Short on 3M settlement funds, Hastings hikes water rates to pay for PFAS treatment plants

Forever chemicals run through Hastings’ water supply, and city Public Works Director Ryan Stempski believes he knows why.

“I can throw a football over to 3M Cottage Grove,” he said.

That short distance — and the river separating Hastings from several 3M plants — has been an obstacle to accessing millions of dollars to help pay for treatment plants needed to purge per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, from Hastings’ drinking water.

Woodbury, Cottage Grove and a cluster of east metro cities are receiving millions from 3M to scrub those “forever chemicals” — synthetic substances linked to certain cancers — from their water. The municipalities’ proximity to company plants that for decades produced toxic chemicals made them immediately eligible for money from a massive settlement 3M reached with Minnesota over PFAS contamination in 2018.

But for Hastings to secure settlement money, officials needed to nail down a link between forever chemicals in the city’s water supply and the same substances produced at a 3M facility — like the one in Cottage Grove about nine miles away.

The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency recognized a link in one city well last fall, making Hastings eligible for roughly $14 million from 3M.

That’s a start, but it’s not enough. The city is still short $45.7 million for a trio of treatment plants costing an estimated $68.9 million.

The Environmental Protection Agency increased the pressure on Hastings to confront its PFAS problem when the agency announced public water systems had to scrub forever chemicals from their supply within five years. That forced the city to recently impose a 10% water rate hike on residents.

City Administrator Dan Wietecha said that without more settlement money or state and federal funds, residents could see their water bills double over the next three years — and triple in five years’ time.

“It’s fantastic that we’re eligible for well 5,” Wietecha said, referring to the contaminated water source that unlocked a slice of the 3M settlement. “I’m frustrated that it’s not being paid 100%. We are being held to a different standard and level of proof and procedures than any other city in the east metro.”

The Minnesota Star Tribune contacted 3M about Hastings' officials frustration that the company isn’t financing the entire project. In a statement, a company spokesperson said the MPCA, not 3M, is responsible for disbursing settlement funds.

“3M has cooperated and will continue to cooperate with the MPCA, including by investigating PFAS detections in Hastings’ municipal wells,” the statement read.

The Minnesota Department of Health began testing Hastings’ water supply for PFAS in 2007, long before the chemical used in everything from non-stick pans to dental floss inspired Hollywood thrillers and intense EPA scrutiny.

Wietecha said the substance’s concentration in the city’s water supply hovered at acceptable levels until the federal agency recently issued new guidelines for “maximum contaminant levels” of certain PFAS in public water systems. One of them, PFOA, is present in Hastings’ wells at levels above the EPA threshold, according to the Minnesota Department of Health.

Hastings officials began discussing plans to treat city water as news of the updated guidance trickled out, Stempski said, noting that building three treatment plants emerged as the most economical option. As residents wait for the city to find more money, some are bemoaning the possible rate increases and slamming 3M for not footing the entire bill.

Equally concerning to many is the water itself.

Stephanie Wimber said her pets have suffered similarly inexplicable ailments, including kidney failure, since she moved to Hastings from Minneapolis two years ago. And while Wimber said she can’t be sure her animals’ health problems have anything to do with PFAS-tinged tap water, she was concerned to learn scientists have linked exposure to the chemicals to kidney issues in people, cats and dogs.

“You don’t even want to boil your pasta” in the water, she said. “I’m not even really sold on the idea of my son taking a bath in it.”

Kristine Klos, who supervises the Health Risk Assessment Unit at the Minnesota Department of Health, spoke about PFAS’ potential health implications at a May 2024 meeting in Hastings. Asked in a recent interview if concentrations of the chemicals in the city’s water supply concern her, Klos said it depends who’s drinking it.

Pregnant women and infants, for example, are particularly sensitive to the adverse health outcomes that can accompany long-term exposure to PFAS.

“While we believe the immediate health risks are low for most people, everyone has their own individual level of acceptable risk,” Klos said, adding that she “would probably get a different water source… if I was pregnant, or if I had a young child in the home.”

Hastings officials are advising residents to talk to their medical providers about their personal risks of PFAS exposure.

Wimber, who has a 4-year-old son, is using a heavy-duty filter to remove chemicals before drinking the water. But she noted the cost of replacement filters can quickly add up.

“We shouldn’t have to pay for any of it,” she said. “This should be all on 3M.”

Kirk Koudelka, an assistant commissioner with the MPCA, said the state agency has tasked 3M and Hastings with investigating possible links between chemicals in the city’s other wells and 3M sites — key to securing more settlement money. The company is preparing a plan to understand the spread of contamination from the Cottage Grove site before starting the investigation, MPCA East Metro Unit Supervisor Andri Dahlmeier added.

Koudelka said the frustration that 3M isn’t covering more of the cost is understandable.

“We do have to go through this process,” Koudelka said, referring to the effort to tie Hastings’ PFAS contamination to 3M. “It does unfortunately take time to move forward, and we’re committed to doing that.”

Koudelka noted a $3.2 million MPCA grant helped Hastings defray the costs of designing the plants. Wietecha said other grants totaling $6 million will be used to finance the project, too.

City officials applied for funding from the state last session, but legislators failed to pass a bonding bill. They’re hoping for a cash infusion from the state this year, and also seeking $1 million from the federal government.

The one-off cash infusions help, Wietecha said, but won’t nearly be enough to pay for the three plants, set to be completed in the fall of 2028, without raising water rates.

Asked what funding sources the city was eyeing, Wietecha put it bluntly: “Anything we can get.”