Graham staff pitches $30–$60 million pipeline and treatment plan to tap Possum Kingman Lake

City staff presented a conceptual plan Wednesday to pipe raw water from Possum Kingman Lake into Graham’s water system as a long-term supplement to Lake Graham, outlining engineering options, treatment challenges and a preliminary funding approach but receiving no vote from the council.

In a presentation described as a workshop, a staff presenter noted the city currently holds a reservation for about 1,000 acre-feet per year from PK — roughly 893,000 gallons per day — and said staff had identified a range of capital costs to construct intake, pipeline, treatment and storage systems between $30 million and $60 million, with a working midpoint estimate of about $45,000,000. "Water is probably, if not the most, one of the top priorities that we need to be looking at in the city," the presenter said.

Staff described three broad alternatives: (1) rely more on well fields, which can provide groundwater with different treatment needs but risk overpumping; (2) enlarge or dredge Lake Graham to add storage but remain dependent on rainfall; and (3) develop the PK option, which would bring surface water via pipeline to one or more package treatment plants, then into new storage and distribution infrastructure on Graham’s south side.

The PK option would require a new intake and package water‑treatment plant near the Brazos River Authority (BRA) property at the lake, a long pipeline (staff estimated needed pipe larger than 20 inches but likely smaller than 36 inches), one or more booster stations and an elevated storage tower to correct low‑pressure areas in the southern half of the city. Staff warned the PK water’s higher alkalinity and turbidity likely would require additional treatment steps; they cited advances in reverse‑osmosis purification as one possible mitigation for alkalinity concerns.

Council members pressed staff on available volumes, operations and cost questions. One council member said, "I'd like to personally ... see somebody that knows a lot more than we do about the reservoir," and several asked staff to confirm whether more than the reserved 1,000 acre‑feet could be negotiated with PK or BRA. Staff acknowledged Abilene had negotiated additional water rights in the region and said that possibility could be explored.

On funding, staff outlined potential grant and loan sources including the Texas Water Development Board and offered a rate scenario: a capital surcharge of $10 per month per customer would generate about $432,000 per year in gross debt‑service capacity, a figure staff used to illustrate one way to service debt on a multi‑decade loan. Staff warned actual interest rates, grants and loan terms would affect the final affordability picture.

As a next step, staff recommended placing $250,000 in the FY26 budget from city reserves to retain a qualified engineering firm for a feasibility analysis — to study alternative routes (highway 16 vs. FM 1267 alignments), intake siting (shallower vs. deeper intake locations), treatment requirements, dredging options for Lake Graham, and legal/contractual limits on water rights. "I think that's a necessary first step," the presenter said of a feasibility study.

Council members broadly expressed interest in pursuing more information but declined to authorize the capital project at the meeting. Staff was asked to return with precise data on available PK volume, aquifer studies for nearby well fields, dredging cost estimates, and the rights or reservations that permit other entities to draw from Lake Graham. The meeting adjourned after the council moved to close the session.

What happens next: Staff will prepare a feasibility scope and cost estimates for the council; no formal motion to adopt a capital project or to obligate funding beyond the proposed study money was taken at the meeting.