Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Systems topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Whiteland council delays water‑tank cleaning to prioritize hydrant repairs, to revisit in October
Summary
After a lengthy debate, Whiteland councilors agreed to delay a $30,000 water‑tank cleaning and ask staff to return with updated quotes and a plan in October, prioritizing immediate repairs and flushing of failing fire hydrants to reduce system risk during concurrent maintenance.
Whiteland — The town council signaled on Monday that it will postpone a proposed $30,000 maintenance job to clean two water storage tanks, opting instead to concentrate short‑term resources on repairing fire hydrants and completing a system flushing program.
The discussion began when Steve, a town water operations staff member, outlined the contractor’s quote and scope: cleaning up to three inches of sediment under a fixed fee, with additional work billed at $300 an hour if deeper remediation is required. “There is no additional cost. They stop at three inches because then it becomes an hourly based job — $300 an hour,” Steve said.
Councilors who represent areas that have experienced routine outages and who cited recent large expenditures for hydrants and emergency vehicles urged caution. Tim Brown said the council should avoid overwhelming the system during ongoing hydrant work and scheduled flushing. “I would personally… back it off for a little while because there's not a problem yet,” Brown said, adding concerns that concurrent flushing and tank work could increase the risk of breaks or dirty water complaints.
Those favoring prompt tank cleaning noted long‑term system benefits of removing accumulated sediment and pointed out that the contractor’s quote is only valid for a short window. “If this is something that's going to improve the system, much like we don't want to delay the fire‑hydrant project, that’s something that's going to improve the system,” a councilor said.
Town staff told the council the contractor had advised cleaning could be completed in one to two days of on‑site work and that the company would document inspections and provide photos and reports. Council members also raised operational questions, including whether cleaning could strain the system during hydrant flushing and whether work should be charged to water operating or improvement accounts.
After extended debate about timing, risk and budget impact, the council asked staff to obtain updated quotes, confirm whether the work should be charged to the water operating fund, and return with a clear dollar ask. Members agreed to bring the project back for more deliberation at an October meeting so the council can consider quotes and funding options after hydrant repairs near completion.
What happens next: Staff will gather updated bids, identify an appropriation source (water operating vs. improvement), and return to the council in October with a recommendation. The council did not adopt a spending authorization at Monday’s meeting.
