- Hanover Borough Council is scheduled to vote on whether to stop adding fluoride to the public water system.
- A memo to the council cited financial reasons for the proposed change.
- The water system has been adding fluoride since 1972, and the change would affect Hanover and four surrounding townships.
Hanover Borough Council is set to consider a proposal to stop adding fluoride to Hanover’s drinking water.
Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). In 1950, federal officials endorsed water fluoridation to prevent tooth decay. About one-third of community water systems — 17,000 out of 51,000 across the U.S. — serving more than 60% of the population fluoridated their water, according to a 2022 CDC analysis.
Locally, York Water Co. does not add fluoride to the water, except in West Manheim Township’s supply. That system was purchased by York Water Co. in 2007 with the understanding that it would continue to add fluoride to the supply, according to the utility.
Removing fluoride from water treatment is considered a “substantial modification” by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection and would require a “major permit amendment before cessation of water fluoridation.”
Local officials have discussed the possibility for some time. Most recently, the proposal advanced out of the March 12, 2026, meeting of Hanover’s Water & Sewer Committee, which voted to recommend the removal of fluoride to Hanover’s council.
Now, the issue is expected to be taken up at the Hanover Borough Finance and Personnel Committee’s 7 p.m. meeting on Wednesday, March 18.
If advanced by the council, the vote will authorize the Department of Water Resources to provide the required public notification over the change in treatment, and to “coordinate required communications with regulatory agencies.”
The first step, according to state guidance, would be to obtain a new water supply permit from the state.
In order to obtain the new permit, according to the state, the water company must provide a 30-day public comment period and prove it has provided advance notice to residents and area medical professionals before fluoridation is stopped.
In addition to serving Hanover Borough, the water system provides drinking water to residents in Penn Township, Conewago Township, McSherrystown Borough and Heidelberg Township.
It was not clear what led to the agenda item being included in the March Water & Sewer Committee, with the committee’s prior meeting, in January of 2026, being canceled “due to a lack of business.”
In the month before the recent March 2026 meeting, a presentation against fluoride use was promoted by former Hanover mayor SueAnn Whitman and attended by several members of Hanover Borough Council.
Posts by Whitman, in promoting the presentation using her “Former Mayor SueAnn Whitman 2020 to 2026, Hanover Borough, PA” page, referred to fluoride as a “toxin” and “significant health risk.” The event, which had rented the Bare Center event space of the Hanover Public Library on Feb. 7, 2026, was not widely advertised beyond Whitman’s posts.
Most recently on the topic by the municipality, the water committee had discussed fluoridation in March of 2025, but those conversations did not result in a proposal to discontinue the use of the additive. At the time, in 2025, staff had reportedly brought the topic to the committee due to it being a “relevant topic” in national discourse.
According to the 2025 meeting of the water committee, Hanover Borough has been treating drinking water with fluoride since 1972, with an annual treatment cost of around $23,000 a year.
In the most recent water quality report issued by Hanover’s water system, tests showed 0.65 parts per million of fluoride in Hanover’s drinking water.
With fluoride being a mineral naturally found in water, soil and plants, the report notes that local levels can fluctuate as a result of naturally occurring deposits of the mineral.
The current level recommended to be maintained by state and federal officials for dental health, 0.7 parts per million, is lower than the natural levels of the mineral in freshwater across several regions of the world, including India, China, and Iran.
As the York Water Company does not add fluoride to its water, Hanover is one of the few water systems in York County that participates in fluoridation, officials said at the 2025 meeting.
Memo cites financial considerations
While the health factors of fluoride use are the primary arena for public debate over the water treatment, nearly all of the arguments that were cited in the memo to the council instead focused on cost savings.
The memo, dated March 16, 2026, by Hanover Director of Water and Wastewater Treatment Tony Thomas, lists six factors in the recommendation, none of which focus directly on the aspects that frequently draw public debate.
A year prior, in the March 2025 meeting of the water committee, Thomas referred to fluoride as “one of the least expensive items we add,” and that it “does not affect overall water quality.”
The memo states that the committee’s “recommendation is based on aging equipment, increasing operational and chemical costs, supply-chain reliability concerns, and occupational safety considerations.”
According to the memo, the components of Hanover’s fluoridation system, “including chemical feed pumps, storage tanks, and monitoring equipment, have reached or exceeded their expected service life,” stating that the continued operation of these components “increases the likelihood of equipment failure and unplanned maintenance.”
The costs of the materials needed, according to the memo, have “increased in recent years, and availability has become less predictable.”
The materials require “specialized handling, storage, and spill response procedures,” which the memo argued the discontinuation of would reduce “occupational safety risks to plant personnel and lower overall facility liability.”
No distinction was made for the continued handling and storage of other bulk substances that would remain in use at the Hanover treatment plant, including chlorine, added as a water disinfectant, and aluminum sulfate, alum, added as a coagulant.
Discontinuation of the fluoridation process, Thomas wrote in the memo, would “reduce ongoing operation and maintenance costs and eliminate the need for future capital investment to replace or upgrade fluoridation equipment.”
“The borough will continue to meet all applicable drinking water quality standards without the addition of fluoride,” the memo states, noting that fluoride is not required by the Safe Drinking Water Act or in Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection regulations.
On the issue of health, the memo does not wade far into the public debate on either side of the topic.
Instead, the memo only argues that “alternative sources of fluoride, including toothpaste, mouth rinses, and routine dental care” are available to the public in place of systemwide fluoridation.
The memo also does not otherwise respond to public health concerns that have been regularly highlighted by the American Dental Association (ADA) in response to proposals to discontinue fluoridation.
Among several releases issued by the ADA, the association has responded to similar proposals by citing a lengthy list of studies from the CDC and other health agencies.
The CDC reports that the discontinuation of supplemental fluoridation triggers an on-average 25% increase in cavities and dental costs across a community.
Around $6.5 billion in dental costs each year are estimated to be saved nationwide, according to the CDC, which recognizes fluoridation as one of the nation’s “most successful public health campaigns” with the campaign triggering a “dramatic decline in cavities since community water fluoridation started in 1945.”
Public skepticism over the mineral’s addition to drinking water has been prevalent since communities first began intentionally supplementing the fluoride in their water in 1945. By around 2010, roughly two-thirds of the U.S. population had access to drinking water with fluoride added.
In recent years, pushes to ban fluoride have gained momentum amid the push-pull of research, with some studies linking excessive prenatal and childhood fluoride exposure with lower IQ scores. Other researchers have found no evidence that the mineral has any cognitive impacts.
In June of 2025, local Pa. Sen. Dawn Keefer, R-York, proposed a state ban on the water treatment, though the ban did not make it out of committee.
Original article online at: https://www.eveningsun.com/story/news/local/2026/03/17/hanover-pa-in-york-county-considering-removing-fluoride-from-water-system-drinking-water/89191896007