Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Systems topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Southborough DPW outlines $20-year water plan, flags large unaccounted-for losses and a $70,000 smart‑meter study
Summary
DPW Superintendent Bill Cundiff presented a multi‑decade water capital improvement plan and urged the board to fund a $70,000 FY27 feasibility study for smart meters after identifying roughly 111 million gallons unbilled in FY25 and a large leak-detection gap.
Get email alerts on the Water Systems topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill Cundiff, the Town of Southborough's Department of Public Works superintendent, presented a 20-year water capital improvement plan and urged the Select Board to authorize a $70,000 feasibility study for smart meters as part of the town's FY27 budget planning.
Cundiff said the plan, prepared by Parcorp and tied to a 2020 master-plan update, prioritizes immediate five-year projects — including a $1.5 million Lynn Brook Road water-main lining (funded through an MWRA 10-year, 0% loan) and a $1.1 million loop between Fisher Road and Presidential Estates — and projects larger work out over two decades. He also described Terra Road tank improvements mandated by a recent DEP sanitary survey and budgeted at $50,000 for FY27 design work and $700,000 in FY28 construction.
On system losses, Cundiff told the board that Southborough purchased roughly 404,000,000 gallons of water in FY25 and billed customers for about 292,000,000 gallons, leaving an approximately 111,000,000‑gallon difference. "That's a difference of 111,000,000 gallons that was unbilled for FY25," he said. An outside leak-detection survey identified about 58,800,000 gallons of leaks; Cundiff said a typical allowance is roughly 10% unaccounted water (about 40,000,000 gallons), leaving about 12,200,000 gallons beyond that baseline — which he estimated could cost the town roughly $50,000 per year. He added that, in a worst‑case scenario if most unidentified water were accounted for, the annual cost could reach about $217,000.
Cundiff said the smart‑meter proposal would give customers an app to monitor usage and provide the municipality with system‑level monitoring to identify leaks and pressure issues. He recommended carrying $70,000 in FY27 to complete a system evaluation and RFP preparation; implementation — including replacing meters in basements and addressing potential cell‑coverage dead zones with repeaters — would be a later, larger FY28 expense if the study shows it is feasible. The board directed staff to include the smart‑meter study option in consultant Matt Abrams's rate work and requested cost scenarios with and without the meters included.
Residents who spoke during the discussion said they supported online metering for both customer notice and leak detection; board members pressed for alternatives such as interim hydrant or system‑level meters and asked for multi‑year leak/demand trend data. Cundiff said the town performs a leak detection survey regularly and will provide multi‑year data to the board.

