assumed it wouldn't be spent. Right. It's only there in case it's needed. And that's why we've typically funded it by retained earnings. Yeah. So we're looking at about, you said the projections may be a little bit low here.
On the revenue, yeah. Yeah. So we'll see where we end up, but it looks like it'll be about $950,000 to $1 million. Yeah. Okay. Okay.
Good, Judy? Should we move on? You can move on. Cool. All right. All good questions. Mike, John, Ed, any questions so far?
Judy skipped ahead. So, okay. Do you want to continue, Matt? Sure. So, actually, Mr. Chairman, if you look at that line one down from where your cursor is, where it says contingency, what's the number in the 26 column? Because I think that number does not equal what Tom just mentioned a moment ago. No, he said 327, so that's gone up. Yeah. And that could be because, Tom, that bill has not come in yet. Is that correct? That's right, yeah. So we've, right now, we currently have a bill and have paid a bill for 227, and I'm seeking, and that only paid for the water up until December 31st. So that emergency connection was active quite a bit this particular calendar year. So I'm expecting, and I'm just using an estimate of an additional $100,000, but I am aggressively trying to get that invoice because we've got to encumber those funds prior to June 30th. And I'm not, well, I won't get into it, but I am aggressively seeking that invoice so that we can make payment on that.
Sounds good. Yeah. Yes. So if that number goes up, so if that number goes up, then the deficit that's in orange will go up as well. But we also know that the revenue, we think the revenue is going to go up too. So perhaps they offset each other. We don't know at this point. But it's possible you end in deficit for 26 if, assuming the rest of the budget is fully spent. And, you know, we are working with Brian, preparing ourselves that our expenses will exceed our revenue and having the ability to use the fund balance to make that, make up that gap. So we're, we're not just sitting back watching this. We are preparing to be able to deal with it. Great.
Okay. So that's pretty much it. The next row down is the row that you're on now is total expenses. So the row right below that is a comparison between the revenues and the expenses. Yep. And you can see that once you get into the 27 area, that is a pretty, is a big deficit number there. And that has a lot to do with the fact that that new debt came on. Yep. On that, the row that's at the top of your screen right now. This one here. Yeah. The difference. Yeah. So 1.1 million additional in debt service. So, yeah. So we're looking at, we're going to have to figure out how to bridge the gap with a rate increase. And, Mr. Chairman, I want to point out one other thing before we, with some of the numbers. If you go back up to the top. Yeah. So what's in the FY27 column in the yellow there? Yeah. Those numbers are based off of the discussion that took place a year ago at this time when you, when the board was setting rates. Yes. The decision at the time was to use an average for recent fiscal years, as you can see by the formula there, plus an inflator of 6%. And the 6% was meant to, I believe, represent the perceived impact of the water. Yeah. The water meters. Yeah. So I'm curious, Tom's thoughts as well. But when I, when I was able to get at a usage that I think represents a true year, now that you're on quarterly, I wasn't seeing a 6%. It was just, it was more like a half percent or maybe 1%, but it wasn't, it wasn't 6%. And just keep in mind that those numbers where you currently are, those are still in there. So as the discussion moves forward, it'll be important to try and get comfortable with what to use. Yeah. So for John, typically what we did in the past was we used the average of prior years. And we skipped 2021 because it was an anomaly due to the pandemic. A lot more water was used that year. Um, and then last year or this year we put in new meters, um, and the, the guidance was that new meters track the amount of water flowing through, but much better. Um, and the expected increase was about 12% increase in, um, reporting water usage. Uh, so we used what we thought was a conservative number of 6% to project, uh, the, the increase due to the new meters. And what Matt's saying is we really haven't seen that yet. Okay. So, um, can, can you tell me where the, um, the equipment for the water treatment is shown that expense or how did that get funded?
Which water treatment, you mean PFAS remediation? Yeah. Um, I'll, let me go to Matt. Can you tell me which tab I should move to, to show the detail? Are you looking for your budget? This one, right. This one right here, detailed analysis baseline. I mean, that has, that has the expenses in my format that does, that doesn't necessarily match the budget. The budget is more detailed than that. Is that what you're looking for? I guess I would almost ask John, are you talking about the 38.6 million that was just approved at town meeting where that. So, you have existing equipment that was all purchased and set up. And, and I just was curious where that's shown on which year. In the expense budget. Yeah. Yeah. So it's leased. And so is this the right tab to show that, um, maybe, maybe go to the budget tab. So if you scroll on the bottom, where the tabs are, scroll to the right until you see 27 budget. Um, so that's leased. It's leased. And that monthly payment comes out of our professionals or, or contracted services line in the operating budget. So that will disappear in a couple of years. So, yeah, once we get the new connection and get the new treatment plant, that all will be dismantled and, uh, taken back by the vendor and the, the actual initial, um, installation of it. We had to, we had to build a pad. We had to build in piping, um, back in 2022, uh, there was, uh, actually funds appropriated specifically to get that program up and running. And, and now at this point in time, we had a little bit of money remaining from that initial 2022 appropriation. Uh, we just changed out, um, nearly all of the plastic pipe, um, schedule 80 plastic pipe with welded steel. So, uh, that initial appropriation has now been expended and the remaining funds, those expenses are in our operating budget. And we also carry, we also carry an additional $200,000 in that professional services. Um, it's anticipated that we're going to need to replace the resin that's in the two vessels. That resin has been operating beautifully. I'm going to knock on wood for almost nearly four years at this point. And, uh, so we've gotten a lot of mileage out of that, but it will need to be replaced. So we're carrying funds in that professional services line to pay for that replacement. I understand. This is the line item, Matt, correct? Yeah. It's now 710. Yes. Yeah. Yep. And you can actually see in the, in the comment section, it talks about resin replacement. So you're right, John, at some point, this will be reduced. I would, I would suspect 2029, this will be, uh, reduced. I mean, you'll find seven 50 a year ish. Uh, it's more than just PFAS remediation on this line, but yeah, I think we were carrying what around a year. Yeah. It's 12,500 a month to lease that. Um, and then the 200,000 that I have portion to play, to replace the resin, that'll, that'll come off. But we still have contractual services. So we have a line item for that. That's about a hundred thousand a year. Typically, if, if we didn't have. Oh, it would be higher than that. It would be, it would be hundreds of thousands. Yep.
Okay. Yep. Still, well, we, we, you know, I guess I could take a ballpark. We go from seven 10 in 27, you know, perhaps maybe down to 400 or something like that, uh, three 50, uh, and 29. Okay. So maybe not just looking at what it was prior. Yeah. You can see it's starting to, starting to creep up, um, you know, with, with the things that we've been doing. I mean, we can, we can talk a lot about, uh, you know, equipment repairs and maintenance and, um, was that, and I'm going to, in a, in a later topic tonight, I get a, I'm going to talk a little bit about, you know, FY26 status and you'll see that, uh, you know, with the equipment being aged and needing replacement repairs frequently that we're exceeding our budget on that line, that'll all, you know, uh, come back within line once the new equipment is up and running. So we'll be in a much better shape operationally than we are right now. Yeah. Can I just ask a quick question related to this? Is this related to a reduction in the budget once, once you're connected to the MWRN? Yes. Okay. So we have worked that, we have already worked that into here. I can show you that if you want to see it.
Um, if you go back. I'm not sure. Oh, no. Do we want to get into that detail now? I just wanted you to be aware of that. Um, we did check. All right. Where, where is it? We checked with Don Milad on this and he provided, um, a reduced, a change in the budget to use once connected. Um, okay. So if you were to go to, um, you're going to have to scroll to the right a little bit. Um, not, not on this tab. Sorry. It's a different tab. Mr. Chairman. I'm sorry. Which tab? It's, it's, it starts with it with Don. It actually has Don's name in it, I believe. So if you start moving to the right on these tabs, you should see it eventually.
Actually, I can look at it on my screen too.
No, you're headed left. You're headed left. Oh, more to the right? Yeah. More to the right. Yeah.
It's called Don's latest adjusted budget. I see it right there. There we go. There you go. You're going to go a little bit further. Oh. Yep. Old. Nope. Not that one. That was the one that I had in here before he provided the update, which is the first tab. Yep. Yep. So if you look, um, in the column, that's column, uh, L, it looks like where it says FY27 budget. Does that say adjusted? Yes. Yep. So anything in orange is a change and the dollar difference is on the, is just to the right of that. Okay. So when, when we get to 29 though, we're, that's, I think what John was asking about when we get our new, um, facility in place, we're going to eliminate the contractual services for the PFAS, the temporary PFAS remediation. So that, that contractual services should go down. And I think Tom was mentioning our equipment repairs and maintenance should go back down. Cause we'll have all new equipment. Um, so there should be some adjustments in future years. Right. Well, I, I, that was what, uh, we asked him, Don. So maybe this doesn't accurately reflect the truth. Well, this looks like it's just 27. That, that won't happen until 29. Yeah. So, right. But that was the request to, he, he, he looked at the current budget. So what I took was I then inflated these numbers to 29 or $30, whichever year I changed to them. So what's in the model is this inflated to the year that it happens.
Got it. Okay. Yeah. That, uh, that's, that's seven, 10 will come down dramatically. Okay. Tom, you want to talk to Don about that? Yeah, we can. I'll talk. Yep. Okay. Thank you. So, Mr. Chairman, we can get a more accurate, uh, reflection of what's, what's anticipated to happen into the model. Great. Um, I think that's a good start for an overview. Uh, we went through the revenues, the expenses, some future changes. Um, yeah. So if you go back to that, that, that, that tab we started on just one more comment for me, um, under the anticipation that board members might take this file and use it. To play around with the numbers a little bit, um, anything in yellow is an input. So, um, if you want to like, yep. So you could set the usage in the, in the area up top, um, where Mr. Chairman currently has it highlighted. That's where you would set the rate changes. So right in that area. Uh, yep. So if you want to increase rates by a certain percentage, yep, exactly. So that those changes right there will have an impact on what's below and you can just play around with that, um, look at different options. That's great.
Okay. Um, Tom, I know, uh, Matt said he has another version, so maybe, uh, you can work with him to get this out to everyone. And again, I don't know if John's yet on the board of public works list, but he does have a Wayland address. Yeah, no, I, uh, uh, I have his address. So I'll, I'll send this thing out either after the meetings tonight or first thing in the morning, this is what you're looking at as the version that, uh, that's the latest and greatest. Okay. Thank you. Great. Uh, and then very briefly, um, if you want to talk about the guidance that you've supplied us in the past regarding targets, um, and I, I can pull up, um, uh, this information here and just, just, uh, by way of history. Um, Matt's dad, Mark was, um, uh, was the person working with us initially on this rate model many, many moons ago. And I think what, 2010, 2009. Um, and so he, he's, um, referenced here and, um, yeah, Matt, if you, if you want to quickly go through kind of the targets, um, that we set for retained earnings and, and retained earnings is our rainy day fund. It's basically what do we want to have in reserves in case things go wrong? We don't, um, you know, the revenue doesn't come in as we expect. Uh, we have an emergency issue. Um, those types of things. Yep. So, um, when we talk about retained earnings targets, we, we say, we usually use a percentage as a target. And the percentage in this case is your retained earnings balance compared to your budget. So it's just simple math. Take the retainer's budget, uh, retainer's balance, divide it by your budget and you get the percentage. Um, we recommend anywhere from 10% to 25%. Um, when we work with the different communities on this, it usually ends up as a very local decision. Um, they, they sometimes ask for a recommendation. They sometimes have one in mind already. Um, but if they ask me, I'm saying between 10 and 25%. Um, and it really depends on that community. What's, what the answer is within the 10 to 25%. Um, if they have, um, if, if the infrastructure is up to date, doesn't need a lot of work, then 10% is, um, okay. Uh, it would be something they could probably focus on if the infrastructure was not as up to date and, um, the likelihood that there was an issue was higher. Then we would recommend more at the higher end of the range. Um, so now with the work that we do with, with, with communities, we set a target and we then work on rates to hit that target. And that's no different than what we've done in Whalen the last few years.
And for your, uh, reference, John, we've typically targeted about 20%. Um, we were above that last year. Our balance was, uh, about 25%, I think. Um, but we've typically targeted on the more conservative side simply because we have older infrastructure. And then if, if I might add a note, Mike. Yeah. So in September of last year, the select board implemented what they're calling their financial policies and procedures manual, something that they voted on. And it's a, it's 104 page document. It's got a lot of information in it, but there is, um, a section that talks about financial reserves and they actually, um, identify the three enterprise funds within public works, water, wastewater, and transfer station. And they have implemented this, this program whereby the retained earnings would be a minimum target of 25%. So I know that, you know, as, as our activities are, are, you know, kind of monitored over the coming months and months, um, there may be a desire to have our retained earnings target match what this select board recommendation is. So I throw it out there just, you know, if we want to have, uh, uh, you know, a smooth process, uh, considering this financial policy that they put forth would probably, you know, kind of grease the skids, so to speak. Yeah. And I think you're opening up a can of worms there because an enterprise fund, as I understand it, that we're supposed to manage this efficiently and independently. Um, so to support the town's efforts to build cash using water rates, um, that becomes a political issue. So they may have a desire to do that. So I think I understand your, your reason for, for mentioning it here. Um, but we have an expert financial water, financial guidance in, in, uh, the form of Matt. Um, and, um, so that's why I want to focus on it here. Very good.
Uh, I think that that covers it. There's a little more information here. Is there anything else you want to mention, Matt? No. Okay. Um, yeah, actually, Mr. Chairman, one, one other thing, sorry. So as the board starts thinking about rates for FY27, just know that when you look in the model, there are many years shown into the future as well. Um, so as you make decisions for 27, just, um, I advise to also consider what's coming in future years as well, and just make sure you have your eye on that too. Absolutely. Yeah. Yeah. We've got a lot of large jumps and, and expenses coming up from the debt side. Maia, you have a question? Yes. So given that we did not see a bump in billing using the new rate, uh, new meters, I should say, uh, the, the version that gets sent out, can that 1.06 be removed before it gets sent out? That's, that's in the yellow area that we can play with. So sure. I mean, I mean, I, I don't think that's a problem, but those yellow areas, those are inputs for us to play with, um, where we can use whatever years we want as an average, we can use 12%, 0%, any of those that's, those are, um, so this is simply a, a tool for us to look at it.
Sure. So, but, uh, realistically speaking, there was no bump. Is that, am I understanding that correctly? So I did, oh, yeah, sorry. Mr. Chairman, go ahead.
No, you go ahead. Um, and then I'll have a question. Okay. Um, so it's, it's, it's an analysis that I did and I just need the board to understand that trying to figure out the true consumption, um, for a year, like a, what a year would look like if you were already on quarterly for FY26, instead of being, instead of transitioning to it during that year has proven to be pretty tricky. So it's my best guess as to what it was just doing a lot of number crunching, but yes, what I, when I finally got the numbers, when I got comfortable with the numbers, it looked like a small bump only, um, less than 1% when the, when the board was anticipating a 6% bump when the rates were set last year, but those are, those are my numbers. Those are not the town's numbers.
Um, the question I had was when did we finish installing the meters, um, throughout the town tomorrow? Okay. Okay. We, we have, we have about 70 locations still remaining, but, uh, uh, we're nearly there, but we're, yeah, I mean, for all sakes and purposes, we're done, but we still have some, uh, locations that we're unable to get inside and, but, you know, so, you know, for, I think for the purpose of your question in trying to make a determination on water consumption, we're measuring it now with new meters aside from those handful. So I think, Judy, it's been a portion of this year that we've seen, um, uh, full, well, we won't see full usage yet, uh, since we have some meters installed still. So, so it's kind of hard to gauge what's happened this year. I'm fine with, uh, sending out the model with that, that 1.06 removed. Um, this is really just a working model for us to play with. Okay.
Do you want to just do that, Matt? Do you want to just, uh, if you don't mind when we, uh, are through tonight, just take that 1.06 off that calculation, resend it, and then I'll, uh, I'll send that out to the full board, uh, in the morning? That's fine. Great.
Well, I think that was a great overview. Thank you. Thank you, Matt. Um, uh, and we're almost on schedule. We're slightly ahead of schedule. So that will move over to the long-term water supply construction funding, Tom, the state revolving fund and the, um, grant that we apply. Yeah, sure. Sure. Great. And if, if Matt is bowing out, uh, thanks very much, Matt. I'll, uh, we'll talk over coming days. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Thanks, Matt. Good night. Yeah. So just to talk about, you know, the three headings that we have here, the state revolving fund, uh, I know that they're, uh, you know, once we learned that, uh, we were not getting the 0% interest loan for the project. Um, there was a fair amount of research done by others that, you know, was trying to identify the reasons why we did not succeed. And I think there's a number of them, but bottom line is that we are going to need to, uh, seek a conventional borrow, um, this summer through the finance department, through Brian Keveney. That does not mean that we cannot seek, um, an SRF loan in this next, uh, funding period, which, you know, starts in July. Um, and the whole process starts again, the SRF group, um, it's the director of the water investment program division, uh, has offered to sit with us to, uh, to speak with us about, you know, how we might, uh, reformat our request, our, you know, project evaluation form. It's a PEF that we submit by the end of July. So we will certainly take them up on their offer. Um, but simultaneously we will be seeking, um, you know, uh, preparing to, to get a loan next year, uh, a more conventional loan. And then if we are successful with the SRF and working with Brian, figure out how we actually make all of that work together. So that's our intent with that. Tom, we also, sorry, just on that. Um, so have we determined that the loans that we'd, um, obtain would be such that we could pay those off if we do receive the 0% loan? So that I'm not certain. Okay. That's what I really need to find out from Brian, um, is can that actually happen? Okay. And I'm, I'm hopeful. So right now my intent is to kind of pursue both of them simultaneously. But if I learn that we can't, then that'll be changing track. Sounds good. Yep. And then you also saw in the packet that I had mentioned, um, we did submit an application for what they call a congressional directed spending request. And that's through the federal Senator's office, uh, both Markey and Warren, Elizabeth Warren. So, uh, with the help of Abby Charest, uh, she's, she has background in grant writing. Uh, so she's got access and is quite adept at using these portals. So you'll see in the packet was the actual application that we submitted. And we, we looked at what type of funding was available. And, uh, so we sought a $4 million, you know, funding, uh, supplement or whatever funding, uh, assistance through that program. We have not yet heard anything, you know, from them, but, uh, at least it gives you a sense of what that application looks like and, uh, and the value of the, the funding that, that we're asking for. And we also, uh, put it through, um, uh, representative Clark's office, Congresswoman Clark's office, Catherine Clark, we also simultaneously did it through her office as well. So just kind of hitting, hitting both, both areas. Uh, it was recommended that we do that. Right. So that, that is submitted. And then we also have, um, the PFAS class action suit. Uh, we entered into a class action suit probably two years ago. Uh, and this is a, um, this is against companies that, that had, had used PFAS in their, in their products. The companies are 3M, DuPont, Tyco, and BASF. So there's four companies out there. We have been notified that we are likely to bring in, receive about $2 million from that suit and that, that $2 million is after, uh, costs and fees, you know, for the legal fees and all of that are, are, are taken. So that would be our, our clear, um, revenue from that to date. We've received about 660 grand of that. And it's, it's, it's the payment schedule is structured. It, it actually goes out over the course of 10 years. Um, so we've received, you know, probably a third of that, uh, currently. And the money just every, every six months we get notified, which suit, whether it's 3M, whether it's DuPont, they're all coming in individually. Those funds are now placed in a, an account of, you know, a specific account. They are sitting there. That 660 grand is sitting there. I think it's actually in the legislation, the select board has the, um, authority to make the determination of where that money is used. I think it's pretty clear that it should go to, uh, any mitigation, any work, uh, that we perform to mediate PFAS as such the 38.6 million, um, you know, so at some point in time, at any point that this board is comfortable, uh, writing a memo, you know, to, to state that the desire would, would not harm our cause would be helpful. So that's what I was just going to ask. Um, do you think we should, uh, petition to be a memo? Yeah. Something. Yeah. I think it's, um, upcoming. It was those. Okay. Yep. Absolutely. There's enough money sitting in there right now, uh, that I think it warrants action now. Sounds good.
Great. Any questions on those topics?
Um, hearing none, uh, we can move on to the operational budget review. This is, um, something we had done typically in the past where we just look at, um, what, what percentage of the year has passed and where do we sit in terms of expenses and revenue? So what I, what I have in the packet tonight is, is just particular to water. Um, okay. I, I'm glad to bring, you know, we do. We do this for all of the divisions. I might have misunderstood if, if the hope was to have had all the, uh, all the divisions included, but what you have in your packet tonight is it gives you a sense of what that form looks like. And we do this for every single, uh, uh, discipline, uh, DPW, water, wastewater, and, uh, transfer station. So all of, they all have the same, the same look and feel. So just as a, you know, a matter of taking, you know, we're 87% of the year complete. Um, and, uh, you know, you'll see that we, we talked about this a little bit earlier in FY 26, we are expecting that our expenses are going to exceed revenue. So, you know, so we're preparing ourselves for that, that, that second sheet that's in the packet, uh, it's got some yellow, um, highlights on it. That is a projection that we performed. We did one in February and we just did one again on April 6th. And what we did is we, we took the percent spend, um, on April 6th. And then working with John Millett, water superintendent, um, we then projected what we realistically would be spending in those cost centers by June 30th. And that's what you see there. So you'll, you'll see there, you know, there is a discrepancy between the budget and what we're expecting to project, you know, projected to spend. Matt had mentioned there was a $57,000, um, interest payment that was, uh, not known by us when we put the budget together, uh, as well as the, the cost of the MWRA water that, uh, that contingency fund is there to offset those charges, but we used it, uh, quite a bit this past fiscal year. Um, it was just, it was just operating last weekend. We had another failure at Baldwin pond and we just, uh, we were on it for about five days and just shut the thing down this morning. Um, so it's the one good thing is that we had the foresight to make that connection and to pay for that connection, uh, without it, we would be in some deep trouble, but the downside is, is that, that water has an emergency connection is quite expensive.
So it just shows you the projection. And like I said, we are, we are preparing to, uh, to bridge that gap between expenses and revenue.
Great. Any, any questions?
Maybe next time we'll share that, uh, on the screen. Um, and yeah, ideally we'll go through each department, um, when we do this. Yeah. Yeah. We're in, we're in good shape. All the others, you know, the water is really the only one that we're, you know, uh, uh, having a difficulty with the other DPW transfer station and, uh, uh, well, the wastewater, this, this board doesn't oversee that, but we're in, we're in a good place in the other disciplines. Great. Um, yeah, I think it's just, uh, um, helpful, uh, so that the board can become familiar with all the different line items and what, what, what's happening. Um, and it will prepare us for when we start reviewing the budget for next year, which will be here before you know it. Yeah. Yep. But they're already, they're talking about, they're talking about Friday this coming Friday. They're talking about FY28. Oh my gosh. Yeah. Okay. Yep. All right. Um, thanks Tom. Sure. Uh, any other questions on that? If you've had a chance to look at that in the packet, um, you know, just speak up. And I'm happy. I mean, obviously to all board members, this offers there, uh, maybe more particularly to John, um, you know, being the newbie, I am more than happy to spend time on the phone or if you wanted to pop into the office to kind of bring you up to speed on stuff like this so that you're not seeing it and trying to absorb it, you know, during a board meeting. I'm happy to do that.
Thank you.
Thanks, Tom. Uh, and the next topic is the solid waste and recycling feasibility study update. I don't really have an update. I think, uh, there was an attempt to meet the week of town meeting and, and, and that just, um, we were all spent from the town meeting and that, that did not happen. So Joe, do you have any update on this or things stand? No, I think you kind of hit it. We were trying to meet prior to town meeting, but we just couldn't get everyone together. So, and, uh, Kelsey's on vacation this week, so I'm sure we'll be hearing from her next week. Okay. Sounds good. Um, I know there was a, sorry to jump in and I, I, in, when you see George's letter, you're going to see a recommendation. Um, this is, you know, pertaining to the revolving fund. He was suggesting that, um, converting to a revolving fund be something that this working group, you know, works with the consultant considers or whatever. And I know it wasn't in their initial scope of work. You know, I, I just mentioned it tonight, uh, Joe, uh, you know, when you're sitting with Kelsey and working with Julia green, it may be something we try to add on just to see if there's any sort of feedback we can get from her firm relative to going from an enterprise back to a revolving fund. That's a good point. Yeah. Okay. And that brings us to minutes. Um, do we have any, um, let's see, we have April 7th minutes. Um, do we have any comments? I noticed that we spelled Wayland wrong at the top. Oh no, my word. Where's that? It's just, uh, the meeting location. Um, this was our long-term. Oh, my word. I got it. Yep. I got it. Yep. Um, did anyone have a chance to look through these and, and, and, uh, uh, possibly propose any changes if, uh, and I think we can, um, do these all at once. Um, all good with the seventh, the water forum. Okay. We can move on to the 21st.
Uh, this was a zoom meeting.
No changes. No. Okay. Um, and the 4th, May 4th. These all look very good. Um, the May 4th meeting. This was at the high school field house. This was really just, uh, a get together right before town meeting to see if there are any last minute items that needed to be addressed.
So I'll, no changes. Okay. I'll accept a motion to accept, uh, all three meeting minutes from all three meetings. So thank you. Um, and do we have a second, second, thank you, um, Judy. Yes. Thank you. Mike. Yes. John.
Uh, you, you don't have to, uh, you can vote as to form. You can say, yeah, they look, they look good in terms of form or you can just abstain. It's a, they look great. All right. Um, and Ed, did I get you already? I think you said yes. And Mike, yes. Okay. Great. That does it for our meeting minutes. Any concerns anyone wants to discuss?
Judy? Nothing here. Okay. Ed. Okay. Hearing none like that. We'll move on, uh, to the dates for upcoming meetings. We have June 16th as our next meeting. Is that still work for everyone? Yeah. Uh, the second. Okay.
Yes. June 16 works. Okay. And then we have the 21st of July. Oh, good. And the, uh, 18th of August. Um, so it's typically the third Tuesday of each month.
If we need to adjust those others, we can do that in our June meeting and anything else before. I guess I'd just like to, to speak to the June 16th. Is it the intent that we're going to have the water rate hearing that night? Because the reason I ask is that, uh, there's a pretty stringent advertising requirement for hearings, rate hearings. Um, so it would literally, I've got Julie, Julie prepared to send that out to, uh, uh, tomorrow. And I just wanted to affirm, you know, was we'd like to, we'd like to have the rates set in June so that they can be implemented with the bills that go out on July one. So I just wanted to affirm that that is the intent. Uh, I thought we usually, um, I thought we usually had set the rates in July and they went into place in August. No, it didn't always coincide with the fiscal year start. It generally does. I think there was one year years ago, uh, and I forget what the reason was that we didn't, but generally we do it in June every year. Hmm. Okay. I want to be able to come July 20. I'm running in San Francisco for wedding and a book of this and my parents is great. Yeah. Okay.
Um, okay. Then that puts a lot of heat on our next meeting in terms of having, you know, uh, we've just done the overview. Usually we have a second meeting where we go through and play with the numbers and then we have the hearing. Um, yeah, we usually start in April. That's the, we usually start a month earlier. And this year, I think with just with this, the water article, just taking so much of our time. Um, that's the, that was the reason why we kind of, it's now been compressed so much into a two, two meeting process. Yep. Okay. Do we have to have another meeting before then? Uh, it would be, what do you think? I, I would propose that we add a meeting prior to this 16th. If we can. To focus on water, water rates. Yeah. And I'm, I'm laughing cause I won't be here. Uh, no, we need you here for that. Uh, I can do the 10th. Um, could we possibly do the, the water hearing on the 23rd, still have our 16th meeting and then hold the hearing and vote on the 23rd. Yeah. Let me see here. I just, uh, yeah, I think that that would, it would work on my calendar and we could certainly, obviously, since we're bumping it back a week, I can make the adjustments to the advertisement. Okay. Uh, that works for me. I can do the 16th and the 23rd. Okay. I can also. Great. Mike, you okay? I'm good with this. All that night.
Probably. I don't know. It, it should be early enough that, uh, uh, we'll be okay. Yeah, no, he does use it pretty quick. Okay. Okay. And Mike, I already know that August 18th, I will be, uh, not a bill.
Okay. So next meeting, let's discuss those future meetings to see if we come up. Yeah. All right. All right. So we'll stick with the 16th. We'll add the 23rd for the hearing and then we'll discuss July and August at that point in time. Yeah. Maybe just put tentative next to those. Yeah. So we know we have to adjust. Okay. Cool. All right. Anything else? I have one more thing. Yes. I just wanted to officially recognize all our employees and staff as this is a national public works week. Uh, and they're, they're, they're working extremely hard this week, considering Memorial day and preparing for the parade and everything Monday. So I just wanted to throw that out there. That's great. Yeah. Yeah. And I know every year we get accolades. Um, the department gets accolades for their setup of the parade and the, um, the cemetery, uh, um, set up and organization. So I'm not sure what to say. Congratulations to all those, um, for national public works week. Yeah. Thanks for, thanks for mentioning that show. No, no.
Okay. With that, I'll take a motion to adjourn. So moved. So moved. Second. Who's got a second?
Second. Thank you. All right. All in favor. Judy. Yes. John. Yes. Ed.
Ed. I saw a hand. I saw a hand. I know. Uh, uh, and, uh, I think I got you, Mike. Yeah. Yeah. Wiggenbauer. Yes. Okay. All right. All right. Thanks everyone. All right.