A December 20 meeting of the school board featured some heated debate
about whether the town system is of any value to the school and whether
the school board would be looking out for the best interests of the
school or the town by signing up for the system.
STATE STANDARDS
In 2008, the school board agreed to sign up for the municipal system.
School Principal Kaiya Korb told the crowd at this week's meeting that
the school's current water system failed to comply with state
regulations in 2005 and that the school has been able to provide potable
water via chlorination but that the contact time for chlorination does
not meet state standards.
In 2006, she explained, voters approved a motion to borrow up to $50,000
to repair, replace or upgrade the current system. The current system
serves the school, the General Wait House and the Waitsfield-Fayston
Fire Station. At present the school does not have a full-service kitchen
because it lacks the septic capacity for such a system. The septic
system cannot be expanded without interfering with the water source
protection area for the school's water supply.
Between 2006 and 2008, the school board reviewed various options for
repairing the existing water supply, holding off on the repairs because
the state was willing to let the school explore its options as long as
the water remained potable in regular testing.
REPLACING THE SYSTEM
To repair the current system will cost an estimated $34,000 and the
school has $25,000 of that cost forgiven by the state. Under that
scenario, the school's water would be regularly chlorinated and the
school would incur an estimated $7,000 in water system maintenance and
costs to save for replacing the system. Continuing to use the existing
system would continue to require Korb and the school's lead facility
maintainer to spend time overseeing the system.
If the school stands by its commitment to the town water system, the
school will have to pay $1,500 in connection fees, on top of the $5,800
the school has already paid. Annual costs for using the town system
would be an estimated $12,000, but those fees will be reduced as more
users sign on to the system.
If the school breaks its contract with the town, the school would lose the $5,800 already paid.
At this week's meeting Korb explained to the board and others present
that her recommendation that the school stick with the town water
project was based on several factors. She noted that the town system
would provide water that was not required to be treated with chlorine.
She reminded those present that declining school enrollment throughout
The Valley would likely lead to the consolidation of elementary schools
and said that the Waitsfield School needs to have the ability to expand
the septic system to accommodate a full kitchen - something that is only
possible if the current water source protection distance goes away.
USAGE FEES
Robin Morris, chair of the town's water implementation task force,
answered a series of questions from the public, from Mike Kingsbury and
school board member Scott Kingsbury about the proposed system. Morris
also explained that the town's assessment of the school's projected
water use initially came in at 23.7 ERUs (an ERU is an equivalent
residential unit based on a three-bedroom house). After review the town
dropped the school's number of ERUs to 14.1, which reduces the
connection fees and usage fees.
Mike Kingsbury raised several questions about the cost of the Waitsfield
system compared to systems in Rochester and Waterbury. He also
questioned the wisdom of Waitsfield's linear system, versus the circular
system that exists in Waterbury. He said that he had initially been a
supporter of the municipal water project but could now no longer support
the project.
Chris Pierson joined Gary Kingsbury in questioning why a property owner
could not sign up, pay the connection fees and then not use the water
until it was needed. Morris explained that the terms of the grants and
loans the town had received required that all connected users pay for
the system.
POTENTIAL CONSOLIDATION
Board chair Rob Williams brought the focus of the meeting back to the
issue of what is right for the school versus the merits of the town's
system, and the board closed the public comment portion of the meeting.
School board members discussed the impact of joining the water project
on the future of the school, with some members concurring that the
school needs to keep long-range planning in mind and keep the water
option available in light of potential consolidation, use of the school
for more town/community events and the ability to have a full kitchen.
Board members also discussed revisiting the issue of school
participation in the town water project if the town makes no progress on
legal challenges facing the project by next August.
Scott Kingsbury made a motion that the school withdraw from the town
project which board member Wrenn Compere seconded to allow for
discussion. After discussion, Chair Williams, board member Helen Kellogg
and Compere voted against the motion; Kingsbury voted for it and board
member Elizabeth Cadwell abstained.
Waitsfield's $7.6 million project got underway this fall. It is funded
through state and federal grants and loans. Work on the project came to a
halt due to weather and also due to a legal challenge to the town's
right to drill its well in the right of way on Reed Road. Last month a
Vermont Superior Court judge ruled against the town, in favor of
plaintiffs Jean Damon and Virginia Houston. The town must now negotiate
with those two landowners for use of the road or appeal the decision or
initiate condemnation proceedings to take that section of road.
{loadnavigation}
