Wastewater prices set to increase in 2024 as Council votes move forward with legal action

Non-functioning reed beds long-running problem on south end

By Danielle Boos
Posted 9/14/23

Stanley residents will soon see an increase on their water bills. With the exception of Council member Jacob Huff, who was absent, the Stanley City Council unanimously voted to approve a 3% …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Wastewater prices set to increase in 2024 as Council votes move forward with legal action

Non-functioning reed beds long-running problem on south end

Posted

Stanley residents will soon see an increase on their water bills. With the exception of Council member Jacob Huff, who was absent, the Stanley City Council unanimously voted to approve a 3% wastewater increase at the September 5th meeting.   

Mayor Al Haas explained the reason for the rate increase is to cover the chemical cost. “We use a lot of chemicals in the waste treatment plant. Chemicals are going up and we have to try and keep up with it,” he said.  

The rate increase will begin in January 2024 and residents can expect to see the effects of that increase on their first quarterly bill. 

Wastewater operator Nick Martin also attended the Monday evening meeting to inform the Council and answer questions regarding the issues surrounding reed bed #4 at the Stanley wastewater treatment plant.  

“It was used as a sacrificial reed bed before I started here,” Martin said.  After a previous city wastewater operator was given incorrect instructions concerning the 4th reed bed at the wastewater treatment plant, the bed filled up with filamentous microorganisms and there was nowhere to go with the sludge in the system. So, the 4th bed was used as a sacrificial bed.  

“It was a holding tank,” Haas interjected to which Martin agreed. Martin explained that the stress was needed to be alleviated from the remaining beds, so the sludge was then hauled to a landfill per the permit with the DNR. A contract was then entered in with Constructed Wetlands Group and negotiations were made with Scott Davis regarding the reed bed situations where it was also discovered that the reed beds were mis engineered for size. In order for the plant to operate effectively it would need four additional reed beds to alleviate the amount of sludge it produces. Instead of paying the regular price of a reed bed planting, Davis and a previous Council member agreed to $20,000 and Davis was going to give phragmites for the reed bed. After the delivered rhizomes were planted, operators watered and took care of them. All of the reeds died except for a handful.  Davis mentioned that the same type of rhizomes, that were delivered to multiple other sites, died as well, including a plant in New York, Indiana and Wisconsin. Davis stated he would replace the reeds, but it’s been almost a year with no action and Davis won’t return phone calls.  

Council member Mark Fitzsimmons asked if Martin has documentation of what was put on them. 

Martin remarked that they have documentation from Davis where Davis acknowledged that there was a problem with the delivered reeds.  

“I think we need to move to litigation. Apply for our time, material and damages because he’s not doing business right,” Fitzsimmons remarked referencing Davis. “The longer we wait the more we talk about it.”  

Council member Laurie Foster asked if there is a price guarantee on the refund of the reeds that were paid for.  

“That bed is still dead, correct?” Fitzsimmons asked and said they should sue for damages as time has been spent waiting.  

“Basically, trying to recoup some portion of our $20,000.00 roughly,” he remarked.  

“We have a lot of money invested into the plant itself with that upgrade in 2016. We invested a huge amount of money into having a reed bed system in our plant,” Martin said and started to offer the Council information on how to solve the reed bed problem going forward.   

Fitzsimmons interrupted, “But I think we just need to move on with litigation. We can maintain the reed beds after we find out the amount. What we’re looking at here today is what we’re doing with the litigation part of it or how we’re going to recoup our money, not how we are going to reestablish the reed bed. No offense, Nick, but we’re just trying to get our money back.” 

I agree,” Martin said, “but we should be looking forward too.”  

He added that the City of Stanley is not the only victim of CWG. 

Haas stated that they should look forward but concentrate on getting the money back so, they can do some research on what they can do with the reed bed moving forward.  

“Nick, you do a wonderful job with everything you do,” Foster mentioned to Martin as he has helped the City of Stanley to fix the reed bed issues that preexisted his tenure with the wastewater department. He has also helped in working to update the City’s lift stations.  

After discussion, the City Council voted to pursue legal action against the Constructed Wetlands Group for Reed Bed #4 at the Stanley Wastewater Facility.