|
PUD letter will oppose Port Angeles water fluoridation PORT ANGELES -- Clallam County Public Utility District No. 1 commissioners agreed Monday to write a letter opposing planned fluoridation of the city water supply. The letter will be given to fluoridation opponents, who will present it to the City Council during a public hearing set July 28-29 at 6-9 p.m. both nights in the council chambers of City Hall, 321 E. Fifth St. Since Clallam PUD isn't involved in the appeal that generates the public hearing, the district can't send the city a letter directly, said Blyn physician Eloise Kailin, one of the appellants. Kailin gave a draft opposition letter to Clallam PUD General Manager Dennis Bickford at the PUD commissioners' Monday afternoon meeting. ``I must present it to the city because the hearing is closed to outside speakers,'' she said. Two suggestions The letter asks the City Council to require either an environmental-impact statement for the fluoridation proposal or to stop the project entirely. The City Council voted 6-1 in February 2003 to accept a Washington Dental Services Foundation grant of as much as $260,000 to install a water fluoridation system and fund public education efforts. The city Community Development Department ruled 13 months later that fluoridation of the city's water supply poses no significant environmental threat. Kailin has appealed that ruling, as have the groups Protect the Peninsula's Future and Clallam County Citizens for Safe Drinking Water, as well as Port Angeles resident Barney Munger. RELATED STORY PUD to send anti-fluoridation letter July 20th, 2004 - 5:29am (Port Angeles) – Water fluoridation opponents took their fight to the Clallam County Public Utility District Monday, asking for the PUD’s help in stopping the City of Port Angeles efforts to fluoridate city water, much of which would flow to PUD customers. PUD Commission Chairman Will Purser says the PUD will write a letter opposing the city adding fluoride to its water. Purser told KONP news that Monday’s action did not necessarily reflect the Commission’s views on the fluoridation issue. In other action, the Commissioners voted to postpone sending invitations to bid on a new water treatment plant, because by the time bids came back it would be too late in the year to begin construction.
|