Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Beecher board approves $99,081 pump replacement and upgrades for village water system
Summary
At its May 12 meeting the Village Board approved replacing a submersible pump at Well House 5 for $99,081.20 and authorized purchases of a SCADA computer, handheld meter reader and a trench shoring box; the board noted a 4–5 week lead time and possible additional electrician costs.
Get email alerts on the Water Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Village Board of Beecher on May 12 approved replacing a failing submersible pump at Well House 5 and authorized a package of water-system equipment upgrades.
Board members voted to buy a Franklin 1,000-gallon-per-minute replacement pump from Lane Christensen Company for $99,081.20 and to authorize related work; the agenda notes a 4–5 week lead time after the order is placed and that any additional costs for outside electricians or emergency electrical work are unknown at this time.
The board also approved three other water-utility purchases: a new SCADA computer and software from Energenics for $21,700; a Census 7501 handheld meter reading device and touch gun from Core in Maine for $10,485; and a trench-shoring box purchase totaling $11,158 with an IPRF credit of $5,508 applied toward that purchase. Roll-call votes on the items carried.
Board and staff described why the pump purchase was urgent. Village staff reported the original pump had exceeded its rated life, an associated VFD failed after the prior meeting, and the unit was not repairable. Staff presented two options: replace with the exact current-specification unit for roughly $99,000 or install a lower-speed Hitachi pump at about $150,000; the board approved the lower-cost exact replacement because it is fully compatible with existing VFDs and controls.
Staff cautioned the board that SCADA integration and any interior electrical changes could add to the total costs but said those charges were expected to be minimal if the board chose the exact-replacement option. The pump vendor’s delivery lead time was listed as four to five weeks.
Why it matters: the board framed the purchases as necessary to maintain water service reliability as new development proceeds in the village and to reduce the risk of unscheduled outages.
The board recorded the purchases and lead times and directed staff to proceed with ordering and scheduling the installations.

