Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Supply topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City consultant: test wells show mixed results; council faces $500,000 ARPA deadline
Summary
A consultant told the Mabton City Council that three test wells and one earlier production well have produced mixed results; the most recent test reached about 168 feet. The project has used CDBG grant funds so far and the council was warned a $500,000 county ARPA allocation tied to wells may expire later this year.
A consultant presenting to the Mabton City Council said the city's water-source pilot study has produced mixed technical results and raised questions about whether to continue drilling or rehabilitate existing infrastructure.
The consultant said the most recent test well reached roughly 168 feet and showed promising aquifer conditions, but earlier wells had either little water or water near treatment limits. "They got down to 168 feet," the consultant said, describing the most recent bore and noting the contractor must re‑drill a few feet away at the contractor's cost after an equipment mismatch. He summarized the cost experience: an initial production well was unsuccessful; a test well without a pump test was about $35,000 and pump‑tested wells ran about $60,000. "So the deeper they go, the more we pay them," he said.
Council members asked whether unused project equipment or alternative investments—particularly repairs to Well 6—would deliver faster service. One council member asked, "Why don't we take some of this money and invest it into well 6 to see if we can get that thing back up and running?" The consultant advised that most project funding is contractually tied to the well‑drilling project and cannot be reallocated without funder approval. He said the city began with a $750,000 CDBG grant, had an RD package that was later pulled by the funder, and received a $500,000 ARPA contribution from the county for wells 7 and 8. "You can't just go spend it on something else," the consultant said; using funds for another purpose generally requires a funder conversation to avoid losing reimbursement.
The consultant recommended due diligence: complete the planned test wells using CDBG funds to understand local aquifer potential, then decide whether treatment and pumping costs would make a production well cost‑effective. He also recommended inspecting Well 6's electrical equipment; staff later said a vendor quote to inspect the VFD was about $3,200. The council discussed pursuing flexibility with the county on ARPA timing and exploring state appropriations and other funding to broaden options.
The council did not adopt a new project decision at the meeting but directed staff to continue the feasibility work, gather quotes for repairs, and report back with options and timelines.
