The "Final Report" and Recommendations of the Water Task Force

Jacob Dufour | Publisher
Aug 20
10 min read

On Thursday, August 14, Salem City Councilman Randy Lee announced on Facebook that he had hand-delivered a letter to the office of Mayor Justin Green regarding ongoing concerns from the community about the water supplied by Salem Water Works.

In his letter, Councilman Lee stated, "The Salem Water Task Force was created last year because of a lack of confidence and transparency in the water department which has been ongoing for several years. Councilman [Roger] Pennington was the Chair of that committee and compiled a comprehensive final report that identified several detailed inefficiencies with operations, oversight, chemical purchases, state fines and water rates; all of which viable solutions were offered for each of these problems. Despite these efforts, the Board of Public Works and Safety, including yourself have failed to take action to address any of these issues."

The letter went on to request the immediate implementation of the recommendations of the Water Task Force.

The Washington County Times contacted Councilman Lee and requested the "final report" document referenced in the letter. Below is the document provided to us in its entirety. The report, dated August 9–12, 2024, came to us in two sections: a PowerPoint-style presentation, and a supplementary written document that seemed to serve as narration for the presentation. To the best of our ability, we have reconstructed the presentation for an optimal reading experience.

[Publisher's Note – BEGINNING OF PROVIDED DOCUMENTS.]

"Board of Works Members, Mayor Green and citizens of Salem. I come tonight to deliver my final report of The Water Task Force. As you know, The Water Task Force was was created and adopted by unanimous approval of the Salem City Common Council on April 9, 2024 (ordinance 2024-11)."

"The purpose of the Task Force is to review operating procedures, water production costs, customer rates, status of facilities and bring transparency and increase public trust in the water utility. Upon reviewing these items the task force would make a final report to the Mayor, Board of Public Works and Salem City Council."

"The Task Force consists of 5 members. Two elected City Council members to be selected by the Council President (Roger Pennington and Dylan Moore), one appointment by the Mayor (Rebecca DeWeese) and two community members appointed by the City Council (Tom Jacobs and Jason Cockrill)."

"The Task Force met weekly, approximately 12 times, and took two off site visits (Town of Georgetown Wastewater Treatment Plant and City of Scottsburg Water Treatment Facility). The staff at both of these facilities were very professional and eager to assist us by answering questions and providing us with hard data about their operations. We appreciate them being generous with their time and allowing us complete access to their day to day operations. I also want to thank each of the Task Force members for volunteering their time and energy to this cause. This Task Force has never been about anything except gathering information and following the facts. This has been a huge undertaking and hundreds of hours of work have went into this report."

"My approach has been to ask a question and then research and examine that question with hard data and common sense analiysis [sic]

"During our site visit to the Salem Water Treatment Plant we were impressed with the updated and modern equipment, mixing systems, and alarm capabilities. Its obvious that the new treatment facility was needed and we have very clean and 21st century facility.

"Superintendent Jennifer Mills and her staff were very helpful and professional. It's obvious that they are dedicated to doing their best and I want to thank them for being helpful and polite during our visit. City water utility operators are vigilant and prompt in performing and reporting daily, bi weekly, weekly, monthly and annual tests. SLIDE."

"Lake John hay [sic] treatment plant was built in 1968. The lake is a surface water lake of about 210 acres built in 1964. Before the John Hay treatment plant the cities [sic] primary water source was Lake Salinda which went online in 1947. With Lake Salinda no longer in operation, Lake John Hay is the only current water source serving Salem and our two wholesale customers, East Washington Rural Water Cooperation and the Town of New Pekin. Currently the City has 3534 billable customers for the Salem water [sic] Utility."

"Question #1

Is the Water Utility operating effiently [sic] and are there any procedures, practices or policies that can be streamlined or improved?

"One expensive and inefficient procedure currently being performed is the transport and disposal of liquid sludge from the water plant. This is a complex and somewhat confusing issue. Currently this process involves transporting liquid sludge from the water plant by tanker truck to the wastewater treatment plant where its then dumped into the wastewater lagoons. This additional sludge being added into the lagoons could potentially be contributing to overflows of the lagoons that have occurred in recent years during heavy rain events causing untreated raw sewage to be discharged into the Blue River. As noted on the spreadsheet this is extremely expensive. SLIDE"

"We are probably only hauling about 2-5% solids, so the majority of what we are taking to the lagoons is liquid, which takes up a lot of space in the lagoons. The City has recently obtained a used truck to haul sludge, but that truck has been out of service due to mechanical reasons and also has a much smaller tank capacity requiring more trips.

"After consulting with several water engineers it is my opinion that another procedure exist that I feel we should explore.

1.) De-water sludge at the water treatment plant, purchase a sludge press that would allow us to streamline and consolidate this process. The 'cake' could then be land applied on an approved site or disposed of in the landfill. This is a common practice. This would require setting up a T-clip set of tests which includes heavy metals and toxic organic compounds. If all parameters test below thresholds values then any landfill can accept the material. This would require some site adjustments and additional equipment but the long term savings could be tremendous. Based upon our current production of 1.8 million gallons of water a day we may produce about one 20 cubic foot dumpster a week. As Mr Jacobs stated The City of Scottsburg has the advantage of having lagoons on site at their treatment plant which is a huge advantage. They did say that given the lack of options we currently have that we are doing the only thing we can do, that other procedures would be more efficient and cost effective. And I would like to add that currently we are being given only one opinion in dealing with sludge. I believe having a second opinion about our operations and potential options we may have would be a responsible and reasonable thing to do.

"Question #2

What are the energy costs at the treatment plant and what options do we have to possibly save money?

"Energy costs are expensive and only increasing over time. SLIDE"

"A figure of 93% of the cities [sic] current energy use and cost are being used at the water and wastewater treatment plants. This would lead me to believe that looking for innovative and creative options are needed. Todays [sic] solar power systems are not what they were even 10 years ago. Advancements in this industry have increased capabilities and affordability unlike we have ever seen. I will admit that I've been somewhat skeptical of so called 'green energy' before. However after approaching this with an open mind and thinking of long term solutions, I believe we have a great opportunity to take a big step in reducing our energy costs for the future. After consulting with a local solar company, 820, I have a proposal that is both affordable and practical. This is far cry from the 2.2 million dollar quote mentioned by Mr. Jacobs. 820 a company that does the entire project themselves. They are not a consulting firm like the group that gave the previous quote to the city. Using the available ground at the water treatment plant they estimate 3 rows of panels that will allow us to capture about 25% total energy consumption. This company also has in house grant writers and with numerous federal grants available for green energy its very possible that the vast majority of the project can be paid for without using city funds. A projected project cost of $750.000 with the possibility of expanding the the number of panels therefore increasing our solar percentage. Several municipalities are making this transition to full or partial to solar power including The Town of Georgetown that we visited. They are hoping to be online in early 2025."

"Question #3

Are there any possibilities of combining or streamlining current staff and positions?

"The majority of the time that the city requires an engineer are water and sewer related projects. So during those times when the city does not have a major capital project in the works (which is the majority of the time) I would like to explore the idea of possibly hiring a full time city engineer that would be certified to run the water treatment plant. This person is out there. The combining of those positions would save hundreds of thousands of dollars. The cost savings and the ability of having an engineer that works for us and only us and has the cities best interest at heart would be invaluable.

"Question #4

How much are we spending on chemicals?

SLIDE"

"After reviewing chemical costs for the city some very interesting things stood out. I requested invoices for chemicals for years 2017 thru 2023. Analyzing costs and factoring in Covid and inflation, our price increases over those years was on average 15-20%. So inflation has not been the overriding issue in regards to chemical prices. It appears that for reasons unknown to me, that beginning around 2021 we began using several different chemicals. SLIDE WITH INCREASES" [Publisher's Note – There does not seem to be a slide provided that goes here.]

"Why the change and the substantial increase in the volume of chemicals purchased? SLIDE" [Publisher's Note – There also seems to be no slide that goes here. The slides are numbered on the bottom left corner, so according to the document provided there are no pages missing.]

"Our spending for chemicals increased from 162,000 in 2021 to 489,00 in 2022. That's 327,000 in one year! This in no way can be accounted for by inflation. Who decides where we purchase chemicals? What is the citys [sic] bid process? Its my opinion that we need to immediately explore other options for chemical purchases. Possibly using different chemicals that are as effective and meet guidelines at a lower cost. A competitive bidding process needs to be implemented. I understand there are many factors and variables on chemicals used to treat a surface water source such as ours, but once again getting more than one opinion from one firm would be advisable.

"Question #5

What is the Water Deprecation Fund?

SLIDE"

"After reviewing the water utility financials I became curious about this fund and the amount of money going in and disbursements. I learned that the money going into this fund comes from the operating fund of the water utility. There appeared to be no set schedule on the amount of money deposited. It appears that when the operating account had a surplus that money was moved into the depreciation fund. These funds from the reports I’ve seen can be used for equipment upgrades. I don’t know the guidelines or the who determines the use of this fund. These numbers do shine a light on the fact that the water utility, despite not having consistent or substantial rate increases and making bond issue payments every year except for 2020 was actually doing very well and making impressive profits. At one point having over 1 million dollar balance. While I will agree that rate structures need to be revisited I would conclude that our financial issues doesn't appear be a lack of revenue but rather dramatic increases in spending. Its [sic] important to acknowledge the difference in possible small occasional rate increases to offset inflation for day to day operations vs rate increases for large, capital multi million dollar projects. A capital project like the proposed South Main Street project require a creative outside the box approach. The INDOT South Main Street road project has be planned as far back as 2022. We have had 2 years advance notice to prepare from a financial standpoint to fund the proposed water project. We need to explore all possible grant opportunities along with unconventional sources of revenue. I'm concerned about the future financial obligations of this city."

"Using the projected data provided by Mayor Greens [sic] financial advisors Baker Tilly, our city is expected to lose population over the next 5 years. That means fewer water customers and potentially less revenue. The current status has our city landlocked and with no future plans that I know of to aggressively attract commercial or manufacturing. The majority of new expenses will fall on a shrinking residential population. This is not sustainable. The simple and easiest solution that government always uses is to go back to the taxpayers and take more. I say that should be our last resort, not our first. Why not look inward first and hold ourselves accountable for our responsibility as the financial body of our city. What can we do to operate more effenciently [sic] without sacrificing the services our citizens enjoy and expect. Have we exhausted every potential funding source to lesson the burden on our people? We were told that the reason the City didn't apply for OCRA grants for the South Main Street project was because our water rates were too low and we didn't qualify. After speaking with OCRA that is not entirely true. The grant that we didn't apply for is based on poverty/income levels, not water rates. We need to approve and start the process of getting an updated income survey for our community. According to OCRA officials we were 1% below the level needed to qualify based upon our last survey.

"Additional

We have a incredible resource that most cities would love to have. A secondary water source. Lake Salinda. I know that this lake salinda [sic] has been offline for several years. I know the water quality in the lake was not suitable for treatment several years ago. I would like to know the status of the water quality and infrastructure at the pumphouse. I feel this can be a tremendous economic incentive for potential industrial or commercial development. After speaking with several mayors in our region, their number one priority is securing a secondary water source."

[Publisher's Note – There does not seem to be written narration that goes with the below slides.]