Water plant rehab leaves city more big billsby Nathan Arneal The city council of North Bend spent the first hour of its Aug. 19 meeting hearing how it needed to spend millions of dollars and the second half hearing about how much money it actually had. To begin, city engineer Tyler Keenan of JEO Consulting went over the report from a study done on the city’s water system. He said such a study is necessary to apply for low-interest loans from the state. The report shows that North Bend’s wells pump about 190,000 gallons a day, peaking at a max usage of about 529,000 gallons. Keenan said this is slightly above average on a per capita basis. Two of North Bend’s three wells are on the same block as the water tower on the west side of town. Well 1 was drilled in 1967 and at 77 feet is pretty shallow, Keenan said. Well 2 was drilled in 1981 and is on standby. Well 3 was installed in 2018 and is about a half mile north of town on Cottonwood Street/County Road 7. This well by far provides the best water and puts less stress on its filter at the treatment plant. There are two large filters that take out contaminants, primarily iron and manganese, in the treatment plant building, which is also on the same block as the water tower. Filter No. 2 is newer, installed in 2004, and tied to the cleaner Well 3, so Keenen thinks it is in good shape. Filter No. 1 was installed in the 1980s and works on water from Well 1. Keenan said this filter is showing signs of age and has been rehabbed in the past. He said filters don’t usually stand up to a second rehab, and his recommendation is to replace Filter 1. Councilman Alex Legge, a plumber by trade, wasn’t surprised. “I’ve made my living taking care of this water in town,” he said, “and I can assure you this filter he says is probably horrible has got to be absolutely horrible.” Keenen presented the council with cost estimates for several options. With the council’s agreement, he suggested focusing on three of the options: 1) Rehabbing the existing city wells. The cost estimate for this is $93,400, which would raise user’s monthly water bills by 84 cents. 2) Installing a new well north of town. This would cost $1.54 million and raise monthly rates $14.44. Keenan said this was the least urgent option of the three. 3) Rehab the existing water treatment plant, which includes replacing Filter 1. Keenan said replacing the filter is the most immediate need. This would cost an estimated $4.34 million and raise rates $38.66. “This is a problem in every small town,” councilman Ken Streff said. “Unless they planned way ahead and have all new stuff, every town has the same issue, I assume. The other thing we have to look at is something we really can’t control, the number of users. How do we get more people in town and drop that per-user cost. We can either charge more per person or get more people in town, or obviously do both.” Legge said he wants to study the numbers more and think about it before committing to any of the options. He said it will tie up city funds for decades. “There ain’t going to be nothing else being done until that’s paid off,” Legge said. “Whatever we choose (out of the options) is all there is for 20 years because people won’t stand for any more than that.” The council did not like the idea of adding these costs on top of the $10 million sewer plant project already under way but agreed it was necessary. “There’s no choice behind it,” Streff said. The council decided to apply for funding on all three of the options above in order to get a better idea of what each option would cost. Keenan was also asked to see if it was possible to get a 30-year term instead of the 20-year term presented. The next portion of the meeting reviewed the proposed 2025-2026 city budget with accountant Emily Pernieck of Erickson & Brooks. Read the full story in the print or e-edition. <<Back to the front page |