Hoover council approves two wastewater annual reports to ADEM despite public concerns about errors

The Hoover City Council voted to send two municipal water pollution prevention annual reports — for the Inverness and Riverchase wastewater treatment plants — to the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM) after public commenters identified apparent errors in the draft documents.

Residents flagged spelling mistakes, incorrect dates and mismatched sanitary sewer overflow (SSO) numbers in the draft reports; the council approved both resolutions after city staff said the issues did not require delaying transmittal.

Katie Thomas, a resident of Scout Creek who spoke during public comment, urged the council to correct the reports before they were filed with ADEM, saying, "Before you send this to ADEM, you need to have a good handle on what's in the report." She read multiple examples she said were wrong in the packet, including missing characters and entries that appeared to be labeled for the wrong facility. Thomas asked whether the Riverchase report included the correct SSO entries and whether references to developments and funding were accurate.

City staff were asked directly whether the concerns raised constituted material changes that should delay approval. Mr. Reeves responded, "No, sir. Not at all," and Mr. Welch likewise indicated there were no material changes needed before the vote. On both agenda items the council made and seconded motions to approve the respective resolutions and voted to carry them.

The resolutions state the council reviewed the municipal water pollution prevention annual reports (attached as exhibits to each resolution) and directed "the continued proper operation and maintenance of all wastewater facilities to maintain effluent requirements contained in the permit and prevent the bypass and overflow of raw sewage within the collection system or at the treatment plant." The transmittal formally notifies ADEM and fulfills the city's reporting obligations under its permits.

Public commenters pressed for greater accuracy and clarity in the reports and asked whether funding statements (including references to impact fees and user fees) and useful-life estimates matched observed repair history; those questions were recorded in the meeting but the council did not amend or delay the transmittal. The motions to approve were carried by the council as presented.

Council action: Resolutions 8454-25 (Inverness) and 8455-25 (Riverchase) were approved and the reports will be sent to ADEM. The council record captures citizen objections about specific errors in the packet and requests for correction, but staff said they did not view the items as material changes warranting delay.