Madeira uses approximately 20% of the water produced by the Village and accounts for roughly 24% of the revenue due to minimum billing. The effects of this change are currently being explored in Council’s annual water rate analysis. If this change occurs, a two-year transition is required. Therefore, budgetary effects would not be seen until 2027.

As an offset, Village households have significantly expanded. The northern area of the Village will have over 100 new homes over the next few years – over 50 of which are completed or platted. In addition, various other land parcels have been developed throughout the Village.

Each year, Council performs a water rate analysis based on past year budget performance and multi-year forecasts within the Water Works Maintenance and Operation Fund and Capital Reserve Funds. Money is transferred on an annual basis from the Maintenance and Operation Fund to the Capital Reserve Fund based on cost for various projects – water main replacements, necessary plant upgrades, equipment replacement, etc.

A potential water tower bond payment has been accounted for in previous water rate discussions. Once the USEPA announced the PFAS mandate in April 2024, the Village immediately began exploring multiple different sources of funding, including, but not limited to: principal forgiveness from various state and federal organizations, low interest state loans, class action settlement monies from 3M, Dupont, TYCO, BASF, longer termed bonds and water rate options.

A 30-year bond is included in Council’s annual water rate analysis for the water tower and PFAS removal facility. Bond payments are accounted for in the Capital Reserve Fund and included in the annual water rate (similar to mortgage payment). There is not a separate property tax levy associated with the bond payments, the bond payments are funded by water bills.

Please refer to the Town Hall presentation slides through this link for information about cost comparisons. These estimates include ranges as there are still many unknown factors and assumptions are based on information the Village has at this time.

The following suggestions have been made by residents:

1. Charging Higher Rates to Non-Indian Hill Residents – Most other jurisdictions that supply water outside of their respective jurisdiction do so at a higher rate. Cincinnati, Wyoming, and Milford are examples.  Indian Hill is somewhat unique, as the rate paid for 1 CCF (748 gallons) is the same no matter which jurisdiction is served – Madeira, Terrace Park, Indian Hill, Symmes Township, or Montgomery.
2. Tiered Water Rates – The cost of the PFAS removal facility and water tower is driven by flow rate and capacity needs. Some water customers have asked for higher unit rates for higher volume users.  This could drive improved water conservation and assist with the sufficiency of the aquifer at the wellfield during drought periods; however, higher usage increases revenues.
3. Seasonal Water Rates – IHWW’s water production varies between 1.5 million gallons per day in the winter to 5 million gallons per day in the summer. Water irrigation is the biggest reason causing the fluctuation.

Council will evaluate the above during its annual water rate analysis.

Please refer to the Town Hall presentation slides through this link for information about cost comparisons. These estimates include ranges as there are still many unknown factors and assumptions are based on information the Village has at this time.

The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency recognizes three options for removal of PFAS from drinking water: granular activated carbon (GAC), ion exchange (IX), and reverse osmosis (RO). In 2023-2024, the Village contracted with an engineering firm to evaluate all three options and the engineer recommended GAC as the best solution for our system. The primary drawback of RO systems is the large volume of wastewater created in the process. Industrial-grade reverse osmosis systems typically reject 1 – 2 gallons of water per 10 gallons purified, achieving 80-90% efficiency. This is water pumped from our wells into the RO system but discharged as unusable. Given IHWW’s range of daily production between 1.5 million gallons to 5 million gallons per day, this could be 150,000 gallons to 1 million gallons of water pumped out of the aquifer and rejected per day. Due to aquifer conditions and having no available sanitary sewer system near the water treatment plant, this was not a viable option.

Indian Hill has also worked with a group currently funded by USEPA Research and Development on a process known as Foam Fractionation. This technology is still being evaluated as a potential method for PFAS removal; however, it is not currently recognized as an approved method by the Ohio EPA. The USEPA at this time has a broader acceptance of technologies in regard to PFAS removal.

Yes, individual customers may have in-home filtration systems installed. Some home filtration systems are capable of PFAS removal. Any individual system used for PFAS removal must abide by the manufacturers’ recommended service and replacement guidelines.

As an example, an in-home Reverse Osmosis (RO) system can be installed. Most RO installations are located at the kitchen sink and used for drinking and cooking to reduce the amount of rejected water from the system. Residential reverse osmosis systems discharge between 1 and 5 gallons of rejected water per every one gallon of water purified.

Please visit this link for home filtration system information published by the Ohio Department of Health.

Privately-owned rainwater collection is an option residents have for lawn irrigation. This will reduce the amount of water purchased, providing savings on your water bill in the grass-growing season. Rainwater collection methods could be as simple as installing rain barrels with garden hose spigots.

The Village is a member of a Regional Storm Water Collaborative, which hosts an annual rain barrel art auction at the Cincinnati Zoo each April. For more information about the auction for rain barrels painted by local artists, please visit the link below.

https://www.savelocalwaters.org/auction.html

Larger scale collection and pumping would need to be looked at on a case by case basis and may require more planning to isolate this from the domestic drinking water supplied by the Village. Two sources of water on one property can lead to possible cross contamination issues. Please contact the water works for more details (513) 831-3885.

Council may evaluate incentives during its annual water rate analysis.

The EPA estimates that between 6% and 10% of the 66,000 public drinking water systems in the United States may need to take action to reduce PFAS, and at least 45% of tap water is estimated to contain one or more PFAS. The exact figures are unknown at this time as the April 2024 PFAS regulations provide a time period of three years for public water systems to complete initial monitoring for PFAS. Click here to access the USEPA site.

The Village and several other public water systems have already tested for and found PFAS levels in their water through prior Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Rule testing. OEPA has a website which lists and maps PFAS sampling results. Other public water systems in the area with PFAS levels in excess of the new regulations include Kings Island, Loveland, Milford, Morrow, Western Water, Wilmington, and the Bolton water treatment plant of GCWW. Click here to access the OEPA site.

It is possible that these regulations could be amended or delayed. However, if the Village was to anticipate a change, and that change doesn’t occur, the Village would not be able to meet the compliance deadlines currently in place.

The Village itself is not taking a stand for or against the regulation of PFAS, as the public has a wide range of views on the matter as it relates to public health. Rather, the Village has a goal of continuing to be compliant with drinking water regulations.

The Village has applied for funding and anticipates future funding application requests to the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency for assistance with PFAS removal.

The American Water Works Association (AWWA), of which the Village is a member, has filed a lawsuit against the USEPA for its PFAS regulations.

Lobbying efforts in Washington D.C. are underway by several organizations that must abide by the same standards as the Village.

Violations from the EPA, significant penalties including fines, potential jail sentences for negligence and possible shut down of the water plant as the license would not be renewed.

The health effects of PFAS have been heavily researched and discussed by multiple credentialed health and environmental professionals. We recommend researching the topic with the national or state Environmental Protection Agency, County or State Health Departments.

The purpose of the community engagement is for the Village to educate the residents on its efforts to comply with a USEPA mandate.

Fluoridation of water was adopted into the City’s Charter by Village residents. A petition process is necessary to get the item on the ballot for voters to agree to a change of the Charter.

When the water tower was built in 1936, this single source of elevated water storage was not planned to meet the water system needs of 2025. This water tower used by Indian Hill Water Works (IHWW) holds 500,000 gallons while IHWW produces a daily average ranging from 1.5 million gallons (in winter) to 5 million gallons per day (in summer). Not only is the existing tower under capacity, but the capacity is operationally limited because there is only a 3’ elevation range it must be kept within to properly pressurize the water system.

With an effective operating capacity in the current structure of only 70,000 gallons out of 500,000 gallons (14%), it requires a continued source of pumped water to remain in operation. The effective storage only lasts about 15 minutes during the summer and requires replenishment by some means of pumping from the underground storage tanks. Pumped water depends on electricity, which is not as reliable as gravity, to pressurize the water system.

To assist in prolonging the tower’s viability through the years, the Village performed significant infrastructure improvements:

• 1963 – Two (2) 1-million-gallon underground tanks installed
• 1965 – Perimeter Seal/Concrete Repair 1976 – Exterior and Interior rehabilitation 1981 – Tower relining
• 1988 – One (1) 1-million-gallon underground tank installed 1992 – Tower restoration after fire damage
• 2005 – Epoxy liner installed
• 2012 – Fill pipe, catwalk, and windows replaced

The Village has three Master Plans which all recommend a water tower replacement with a 1 million-to-1.5-million-gallon tank.

Currently, the tower needs a new liner, a new roof, and extensive exterior repair. Village Council determined it is not fiscally responsible to spend $2 – $3 million dollars on rehabilitating a structure that is close to the end of its useful life (not counting on-going maintenance costs in perpetuity) and doesn’t meet the required needs of the water system.

Not building a water tower on the same site as the existing water tower comes down to a level of risk the Village is willing to accept when it comes to the Village’s sole location of water storage, the means of providing drinking water to customers as well as fire flows to the service area.

The existing water tower site on Miami Road is also the site of three underground water storage vaults to remain in service. These vaults cannot support the weight of construction vehicles above them, and limit the area on site where a new water tower may be placed.

The availability of water storage, particularly the elevated storage in the existing tower, is critical to the health and safety of the general public until at least the new water tower is in service. Should the existing water tower be taken out of service prior to the new tower being operational, Indian Hill Water Works (IHWW) would be dependent on pumps running in constant operation to pressurize the water system for not only fire flows, but even general domestic use, and maintaining a system pressure high enough to avoid system-wide boil water advisories

Pumps rely on not only the mechanical components to function, but also require a steady supply of electricity. Although a back-up generator is on-site in the event of a power outage, it is also mechanical equipment susceptible to failure. Water towers supply system pressure by using gravity rather than electricity. While electric service may be unreliable at times, gravity always works.

Further, a chance of having the underground water storage out of service would leave the system with insignificant water storage and increase the potential for use of the emergency water system interconnection with Greater Cincinnati Water Works (GCWW) to meet the demand and avoid water outages.

However, GCWW reserves the right to deny emergency water service to IHWW and any other wholesale or retail customer outside their corporation limits in order to prioritize serving the customers within their jurisdiction.

Risk potential for long term water outages, water main breaks from operating a closed system, boil water advisories, and reduced fire protection for the existing tower site on Miami Road is too high to consider the site as feasible.

Please refer to the Water Tower Site Consideration packet using this link for detailed information about eight sites considered for the proposed water tower.

Below is an excerpt from this document of the rationale summary chart:

While the Village has the legal right to use eminent domain, it prefers not to pursue challenges and risks significant project delays associated with taking of personal property rights with this route.

A new water tower would slightly increase water pressure on the system. The water at a customer’s tap is directly impacted by the difference between the elevation of the tap and the elevation of the water level in the water tower. Each foot of height provides 0.43 pounds per square foot (psi) of water pressure. The high-water elevation of the proposed tower is 7 feet higher than the existing tower, which will result in about an overall additional 3.03 psi of water pressure in the system.

By raising the high-water elevation, it will allow for better turnover within the structure and overall better water quality for our customers. Typical water supply pressures range between 50 and 100 psi.

A disconnection of Madeira from the system could also increase system pressure between 2-6 psi.

The water tower height depends on three factors.

First, the high water elevation of the proposed water tower will be designed to be set at 967’ above mean sea level (MSL) from engineering recommendations for the IHWW system and elevation range of the service area. The difference in elevation between the tower’s water level and the customer’s taps directly impacts the available water pressure for the customer. This high water level was determined based on elevation and pressure ranges, turn-over rates of the stored water within the operating zone, and ratings of the existing pumps at the water treatment plant to verify they have the capacity to fill the proposed water tower.

The second factor is the ground elevation at the tower site. The higher the ground elevation is above mean sea level, the shorter the water tower structure can be. It is a simple subtraction to calculate. At the recommended Camp Jim B location, the ground elevation is approximately 850’ MSL. Therefore, the height from the ground to the high water level of the proposed tower at that site is (967’ MSL – 850’ MSL =) 117’ MSL.

The third factor, the aesthetics of the tower have not yet been determined. If a decorative roof peak style or features above the normal top of tank are desired by the community, those will add to the overall tower height.

The Village understands that aesthetics of the water tower are important. The Village has engaged a consultant to prepare renderings of a basic water tower at the proposed elevation and size. This will be done from three different views toward the proposed site solely for purposes of estimating the visibility of the tower. The aesthetics of the proposed water tower will be guided with input from the community.

After the construction of the new water tower is built at a higher elevation, the existing tower will no longer be able to be functional and will be decommissioned from use. It is unknown at this time whether the Village will demolish the structure or continue to invest funds to maintain it into the future as a historic landmark. The proposed water tower still needs to be designed, with construction anticipated to begin in 2026 and last for 18-24 months before the transition of operation occurs. There is still time for the community to contemplate and voice opinions on the future of the existing water tower. The proposed water tower and PFAS removal facility decisions are currently the most urgent matters.

Indian Hill Water Works Benefits

1. The Little Miami aquifer is the source of IHWW’s water. Underground aquifers are often preferred over surface water sources because they tend to be less susceptible to contamination and take longer to become contaminated due to natural filtration as groundwater moves through layers of rock and sediment. Water drawn from wells generally requires less treatment processes to make it safe for drinking water.
2. Increased resiliency by maintaining a reliable source of water and contracting with GCWW for an emergency back-up supply, such as was used for supplementation during the drought of 2024.
3. Controlling overall water rates within the Village now and into the future.
4. Money from payment of your water bill goes directly right back into the community being served.
5. Maintaining the current high level of 24/7/365 service provided to customers by IHWW.
6. Both IHWW and GCWW must meet OEPA drinking water standards.  Water quality is additionally controlled by Indian Hill through a much shorter distribution system, reducing the age of treated water reaching customers.
7. Per residential sentiment, other Indian Hill departments preferred in-house versus outsourcing– e.g., waste collections/recycling, dispatch, park maintenance, etc.

GCWW Benefits

1. No need for Village to fund its own PFAS removal facility as the purchased water would be treated already.
2. Indian Hill customer base becomes a part of a much bigger system to spread future costs out among more users.
3. The Ohio River is an abundant source of water.

GCWW Costs

1. GCWW’s water source is the Ohio River. Surface water is generally more susceptible to contamination from exposure in the environment, runoff, air fallout, and other sources, leading to higher concentrations of contaminants. It generally requires more treatment to make it safe for drinking, which was why GCWW installed a granular activated carbon (GAC) facility in the 1990’s.
2. Reliability of water is reduced as the water supply from GCWW is not guaranteed to wholesale and retail customers. If a water shortage emergency were to occur, City of Cincinnati residents and businesses will receive water as the first priority. In addition to the annexation for water service requirement that GCWW imposed in the 1940’s, it was also water outages experienced by a past GCWW labor strike and contamination from wide-spread flooding in 1937 that caused IHWW to be established.
3. Other possible scenarios which could lead to water outages may include severe droughts, train derailments or other sources of long-lasting chemical spills introduced upstream in the Ohio River.
4. If GCWW provides water in lieu of IHWW providing a PFAS removal facility, both the IHWW wellfield and water treatment plant which has been invested in and upgraded many times over the years will need to be abandoned and demolished.
5. GCWW is anticipated to have future rate increases for not only general inflation and infrastructure replacements, but also for $125 Million in PFAS removal upgrades at the Bolton treatment plant and $200 Million in lead water service line replacement costs. GCWW’s rate increase is set at 5.55% for Hamilton County incorporated areas in 2026.  GCWW rates are out of the Village’s control. If a transition to GCWW for water supply was chosen in lieu of IHWW, the community would not be paying to install PFAS removal assets for IHWW, but would be financially contributing to GCWW’s PFAS removal facility and other infrastructure needs.

Similar to the court decision in the 1940’s which led to IHWW being founded to avoid annexation into Cincinnati to receive water service, GCWW still does not have responsibility to serve water outside their jurisdiction. Indian Hill’s water needs would fall behind GCWW’s number one priority, City of Cincinnati businesses and residents.

If GCWW had a water shortage, they would be able to deny water to Indian Hill.  Reliability of water service is a concern with joining GCWW as IHWW would no longer have any emergency interconnection and service contract with a secondary water source. GCWW would be the sole provider with no emergency backup supply.

Madeira has had two different water suppliers for 75 years. This resulted in two different water rates for members of their community.

Moreover, Madeira owns its water mains on the side of the city that IHWW supplies water. Consequently, they are responsible for the replacement of these mains. IHWW is only responsible for maintenance and supply of water. Madeira deferred water main replacement for the city on the side Indian Hill serves for approximately 70 years. For all those years, IHWW has handled the water main breaks, project inspections, home leak checks, meter readings and line locating at no cost to Madeira.

Over the last five years, Madeira began replacing a large volume of its water infrastructure as the deferred replacement left its infrastructure in a deteriorating state. To replace large volumes of pipe, Madeira Council approved a 25% surcharge to be placed on Indian Hill’s water rates in 2012. Indian Hill was simply the collecting agent for the 25% fee. The entire 25% collected was given to Madeira to fund its infrastructure.

However, this surcharge wasn’t sufficient to account for the necessary volume of infrastructure replacement. Therefore, the Madeira Council voted to increase the surcharge from 25% to 41% in 2023. This 41% surcharge has become a significant point of contention to these customers. Consequently, Madeira solicited proposals for GCWW to take over their current water system supplied by Indian Hill. Madeira has received an aggressive proposal from GCWW to supply water to the entire city and take over ownership of the distribution system. Adding more customers helps GCWW offset $125 million Bolton Plant PFAS facility and $200 million in lead service line replacement.

A transition to a new sole water source is not like flipping a light switch. For example, the expected transition to serve 60% of Madeira may take two years.

Available water storage capacity (a larger water tower) would become increasingly important to the Village if the intent was to buy water from GCWW since reliability of water supply would be diminished with the loss of an emergency back-up supply contract with a second water source. GCWW will prioritize its customers within the City of Cincinnati over any wholesale and retail customers outside their City limits if they experience any shortages.

Some water system modeling and engineering considerations will be necessary as the current IHWW water system has been designed with the water coming from the current treatment plant on the east side of the system for the last 75 years. The water mains leaving the water treatment plant are large 12”, 16”, and 20” diameter pipes, as it is required to get a large volume of water out to the system and to the storage tanks currently on Miami Rd.

To change direction IHWW water mains receive water may require new water mains to provide sufficient flows. Maintaining large diameter mains on the east side of the water system may create water quality and disinfection byproduct problems in the area and require replacement with smaller distribution mains.

When you chlorinate water, it has a certain life expectancy and must be turned over, or used at a certain rate, to stay within safe tolerances for drinking. The limited number of customers available on the east side to turn this large volume over could present a problem.

There are other potential issues with pH differences as well.