More than three dozen Minnesota cities, including Mound, have warned residents their drinking water might contain unsafe levels of manganese.
Mound Mayor Jason Holt tried just about everything to ensure his family had drinkable water: He bought it in bottles. He experimented with filters. He installed a special treatment system.
Now, four years after unsafe levels of manganese were detected in the city’s water supply, Holt says it’s time to “have an adult conversation” about what it would take for the city to build its first water treatment plant.
Mound is among more than three dozen Minnesota cities that have detected unsafe levels of manganese in some parts of their water systems. But finding a solution can prove difficult and costly. While some residents are pleading with local leaders to build new facilities fast, others are urging them to avoid hiking already high water bills.
“It’s a lot of money. We get it. We don’t take this lightly,” Holt said. But, at the same time, he added, “the city, just like every city in the state, should be providing drinkable water at the source.”
It’s difficult to tell precisely how many towns in Minnesota have unsafe levels of manganese in their drinking water. About five years ago, after new health research prompted state officials to release updated manganese recommendations, some cities chose to voluntarily test for it. Cities that have found high manganese include Mound, Ramsey and Lino Lakes.
Manganese is a substance naturally found in rocks, soil and groundwater. Humans need some manganese to stay healthy, but drinking excess levels can cause neurological problems. Adults’ attention, memory and motor skills might decline, while infants could develop learning or behavior problems, according to the Minnesota Department of Health.
When excess levels of manganese are detected, the Department of Health offers residents a few recommendations: They can drink bottled water. They can use a water softener. They can install home treatment systems.
“There is no perfect solution. They all have their pros and cons,” said Karla Peterson, chief engineer and technical advisor for drinking water at the Minnesota Department of Health.
Officials in some cities looked at supplying residents with filters or bottled water. Others sought estimates for treatment plants.
Lino Lakes expects to open a new $34 million facility off Birch Street next year. The city used $16.5 million in state funding to help cover the costs, and increased quarterly user fees for water customers from about $10 in 2022 to $25 in 2025.
Ramsey spent roughly $37 million to update its water distribution system and build a new treatment plant, which it hopes to finish this year. The city also relied on state funding and increased fees.
“I think there are a number of core services that cities are responsible for providing to their residents, and safe drinking water is one of them,” Ramsey City Administrator Brian Hagen said. “No one loves the cost to do this but recognizes it as a need, and we wanted to provide that safe water.”
Mound notified residents in 2021 that city wells had tested high for manganese, with some reporting concentrations more than twice the recommended level for adults and more than seven times the recommended level for infants.
Some residents didn’t need to make changes because they already had water softeners that treated for manganese. Others spent hundreds of dollars on new systems. Some started buying bottled water in bulk.
Mound received about $11 million in state and federal funding to help cover the costs of building a treatment facility and related upgrades. But inflation has driven up constructions costs, and the project estimates have risen from $26 million closer to $42 million.
While Mound continues to seek additional federal aid, some local officials want to start talking about whether the city could cover the remaining bill itself.
“We can’t keep sitting here, waiting for mom and dad at the [state and federal] government to give us money,” Holt told his colleagues in a council meeting last month.
City engineer Brian Simmons told council members he expects that, if they were to cover the costs just by adjusting water rates, the average person’s water bill could increase between $44 and $47 per month – a figure that he acknowledges might give some people “shell shock.”
But he also cautioned that a formal rate study could give more reliable figures and provide other funding ideas. The council could decide as early as this week whether to seek a rate study.
“We’re trying to be as fiscally responsible as possible while also trying to move as quickly as we can,” City Manager Jesse Dickson said in an interview. “It’s very much a balancing act.”