Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facility Services Water topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Becker County approves five-year rental for filtered water and ice machines after debate
Summary
Becker County commissioners approved a five-year rental agreement with Pure Water Technology North for filtered water and ice machines for county facilities after several commissioners pressed for cost comparisons and usage details. The motion passed despite at least one commissioner voting no.
Get email alerts on the Facility Services Water topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Becker County commissioners voted to approve a five-year rental agreement with Pure Water Technology North to provide filtered water, hot-water dispensers and ice to county facilities, the board decided at its July 15 meeting. The agreement was pulled from the consent agenda for discussion by multiple commissioners and later approved at a separate vote.
The board approved the rental agreement after commissioners debated whether the machines were necessary, whether existing drinking fountains could be used and whether maintenance could be done more cheaply in-house. Commissioner Erica (first name used in meeting) moved to approve the rental agreement; the motion was seconded by Commissioner Richard and carried. At least one commissioner stated on the record they opposed approving the contract without additional price comparisons.
Supporters said staff and building users value the machines because they provide cold water, hot water for beverages and ice, and because some floors lack drinking fountains. A staff member noted the courthouse lacks fountains on the basement and top floors, while county custodial staff and human services employees said the machines have been in place for years and are appreciated by employees.
Opponents sought clarification on alternatives and costs, asking whether installing permanent drinking fountains (two additional units were estimated at about $3,000 each in the discussion) or using existing highway-department equipment might be cheaper than a rental contract. One commissioner said the equipment has been in place for 8–10 years and the rental increases cost by about $20 per month compared with previous service; another commissioner emphasized the board should compare in-house and contract costs before committing to long-term contracts.
County staff said the highway department and other county facilities maintain ice makers and refrigerators, and that some of the questions could be answered by maintenance staff. Commissioners asked staff to confirm whether barbed components of other procurements were required by outside agencies, and asked that maintenance and alternatives be checked before future similar agreements are finalized.
The motion to approve the Pure Water Technology North rental agreement passed after a roll-call-style verbal vote; commissioners present said “aye,” and one commissioner stated on the record they would vote no and that they wanted a cost-comparison before approving similar contracts in the future.
The board moved the water rental agreement out of the consent agenda and treated it as a separate action item, then approved the rental agreement for the county facilities. Staff will follow up with maintenance about longer-term alternatives and report back if additional budgeting or procurement changes are recommended.

