Residents accuse Las Cruces utilities of gaps in lead testing and disputed CCR claims
Loading...
Summary
Two public commenters told the council that recent sampling and the city’s Consumer Confidence Report understate lead problems, citing individual samples above the 15 ppb action level and gaps in sampling years; they urged more transparent inventories and remedial action.
Lynn Moorerer told the Las Cruces City Council that handouts and sampling data show the city’s drinking-water reporting is misleading and that Consumer Confidence Reports (CCRs) omitted critical exceedances. "Our water is actually 4 times higher," Moorerer said, summarizing results she said showed three homes in August 2024 with samples at 8, 6 and 3 parts per billion and earlier samples in 2023 at 24 ppb and 18 ppb — both above the 15 ppb action level.
Moorerer said the city did not sample every year across its five systems and pointed to gaps in 2019 and 2022 sampling that, she said, allowed the 2024 CCR for the Alturas system to repeat older numbers and claim 90th‑percentile compliance incorrectly. "In reality, those 2 exceedances brought the overall compliance below 90%," she said, and called the reporting "false information." She urged honest, timely public notice and a full, accurate inventory of lead and galvanized pipes.
Liz Rodriguez Johnson followed, saying she believes Memorial Medical Center has adopted Dona Ana County Resolution 2023‑68 as its indigent‑care policy and that the language used — including a "payer of last resort" clause — effectively excludes some residents from financial-assistance elements. She provided handouts and asked whether the city had been notified or involved in county revisions that affect city residents.
Councilors did not take immediate action on these comments during the meeting. The statements from Moorerer and Rodriguez Johnson were recorded in the public-comment portion of the council meeting and are a direct appeal for follow-up from Las Cruces utilities and city staff to clarify sampling schedules, CCR methodology, inventory completeness, and whether hospital indigent‑care workflows are serving city residents as intended.
