Present: Roger Spindler, Terry Johnson, Jerry McConnell, Norm Baker, Jon Ebensperger, Chris Zenner & Sandra Goulette
Call meeting to order: 6:30 pm
MOTION to accept February 11, 2026, Board Meeting Minutes by Ebensperger / Johnson, motion carried
DAVY ENGINEERING – Alex & Rachael Project Engineers with Davy Engineering came to update us on the well project. The reports for the well-site investigation have been submitted to Rural Development (RD), the major funding agency. With rising nitrate levels, we are not yet at the maximum contaminant level. We are trying to stay ahead of the game. Alex touched bases with RD, and they have not drafted any sort of approval up yet. We also drafted and submitted an environmental report. We are outlining a proposed site up on County Road EE & Elsa. We have come up with several outcomes. The 1st proposed or the best alternative would be to have a shallow supply well. This would pull from a different source to where you’re at now. Go a bit shallower and stay in the sand and gravel. It’s a cheaper alternative and just test pump it. Then after 30 days of pumping, this will show you what years of pumping will look like. We would be utilizing and doing some upgrades at the existing pump house, piping, putting in a submersible pump and pitiless unit and being able to pipe it over to the existing pump house. Besides nitrates, you would have low iron, manganese, radium because that’s what you have now. If you hit on nitrates, then next alternative is to go deeper. Depending on the levels, you could treat it with like chemical addition for iron and manganese. If there is radium, then that’s filtration. The benefit of that is a more protected source. It has a confining layer over it with an Eau Claire formation. There is a very low probability that that source would be contaminated. 2 – you wouldn’t have two wells; you’d be treating only well one and wouldn’t have that additional redundancy. Surface water has a lot more complications. That is not a pursued alternative and not the route we want to go. From a water storage standpoint, the current water tower is adequately sized and it’s in good condition. 90% of coating system is original, roughly 30 years, so you have the overcoat option and a full recondition option. With that you have the risk of having to redo that every five to eight years. Depending on how the surface prep is. It’s less expensive over that 25-to 30-year period. We would recommend providing a new coating system. Investing in your tank and doing it right should last you 90 years if you do this reconditioning. We will talk about that cost in the funding applications. All these costs include the construction, the administrative, legal, engineering and funding applications. There are several options for funding. The community development block grant, that is a grant program that we’ve used, you get grants up to a million dollars, It’s very common in Wisconsin as a match to the NR safe drinking water loan program. The biggest ones that we would recommend are safe drinking water loan program that’s through the DNR because you are eligible for 50% principal forgiveness which is a grant. Whatever the costs are, you’re applying for that total amount, 50% of that would be granted back to it, a loan forgiveness. There is a cap and we would hit that. But it would be paired with CDBG or RD. Typically you do one or the other. The safe drinking water loan program doesn’t cover costs for the tank because it’s considered maintenance. USDA RD does cover the reconditioning costs of the tank. They have a 40-year term, which drives the cost down on your annual principal and interest payments. RD loans that’s financed over 40 years cover the entire project costs. We will have to wait until we get the approval to move forward from DNR and RD to PSC. But, at this time Wes can come down and help with the rural development grant application. DNR does have a $500.00 submittal fee. That must be paid first.
DISCUSSION – Public Works Chris Zenner said that he will be working on turning the water on at the Campground on Monday April 13. Backwoods said they should be down to do the work on the camp sites at the end of March or 1st week of April. They said there is still frost in the ground at this time. Going to check with Brad from the campground to see if he can do some work on our sander. Mike Celt asked about the stump removal at the ballpark. They have several that need to be removed, and we also have several at the campground tenting area and around the beach. Chris will see if the Bay City Bombers would be willing to donate some money to help the cost. We can mark the ones that are priority to remove.
MOTION for the Village to pay up to $2000.00 to have stumps removed with the priority of which ones are a hazard and safety concern for visitors to the ballpark or campground by Ebensperger / McConnell, motion carried
DISCUSSION – Mowing lawn at the American Legion – Chris currently will mow the outside of the memorial the same time he is mowing the empty lot. That might be an extra 15-20 min. The board agrees that he isn’t going out of his way to mow. This is just a small contribution to help keep the memorial looking good.
APPROVE / DENY – Approved to place an Ad in the Bay City Bomber’s Book for $100.00 by McConnell / Johnson, motion carried
DISCUSSION – Open the Lawn Mowing bids for the Bay City Cemetery.
MOTION to accept Hubert Schladweiler bid for mowing the Bay City Cemetery by McConnell / Baker, motion carried
APPROVE / DENY – Approve the whole staff to attend the Pierce County Safety meeting on April 23 by McConnell / Baker, motion carried
DISCUSSION – No need to go into closed session
MOTION to Approve the bills Ebensperger / Johnson, motion carried
ADJOURN:
Submitted by:
Sandra Goulette
Clerk/Treasurer
Village of Bay City