Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wastewater topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant proposes $49,000 study as Farmland weighs wastewater options
Summary
A consultant told the Farmland Town Council the town lacks a completed PER for SRF funding and outlined options including lagoon rehabilitation and mechanical treatment; he proposed a reduced-scope study priced at about $49,000 to position the town for State Revolving Fund application and warned against executing contracts before the PER is available.
A consultant outlined wastewater treatment options for Farmland on July 7 and recommended pausing on contracts until the town’s preliminary engineering report (PER) is complete.
The presenter (S8) told the Town Council that "SRF doesn't have a PER for you guys" and that the current engineer appears to be working on a schedule to submit material to IDEM. He described two primary local options — enlarging lagoon capacity or adding some mechanical treatment and aeration — and said a regional option with neighboring Parker City remains under consideration. "They're probably going to let you dig a bigger lagoon... or add some type of mechanical process to it," he said.
Why it matters: the PER is the planning document that a State Revolving Fund (SRF) application typically requires. S8 said the engineer’s schedule indicates survey work could start around Jan. 1, 2027, fund closing might occur around Sept. 1, 2027, and construction mobilization around Jan. 1, 2028. He cautioned the council not to "execute anything" or lock into a contract before the PER is finalized because that could bind the town to a firm prematurely.
Cost and timetable: S8 said his initial estimate for producing the addendum/study was $65,000 but that he reduced scope and "knocked 15,000 off of that," bringing the proposal to about $49,000. He recommended the council wait to receive the PER from the current engineer and promised to return next month with a refined comparison of the engineer’s lagoon option and the additional options his firm could offer.
Council follow-up: Council member (S2) acknowledged the presentation and agreed the town should review the PER at the next meeting before making decisions. S8 said he would review the PER and prepare options for council consideration.
Next steps: The council did not authorize funding for the study at the meeting; the presenter recommended waiting until the PER is available so the town can compare options and funding paths. S8 said the SRF deadline and schedule make timely action important if the town wants to pursue SRF funding.
