During the Madison City Council meeting on Monday night, over 20 residents voiced their opinions after it was announced that Madison Utility would stop adding fluoride to the city’s water supply.

A significant number of the speakers—nearly two to one—expressed concerns about public health in opposing the utility’s decision. Meanwhile, some praised the halt on what they view as a harmful chemical.

Despite differing opinions, many speakers were frustrated by what seemed to be a sudden decision by Madison Utility, particularly since it wasn’t mentioned in prior discussions.

The agenda was adjusted to include a presentation from Madison Utility, detailing a recent lawsuit that caught many, including city council members, by surprise.

City Council member Ranae Bartlett admitted she was unaware of the utility’s decision to stop the fluoride addition until seeing last week’s news reports.

David Moore, the Utility Water Manager, told the council that the Madison Utility Committee had reached a unanimous decision on March 17 to cease fluoride addition.

“This won’t eliminate fluoride from the water,” he clarified. “Natural fluoride remains in the water.”

Moore emphasized that the decision was made carefully.

“It was based on structural concerns,” he explained. “There are employee health risks and deterioration during upgrades. We’ll show photos from the upgrade at one of our water treatment facilities.”

He presented several images depicting damage to equipment, which he attributed to fluoride refills, and noted that repairs could cost around $500,000.

Bartlett posed several questions to Moore, including whether the public was involved in the decision-making process or the March 17 meeting.

“Were there any public attendees at your meeting?” she inquired.

“Um, ma’am,” Moore replied.

Bartlett also wanted to know if the decision was final or could be revisited.

“That’s a question for the board,” Moore answered.

Councilor Teddy Powell reminded everyone that the city council doesn’t control the utility’s decisions.

“We don’t have a vote on that board,” Powell stated. “We can’t change their decisions.” He wanted to make that clear.

Residents expressed their worries directly to both the council and Madison Utility. Pediatric dentist Dr. Brian Beitel recounted witnessing the consequences of non-fluoridated water in his practice.

“We must be proactive in non-fluoridated areas,” Beitel said. “Fluoridated regions have significantly fewer issues.”

Karen Thornton, another Madison resident, expressed her frustrations, noting they had moved to the area for better living conditions and education. She wasn’t convinced by the photos of rust in the treatment facility.

“I worry this may cover up something worse than what people say online,” she stated. “Fluoride can be harmful in excessive doses but beneficial in regulated amounts.”

A senior scientist from the Hudson Alpha Biotechnology Institute also spoke, asserting that “Fluoride isn’t toxic at the levels typically found in water.” Melanie Stoner referenced decades of research supporting fluoride’s safety.

However, opinions varied. Madison resident Robin Grimion criticized water fluoridation as “a mass dosing without consent.”

“Fluoride is the only chemical added to drinking water for medicinal purposes,” Grimion added.

Rachel Homorak expressed gratitude for the decision to remove fluoride, not necessarily due to concerns over its safety, but because it allows residents to choose what they consume.

Strong sentiments were shared regarding Madison Utility. Brooke Cabot questioned whether a 40-minute meeting was adequate to address such significant decisions affecting the city.

“Regardless of fluoride’s presence, the process felt unprofessional and lacking transparency,” she noted, expecting better from Madison Utility.

Michael Sheehee expressed concern over the absence of a public communication strategy and urged Madison Utility to reconsider the board’s decision and involve the community in discussions.

“It might be beneficial for the board and local leaders to pause to engage the community for a more informed decision,” Sheehee suggested.

Concluding the public comments, Bartlett acknowledged the need for further discussions.

“I’m truly disappointed in how these important decisions were made without proper notice,” she remarked. “I’m glad residents could voice their thoughts before Madison Utility representatives tonight.”

Bartlett also mentioned that City Council member Connie Spears, on the Madison Utility Committee, is seeking more public feedback and urging the board to reassess their decision.

The next meeting of the Madison Utility Board is scheduled for Monday at 5:30 PM at 101 Ray Sanderson Road.