Macon's Water Future Is Now in the Hands of the Voters

City Council puts the approximately $80 million water and wastewater treatment project on the November 3 ballot. What happens next could affect Macon for generations...

Macon voter discuss water plant issue

The waiting is over. On Monday night, August 24, the Macon City Council voted to place the proposed approximately $80 million water and wastewater treatment project on the November 3, 2026 ballot. After months of engineering studies, environmental work, equipment research, financing discussions and questions about the future of Macon's aging treatment facilities, the issue has finally moved from the City Council chambers to the citizens of Macon where it belongs.

The November election will give Macon voters the opportunity to decide whether the community should move forward with financing and construction of two new treatment facilities to replace plants that have been serving this community for more than 60 years. It is a tremendous decision for a community of our size, and I don't believe anybody should make that decision without first understanding what we are actually voting on, what happens if the proposal passes, and perhaps most importantly, what happens if it doesn't.

I have spent the past several weeks looking into this issue, including a personal tour of the fresh drinking-water treatment facility on August 14. Brent, the plant manager, spent considerable time with me walking through the facility and explaining what I was seeing. Because of my own background working with industrial equipment, control systems and water-treatment facilities, I have enough familiarity with these systems to understand much of what I was looking at.

My first conclusion was something I have already written about and want to repeat because it is important:

Macon has good drinking water. I have no reason to believe otherwise. The people operating that plant are keeping an aging facility functioning and doing what they were hired to do. What I saw wasn't a treatment plant that had simply stopped working. Quite the opposite. I saw an old plant that is still doing its job. The problem is that it has been running 24/7 for over 60 years!

During my tour, Brent told me that replacing the facilities and getting the new plants constructed, equipped, tested and operational could take approximately five years. That statement deserves some consideration because it changes the way we should look at the November election. Even if voters approve the proposal, Macon will not have two new treatment plants next year or the year after. The existing facilities will continue carrying the load while engineering, financing, permitting, construction, equipment procurement, installation and testing take place.

In other words, the plants we have today aren't going anywhere anytime soon. Macon will continue depending upon them while the replacement facilities are being built.

That brings us to the question I believe deserves the most attention before November 3:

What happens if the voters say no?

A NO vote does not make the two aging treatment plants disappear, and it certainly doesn't make them capable of providing another 20 years of service. It doesn't create additional drinking-water capacity, eliminate the need for new wastewater treatment technology or stop the regulatory requirements that are coming. The basic problem remains exactly where it was the day before the election. The two new plants are still going to be needed & they will still be constructed.

The difference is that the path to getting them could become considerably more complicated.

The Risk of Waiting

If the citizens vote no on the November ballot concerning the water treatment facilities, the underlying problem does not disappear. The existing plants will continue operating, but construction of the replacement facilities could be delayed for another year or so while the city, MMU, financial advisers and the various boards and committees involved in the project return to the financing table and determine how to proceed. That delay could be significant because the financing opportunities being pursued today are not necessarily guaranteed to remain available under the same terms later. Missouri's State Revolving Fund programs provide below-market financing for qualifying drinking-water and wastewater projects, and SRF loans can sometimes be combined with grants or other assistance. Missouri DNR says those programs operate through funding cycles and that grants are available only on a limited basis for qualifying projects.

That is where the citizens of Macon have a very difficult decision to make.

Do we continue to kick the can down the road for another year or so and risk losing access to the most favorable financing opportunities currently being pursued, potentially leaving Macon dependent upon more expensive secondary financing and facing a substantially higher rate increase than the approximately $52 per month currently being discussed?

Or do we vote to approve the water treatment project as proposed and give the city the opportunity to move forward while favorable SRF financing, possible grants and other assistance may be available?

There is another side to that decision that cannot be ignored. Every month that passes is another month that Macon's two aging treatment facilities continue operating. The drinking-water plant is already operating at full capacity during the summer months, according to Dana Ulmer, and the wastewater facility faces additional regulatory requirements in the years ahead. Brent, the drinking-water plant manager who personally gave me a tour of the facility, told me that constructing the replacement plants and bringing them online could take approximately five years.

Nobody knows when an aging piece of equipment will experience the failure that finally forces the issue. It could happen next year, five years from now or considerably later. But the possibility exists, and Macon cannot build two new treatment facilities overnight after a major failure has already occurred.

That is why I believe the November 3 election deserves much more attention than simply looking at the $80 million figure printed on a ballot. The question is not merely what these plants will cost. The question is what it could cost Macon to wait.

The Financing Question

The approximately $80 million price tag is certainly large enough to make any citizen stop and take a hard look at the proposal. I would expect nothing less. Citizens should question the cost, the financing, the projected utility rates, the engineering, the construction schedule and every other aspect of a project this large. But the amount of money borrowed isn't the only number that matters. The cost of borrowing that money matters just as much.

Macon has been working toward a financing structure that could include favorable State Revolving Fund financing, grants and other assistance. Missouri DNR describes SRF as a source of low-cost financing for drinking-water and wastewater infrastructure and says qualifying loan funds may be paired with additional subsidization in the form of grants.

I've heard approximately $52 per month discussed as the projected increase for water and wastewater service based upon 4,000 gallons of usage. That figure, however, is a projection based upon the assumptions being used for the project and its financing. Change the financing assumptions and the monthly cost can change with them.

At one of the City Council meetings I attended, I overheard the number 4.5% mentioned in connection with possible financing. I am not suggesting that 4.5% is what Macon will ultimately pay, because that financing has not been finalized. I am simply pointing out that the number was discussed and illustrates why the financing structure is so important.

On an $80 million project financed over many years, even a few percentage points can translate into millions of dollars of additional interest. That money doesn't improve the treatment process, increase the amount of water the plant can produce or put another piece of equipment into the facility. It is simply the cost of borrowing the money, and ultimately that cost has to be paid by somebody.

The easiest comparison I can make is an automobile loan. If you have good credit and a lender offers you an attractive interest rate, you have access to inexpensive money. If you turn that opportunity down and later find yourself having to finance the same vehicle at a much higher rate, you still get the car, but you pay substantially more for it.

That is one of the things I believe Macon voters need to consider before deciding whether a delay is worth the risk.

A NO vote doesn't eliminate the need for the new plants. It could simply mean that Macon comes back later to finance the same necessary project under a different and less favorable set of circumstances.

Macon's Water Capacity Is Already an Economic Development Issue

There is another part of this story that I believe has been overlooked because most people naturally think of water treatment as a utility issue rather than an economic-development issue.

During the August 11 City Council meeting, Dana Ulmer explained that if a truck stop wanted to locate in Macon, the city could not accommodate the water demand during the summer because the existing drinking-water treatment plant is already operating at full capacity.

That statement should make every person involved in economic development stop and think.

Macon needs new businesses. We need jobs. We need opportunities for the young people who graduate from our schools and leave town because they cannot find the employment opportunities they want here. We can talk about economic development all day long, but eventually every business considering a community has to ask some very basic questions. Is there enough water? Can the wastewater system handle us? Are the utilities adequate for what we want to build?

If the answer to those questions is no, that business has plenty of other communities from which to choose. That is why the water-treatment project isn't merely about replacing old equipment. It is about whether Macon has the infrastructure necessary to grow.

The Wastewater Clock Is Also Running

The wastewater treatment plant is facing future regulatory requirements, including requirements involving phosphorus removal in the early 2030s. The existing facility does not have the treatment capability necessary to simply meet every new requirement that is coming down the road. There are additional regulatory requirements on the horizon that will put further pressure on facilities that are already more than six decades old.

The interesting thing is that Macon isn't starting this process from scratch. A tremendous amount of preliminary work has already been performed. Engineering and environmental studies have been conducted. The existing facilities have been evaluated. Treatment technology has been researched. Equipment has been investigated. Financing options have been examined.

At some point, preliminary work has to become action.

The City Council took that step Monday night by putting the question before the citizens. Now it is our turn.

This Is Not About Spending $80 Million Tomorrow

I understand why some citizens will look at an $80 million project and become uncomfortable. They should. Nobody should take an expenditure of this magnitude lightly. But I also believe citizens need to understand what the November vote actually represents. The question isn't whether somebody is going to walk into City Hall on November 4 and write an $80 million check.

The question is whether the citizens will authorize the city to proceed with the proposed financing and replacement of two treatment facilities that have reached the end of their useful era. That distinction matters and so does the timing.

Missouri DNR's current SRF information makes one thing very clear: these programs are valuable precisely because they provide financing below conventional market rates, but access is subject to program requirements, funding cycles and project eligibility. DNR's current information also shows that SRF financing can provide substantial savings compared with conventional borrowing or leasing. If Macon can take advantage of those opportunities, the financial picture could look very different than it would under a more expensive financing arrangement. But if Macon delays, there is no guarantee that the same circumstances will still exist when the city returns to the financing table.

So, the citizens of Macon need to take a very hard and serious look at how we vote on November 3, 2026. Do we vote to move forward and build two new water facilities with the strong possibilities of obtaining grants, SRF funding, and 2% financing. Or, do the citizens vote no in November, thus delaying the inevitable construction of the two water treatment facilities that need to be online as soon as possible.

How will you vote?

Regards Maconites,

R. Dominique - Editor

maconmoonline.com