Ben Wood, a consultant with Strand, told the village board the firm has screened roughly a dozen potential well sites and recommends pursuing a deep‑aquifer well to replace source water because it avoids many PFAS risks that affect shallow aquifer wells. Wood said Wells 6 and 8 have PFAS detects and Well 8 "currently exceeds the proposed maximum contaminant level," and the village voluntarily shut Well 8 off in December 2023.

Strand summarized the siting criteria used in the screening: proximity to potential contamination sources, DNR setback radii, existing distribution mains (12‑inch mains score highest), floodplains/wetlands and the approximate boundary of the Maquoketa Shale (a confining layer the firm prefers to be west of). After scoring, Strand narrowed options and recommended focusing on a parcel in the southern business park (the "eastern" star on the consultant map) because it offered distance from likely contamination sources and existing water main for connection.

Wood described two primary paths: 1) proceed directly to a permanent deep well (20–24 inch bore) as part of a $6.65 million opinion of probable cost that includes drilling, treatment allowance, site work and contingency; or 2) drill an optional test well (an 8‑inch exploratory bore) costing roughly $600,000–$630,000 that can reduce but not eliminate geologic uncertainty. "If you spend the half million, you don't get to kind of bank that toward the million," Wood said, and a test well increases confidence modestly but cannot fully replicate the hydrologic behavior of a full‑scale well.

On funding, Wood said the village submitted an intent‑to‑apply for the Safe Drinking Water loan program's emerging‑contaminant category; the program can include principal forgiveness up to $1.6 million per municipality (the formal application is due 2026‑06‑30). He cautioned that the program requires final bidding documents as part of the formal application, so design work must be underway to secure funding. Strand also presented a rough estimate of rate impacts using Public Service Commission methodology: depending on how much of the project is contributed or covered by grants, the village's water rates could increase in the consultant's estimate by roughly 60% to 88% (the firm will convert that range into dollar amounts for a typical bill at the board’s request).

Trustees questioned geology, radium/iron treatment needs, the possibility of deepening existing wells, the 2029 compliance date for addressing Well 8, and longer‑term lifecycle and disposal questions for PFAS treatment media. Wood and staff said the firm will supply a side‑by‑side comparison of treating Well 8 versus drilling Well 10, a refined dollar‑amount rate impact (water portion only) by Dec. 1, and coordinate modeling with financial advisor Ehlers as requested. The board asked staff to pursue public engagement (committee of the whole) and to aim for a site decision within three months if possible; staff said they can prepare the requested materials by Dec. 1 and noted the village can delay any final contract decisions until property closing if needed.

What’s next: Strand and village staff will prepare a side‑by‑side cost and rate analysis (treat Well 8 vs new Well 10), provide a dollarized rate‑impact estimate for a typical water bill by Dec. 1, and schedule a committee‑of‑the‑whole public discussion to gather input before any final approvals.