The Village of Maeystown will be conducting a public hearing Monday regarding proposed improvements to the community’s wastewater treatment facility, bringing the sewage system up to code and addressing issues with the system that have lingered since the 1990s.

Per a public notice published in last week’s issue of the Republic-Times, the hearing will take place from 6:45-7 p.m. Feb. 3 – right before the regular meeting – at Village Hall, 1030 Mill Street.

The notice further states the village “is proposing to make necessary improvements to the wastewater treatment facility to meet IEPA compliance regulations.”

Among these improvements are the installation of two septic tanks, rehabilitation of the sand filters, replacement of pumps and installation of a polishing reactor.

Maeystown Mayor Greg Backes offered further explanation on the hearing and why this work is necessary.

Backes summarized that issues arose during construction of the village’s current sewage system nearly three decades ago.

“Basically, when they installed it in the late 90s, a lot of things happened between the contractors and the state,” Backes said. “The sewer treatment facility was not done correctly when they built it.”

As he described, every house in the village has a pump for wastewater, and each house is meant to handle solid waste while fluid waste is pumped to the treatment plant.

Backes further explained that, as much of the village is built on rock, pits for the system couldn’t be built deep or big enough.

The effect of this, per Backes, is that both solids and fluids have been sent to the treatment facility.

“Instead of just the liquids getting sent, everything gets sent to the sewer plant,” Backes said. “The sewer plant was never built to handle what is sent to it now.”

Backes provided the Republic-Times with a document from the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency offering further details on the project.

The document provides additional explanation for the planned improvements to the treatment plant – noting particulars like how the sand filters “will be rebuilt with a liner, increased filter media depth and access openings for maintenance” – but also states the improvements are necessary to address a violation notice from Dec. 28, 2020.

The document further notes the village “has shown to have effluent (wastewater discharged into a body of water) violations for ammonia, total residual chlorine, pH and total suspended solids.”

As Backes explained, the public hearing is necessary in order to secure a needed loan from the agency, a loan for which the village has been pushing for several years now.

“What we’re trying to do is we’re trying to find funding to get this done,” Backes said. “With only 63-ish households actually taking sewer service, we can’t pass that burden onto the customers, so we have to find outside funding.”

Per the IEPA document, the loan would amount to $2,045,000 with an estimated interest rate of 1.87 percent for an annual repayment of around $122,639, though the village could be eligible for a 30-year loan, a 1 percent hardship interest rate and partial loan principal forgiveness of 15 percent.

Backes added further that the actual failing of the treatment facility by the IEPA dates back to about 2014, around the same time the village was also facing IEPA noncompliance due to the village water supply.

That issue was ultimately resolved with the village’s agreement with Fountain Water District in 2016, receiving its water from that supplier instead of dealing with a costly project of constructing a reverse osmosis plant in order to eliminate high nitrate levels.

Backes said the IEPA effectively told the village to prioritize the water before turning attention to the wastewater violation.

Backes further reiterated the intent and purpose of the public hearing this coming Monday evening.

“We have to have a public information hearing, and the public can tell us how they feel we should go about it,” Backes said. “I believe, ultimately, it’s up to the board to decide if we should move forward with the application to the EPA. In a way, we really don’t have a choice.”