School Board Again Presses Its Case

For A Middle Gate Waterline

By Jan Howard

The Board of Education presented packets of information and its emphatic concerns about the safety of water at Middle Gate School to the Legislative Council Wednesday evening.

Board of Education Chairman Elaine McClure, Superintendent of Schools Dr Evan Pitkoff, Steve Messer of the state Department of Public Health, and Board of Education member Paul Mangiafico as well as three parents explained why they feel an extension of the town’s waterline is the correct solution to water quality issues at the school. The estimated cost of the waterline extension is $550,000.

Ms McClure provided background information on the waterline request, which had initially been included in the town’s five-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for 2005/06. The board then tried to move the project up to the 2004/05 year through a supplemental appropriation after the budget is passed this spring. Though the Board of Finance approved the request by a 3-2 vote, the council rejected the waterline extension in November, 10-0. The Board of Finance then voted, at the request of the Board of Education, to move the proposed project to priority status in the CIP for fiscal year 2004/05.

Ms McClure said that while much of the dialogue about the proposal centered on coliform, “There was a lot more to it than the coliform issue.”

She said if the waterline is included in the CIP the Legislative Council approves, the Board of Education would return to the Board of Finance and the Legislative Council for funding for the project.

Dr Pitkoff said testing for coliform is done once a month at Middle Gate. When coliform is present, the state requires that the well be chlorinated. Once the water is clear, five additional tests are required in the next month. If the water is clear, testing resumes once a month. While coliform is present, the school provides bottled water.

He said the school would no longer need to conduct testing for coliform bacteria if a waterline were installed. Monthly testing costs are $100.

“One well is at full capacity, but the second well is at zero capacity,” he said. He noted a location for a new well would be difficult. The new well would cost between $12,000 and $15,000.

Dr Pitkoff also pointed to the need to replace two water tanks that are 40 years old, which have a two-to-three-year life span remaining. These would not be needed if the school were connected to a waterline. Replacement of the tanks would cost approximately $50,000.

He also noted the school wells have a system to remove radon and uranium from the water. A conditional permit to discharge 185 gallons per year of backwash water to the septic system expires in August. If the permit were not renewed, the water would have to be hauled away. The cost to operate the radon system is approximately $2,000 a year.

Connection to the waterline would eliminate monitoring and operation costs of the school’s water system. Dr Pitkoff said the town has an opportunity to receive a low interest loan of 2.1 percent from the state to fund the waterline connection.

The waterline, he said, “would ensure providing quality water and be a savings to us.” The Planning and Zoning Commission has approved the proposed connection to the waterline.

The state Department of Public Health has strongly recommended that Middle Gate be connected to a public water system.

Mr Messer noted that Middle Gate School was built in 1964, and that the average life expectancy of a water system is 40 years.

He said the school system was “very proactive” in providing bottled water to staff and students at the school. He noted, however, it is a temporary solution.

He referred to information contained in a consent order from his department included in a packet of information presented to the Legislative Council members.

While he said he recommends hookup to the town system, he is not mandating it.

He said his concern was not so much for coliform in the water system as it was for radionuclides, such as uranium and radon, for which the school’s water is currently being treated.

He said the school has two options, either upgrade its water system or tie in to the town water system. “We won’t force you to do either until you fail,” he said. The consent order, he added, is an agreement to do something. It is not a mandate.

He said there would be reimbursement if corrections to the system were on site. There is no reimbursement to subsidize town water systems.

He said the application for a loan would be good for one year. The town is ranked second for funding through the state Bonding Commission.

In closing the presentation, Mr Mangiafico said he visited the school and saw the water fountains covered and the students drinking bottled water. “Is this what we want?” he questioned. Though there is no medical emergency, he said he does not every want there to be one.

Though the water problem at the school is not continuous or continuing, he said, “The solution is to connect to the waterline. Is it the best viable solution? I’d rather make a mistake on the side of safety. We need to take the bull by the horns and resolve the issue.”

Board of Finance Chairman John Kortze noted that the information received by the Legislative Council members that evening had not been received by his board.

There was no decision by the Legislative Council. The waterline extension would need to be included in an approved CIP in order to move forward. It is expected the council members would discuss the waterline extension during their review of the five-year plan.

In other business, the Legislative Council unanimously approved, 10-0, the transfer of $100,000 from contingency to winter overtime, sand, and salt accounts. The transfer was recently approved by the Board of Finance.