Paragonah delays water connection pending signed easement; board reviews 60% water drawings and meter upgrade options

Paragonah officials reviewed progress on a multi-phase water project at Tuesday’s meeting, discussed a disputed easement that must be signed before service activation, and considered a proposal to modernize the town’s water-metering system.

The board and staff examined 60% design drawings for the water project and used a pieced-together print to identify gaps in planned hydrant locations and missing customer meters. Staff said the more accurate the meter inventory and the construction documents, the better contractors’ bids will align with expected work and unit pricing.

Board members discussed a pending 25-foot utility easement linked to a planned waterline to serve a property owned by Chris Manili. The easement wording was revised after Mr. Manili raised concerns that the language could be interpreted to allow above-ground lines for an unrelated canal company. Town staff and the town’s attorney (identified as Justin in the meeting) were rewording the instrument to clarify permitted above-ground improvements — items such as hydrants, water meters and transformer pads — without enumerating every conceivable object. Board members said the town will not turn on water service to the property until the town has a signed, notarized and recorded easement in hand.

Separately, town staff reported outreach from a vendor, Vision Metering, that offers electronic metering and a gateway to transmit meter readings at intervals. The vendor’s preliminary pricing discussed at the meeting included a gateway and initial software fee of about $5,000, plus a $600 monthly service charge. Town staff said the town currently pays roughly $1,000 per month for water and gas metering services; the vendor representative suggested the proposed system could reduce monthly costs once installed. Board members discussed whether existing meters could be integrated or whether replacement meters would be required.

Staff also said the town should issue a grading permit — and likely a fence permit — for the property work so the town has an administrative record and can communicate flood- and prairie-dog-protection requirements and other local conditions, even if the county will not inspect the grading permit. The board discussed that the town’s grading permit could be mainly informational but would establish the obligations that must be met before service activation.

No formal vote was recorded on vendor selection or on the easement language during the meeting; actions were described as staff follow-up. Board members directed staff to circulate revised easement language when it is ready and to withhold water activation pending a signed, notarized and recorded easement.

Items to watch - Final easement language and signature by the property owner; town staff to circulate revised draft when available. - Metering vendor follow-up with written pricing and integration options; board asked staff for a detailed setup cost and implementation plan before any contract. - Submission of finalized water project drawings for bidding once the meter inventory and hookups are confirmed.

The meeting transcript records multiple clarifications during the water discussion, including repeated statements that service activation is contingent on a recorded easement and that the town prefers clear, non-enumerative easement language describing above-ground utility needs rather than a vague, two-sentence instrument.