Clearwater council opens discussion on fluoridation; schedules fuller review for April meeting

A Clearwater council member raised the question of removing fluoride from the city’s drinking water during the Feb. 3 work session, triggering a broad discussion and a decision to schedule a fuller review for the council’s first meeting in April.

The council member who introduced the matter summarized scientific studies and recent actions in other jurisdictions, citing a September 2024 federal court ruling and a January 2025 JAMA network review that they said linked fluoride in drinking water to reduced IQ in children and other health concerns. They told colleagues the city currently spends about $50,179 annually on fluoride treatment and urged the council to consider removing systemic fluoridation in favor of topical measures such as toothpaste and mouthwash.

Several council members urged caution. One council member with clinical research experience said many online studies are poorly controlled, recommended relying on randomized and peer-reviewed trials and suggested the council seek expert medical and neuroscientific review before making policy changes. The city attorney explained council rules and recommended using the regular work-session process to give council members time to prepare; the attorney noted that individual council members do have the right under the charter to place items on the agenda, but that bringing items to future work sessions avoids blindsiding colleagues.

Council members discussed timing and public engagement. Some council members requested that any future review include historical materials previously prepared for prior city discussions and suggested staff gather prior analyses and technical details about which portions of the city's water supply are treated locally versus supplied by other utilities. Aware that portions of the city’s water distribution are provided in partnership with adjacent systems, council members asked staff to clarify the technical and jurisdictional implications of any change.

By consensus the council set the item for further discussion at the first regular council meeting in April to allow members and staff time to assemble scientific background, treatment-cost information, and an outreach plan for public input. Several council members also said they favored public hearings or other engagement before any decision was made. No policy decision to add or remove fluoride was taken at the Feb. 3 work session.

Comments and next steps: the council asked staff to compile prior materials, water-treatment system coverage and cost detail and to circulate those materials to council members well before the April meeting; members asked for time to review independent scientific evidence and for a plan to solicit community input before voting on any change.