CLEARFIELD — Clearfield Municipal Authority announced it will take another vote on discontinuing fluoride.
At the authority’s recent meeting, following complaints from several residents about the authority not posting the item on its November meeting agenda, Chairman Russ Triponey said the authority would consider the item again at its Jan. 21 meeting.
Changes made in 2021 to the Pennsylvania Sunshine Act require agencies, such as the municipal authority, to post their agendas, on websites and at the location of their monthly meetings, at least 24 hours in advance of their monthly meetings. They must also make paper copies of agenda’s available at their monthly meetings.
Although the authority announced at its October meeting it would consider whether to keep or terminate fluoride treatment as part of its new water treatment plant’s system, it did not include the business item on its November meeting agenda.
In November, following several months of discussions and hearing and reading various opinions for and against, the authority voted to discontinue adding fluoride to drinking water.
The vote was split with Member Rick Mattern voting no. Member Todd Kling was absent for the vote, which came following the public comment period.
Residents and customers spoke both in favor of keeping the practice and discontinuing it.
Nicole Payonak, policy and advocacy coordinator for the Pennsylvania Oral Health Coalition, asked again not to discontinue treatment, saying many studies members may have reviewed while helping them determine their decision use fluoride levels that are two times the recommended limits. She said, as she has on previous occasions, adding fluoride is beneficial for good dental health in both children and adults.
“Clearfield is doing awesome (at treating its water). It is using a small but powerful amount — one drop in a 55-gallon bucket. It is providing a dental savings of $2.5 million for Clearfield residents. You are committed to keeping the community healthy.”
Resident Kathy Eberhart said she believed while the practice may have been beneficial when the authority began fluoride treatment, it is no longer exclusive for customers who want it. She said treatment is readily available in various forms.
“I appreciate your work to provide safe drinking water but this is not 1945, it is nearly 2025. You need to make your decision on what we know today. Fluoride can damage the plant, leading to more costs for customers. A small amount of water is used for drinking while all water is treated. Please end the unnecessary, costly and questionable practice and give customers a health choice,” she said.
Another customer who spoke at the meeting, said, “I don’t want fluoride in my body. I believe I would be better off without it. I think the authority can spend its money in better ways.”
Engineer Jim Balliett of Gwin, Dobson & Foreman Inc., Altoona, told the authority at previous meetings, there are difficulties obtaining safe and dependable fluoride supplies and the price has been steadily increasing. He also spoke about fluoride being very corrosive to the plant’s treatment storage area and mixing components.
Balliett urged the board to make a decision on whether to continue treating drinking water with fluoride by the end of November as a project to add a new filtration system at the Montgomery plant is expected to be advertised by the first of the year.
Manager Richard Lopez said at the November meeting, the authority has an approximately six to eight month supply of fluoride and it will continue to treat water until the supply is exhausted.
Balliett said it will likely take that long to get final permission from the state Department of Environmental Protection and acquire new permitting to supply drinking water.
Original article online at: https://www.theprogressnews.com/news/cma-to-take-another-vote-on-adding-fluoride-to-drinking-water/article_823e7d4a-c6e2-11ef-8084-2781d169a732.html