Much of the infrastructure that makes up the backbone of our nation’s clean drinking water systems runs under city streets and is largely out of sight (and mind). But municipalities nationwide know firsthand these water systems are aging and many of them are in need of repair or replacement.
When these replacement projects are undertaken, many of them require more money than local utilities have. For example, in my hometown (Tillamook, Oregon), we have seen what others across the country have seen: important federal investments in water infrastructure are really important but it is also critically important that we use all of our resources smartly.
The Tillamook City Council recently awarded a contract to an engineering firm to design a major water project that involves shifting pipes to bypass the airport. The city’s water distribution network goes under the runway, which could be a disaster if there is a major seismic event.
The project is not inexpensive — and when we’re talking about our drinking water infrastructure, we need to make sure that we’re not cutting corners over dollars and cents. The project has a budget of $18 million, and the city is using federal dollars from the American Recovery Plan Act for that. That’s a lot of money, but it’s a drop in the (drinking water) bucket in terms of recent federal investments.
Over the last couple of years, Congress and the White House have worked together to approve billions of dollars for water infrastructure. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act of 2021 included $55 billion over the next five years for drinking and wastewater projects. The Environmental Protection Agency will distribute that money through its drinking water and clean water revolving loan programs.
The drinking water program has $30.7 billion (including $15 billion for replacing lead pipes) and the clean water program — mainly wastewater treatment and managing stormwater — has $12.7 billion.
In February, the EPA announced that it would send more than $26 million to our state for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund. And like others around the country, we really need that funding.
In 2019, the American Society of Civil Engineers gave Oregon a grade of C-minus for its drinking water infrastructure. That’s not the worst grade, but it’s not nearly good enough. The group noted that there is a “growing recognition of resiliency challenges” in water systems. Elected officials have an obligation to make sure their communities’ infrastructure can withstand a major seismic event.
That’s why I sponsored a resolution in the Energy, Environment and Land Use Steering Committee for the National Association of Counties (NACo) that makes clear that local officials and water utility professionals should be the ones who decide the best materials to use in infrastructure projects. In speaking with colleagues in other states, I’ve learned that there were lobbying efforts to force legislation that would require policymakers to base their decisions solely on the price of pipes. Just like the projects, pipes used in water systems are not inexpensive but not all pipes are created equal. We have specific needs in Oregon and even the engineering group’s report highlighted our biggest fear: seismic activity.
We cannot run the risk of using pipes in drinking water projects that cannot withstand the pressure and disruption of an earthquake. While our state lawmakers come from our local communities, they are a few steps removed from the local decision-making.
The Tillamook city council members, the engineering firm they decided to hire, and other water professionals with whom they consult are the ones who need to decide what kinds of piping to use in that project. The Tillamook County Commission may have input on the project, but ultimately, we need to respect the decision the city and its experts make.
In doing research for the NACo resolution, I found that there was a national effort to eliminate local control of such decisions. Those pushing that want to deny engineers, utilities and local officials a voice in how to spend their communities’ dollars. That’s exactly the wrong thing to do. The resolution makes clear that NACo takes no position on the pipe materials — just that we, as county officers, want to ensure that the decisions are made by the right people — those closest to the projects.
Communities have unique needs. For us, it’s that fear of earthquakes and the need to design projects that can stand up to those forces. But it’s not just earthquakes.
Our drinking water pipes need to last for generations, not just decades. The federal dollars we’re receiving give us a once-in-a-generation opportunity to invest in our drinking water infrastructure. Decisions about what kinds of pipes to use must be made by the people who know their communities best and have the best interests of their communities at heart.
