County hears stark water-supply feasibility report; officials discuss growth, bulk purchases and rate choices

Madison County commissioners heard a detailed briefing on current water supply, near-term constraints and long‑range options, and discussed changes to customer rates and connection fees.

Eric Neeson, the consultant leading the county’s water feasibility work, told the board the county’s current average demand is roughly 1 million gallons per day while the James Holcomb well produces about 300,000 gallons per day. Neeson said purchases from neighboring systems (notably Elkerton) and other contracts have kept supply reliable so far, but longtime reliance on crystalline‑rock wells is not a sustainable long‑term strategy.

“You need water now,” Neeson said, and added that surface water — a reservoir or raw‑water storage plan — is the only long‑term, 50‑year solution he expects will meet growth; however, it is expensive and likely a seven‑ to ten‑year project once engineering, permitting and funding are in place.

Why it matters: commissioners face rising demand from subdivisions and commercial growth. The consultant estimated 2035 average day demand at 1.2–1.3 million gallons per day and advised the county to pursue short‑term well production and begin planning for a regional surface‑water strategy now.

What the county discussed

Short- and long-term supply — Neeson said the county’s options today include: (a) pursue additional local wells (five candidate sites identified), (b) continue to purchase bulk water from neighboring systems while those supplies last, and (c) start planning for a regional surface‑water withdrawal and treatment project. He cautioned crystalline‑rock wells vary widely in yield over time and that the county should expect a 7–10 year minimum to bring a surface‑water source online.

Bulk purchases and private wells — Commissioners and staff discussed negotiating bulk‑water contracts with private well owners, buying existing private wells outright, or acquiring easements and wellhead protection areas. Consultants and county staff said private‑well contracts are legally and logistically feasible in some counties but uncommon in north Georgia because yields tend to be low; where wells are productive in other parts of the state they have historically been acquired with permitting and treatment arrangements.

Rates, tap fees and conservation measures — Madison County water staff (Stephanie Wilson) presented a comparative rate survey of nearby counties and models for increases across multiple years. Staff showed a range of options: a modest multi‑year increase in per‑1,000‑gallon charges, changing the monthly minimum (currently $25 for 3,000 gallons), and adopting tiered rates or irrigation‑meter rules to encourage conservation. The board discussed moving connection/tap fees to the midrange of neighboring counties to better reflect capital costs for new connections and discourage unchecked sprawl.

Board direction and next steps

Commissioners asked staff and the consultant to pursue three parallel steps: (1) pursue short‑term increases in well capacity and firm up cost estimates for five identified well locations; (2) continue feasibility work on surface water, including regional partnership options and rough cost modeling; and (3) return with specific options on connection fees, a tiered rate structure and a policy for issuing water‑availability letters for new subdivisions. Staff said it will assemble sample contract language for bulk purchases and a collection of actual agreements used elsewhere.

Ending

Commissioners and staff agreed the county has short‑term water options but must begin work now on long‑term surface‑water strategies. Staff and the consultant will return with cost estimates, sample bulk‑purchase and easement language, and proposed tap/connection fee adjustments for board review.