Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Supply topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council weighs options after Well 7 test shows poor water quality
Summary
City staff reported Well 7 test samples that show iron, manganese, arsenic and nitrate near regulatory limits and estimated that treating or piping the source could cost millions; council directed staff to pursue a measured next step including possible abandonment or an additional test well and to consider grant timing.
City staff presented results from additional sampling on the Well 7 test well behind the school and urged the council to decide whether to abandon the test well, pursue an expensive treatment/production option, or drill another test well.
"There was potential for, like, 200 gallons a minute," staff member Jayman said, but he added water quality is the problem: "The main things were manganese, arsenic, and nitrate," with some measures close to maximum contaminant limits. Jayman told the council that iron and manganese were present in other wells and that nitrate treatment would require a different, costly system or blending with other supplies.
Mayor (speaking during discussion) said the city should talk with property owners near the test well and weigh whether to abandon it now to avoid future liability. Jayman summarized the financial picture: the city has roughly $200,000 remaining in a CDBG grant that could cover another test well but that funding expires in January; the city also has $500,000 in county ARPA funds earmarked for a well project that must be spent by Aug. 31, 2026.
Council members discussed three primary paths: (1) abandon the current test well while contractors are still active; (2) buy or secure property and develop a production well plus one or two treatment systems (Jayman estimated that equipment plus treatment could run "probably at least 3 and a 500,000, possibly more like 4.5" million in total); or (3) authorize one more targeted test well and then reevaluate. Several members favored talking to the adjacent property owner and then returning with a recommendation.
The council asked staff to follow up with the Department of Health and the contractor about the feasibility of another test well, to provide clearer cost estimates for treatment or pipeline options, and to consider alternatives to spend the ARPA funds if Well 7 proves impractical. No formal vote was taken on a capital commitment at the meeting.
