Sedona council debates reclaimed water costs and advanced purification options

During the Sedona City Council meeting on July 9, 2025, discussions centered on the financial implications and operational strategies for water management in the region, particularly focusing on reclaimed water systems and advanced water purification technologies. As Sedona faces increasing water demands, the council explored various alternatives to enhance water sustainability and resilience.

One of the primary topics was the operational and maintenance costs associated with reclaimed water systems, which range from $200,000 to $400,000 annually. The cost per thousand gallons of water distributed varies, with estimates dropping from $16.10 to $13.13 as distribution increases. This cost structure suggests that the more water is distributed, the more economical it becomes, raising questions about the feasibility of implementing such systems in Sedona.

Council members expressed concerns regarding the capital costs associated with different alternatives, noting a significant difference in expenses between options. For instance, the capital cost for one alternative was estimated to be approximately $7 million higher than another. However, the council debated whether these costs accurately reflected the benefits of increased service capacity and efficiency.

A critical point of contention arose regarding the pricing of reclaimed water compared to potable water. Current rates for potable water from Arizona Water Company range from $4.97 to $6.17 per thousand gallons, while reclaimed water could potentially be priced significantly higher. This disparity raised concerns about the economic viability of a reclaimed water system, especially for entities like local schools that may struggle to afford the higher rates.

Despite the economic challenges, proponents of reclaimed water systems emphasized their importance for water conservation and sustainability. The council acknowledged that while the initial costs may be high, the long-term benefits of reducing groundwater pumping and enhancing water resilience could justify the investment. Additionally, reclaimed water could serve various purposes beyond irrigation, including toilet flushing and dust control in construction.

The meeting also touched on advanced water purification technologies, which could transform treated effluent into potable water. While this approach is gaining traction in water-scarce regions, council members questioned its applicability in Sedona, given the community's current water availability and the potential public resistance to using reclaimed water for drinking.

In conclusion, the Sedona City Council's discussions highlighted the complex interplay between cost, sustainability, and community acceptance in water management strategies. As the city navigates these challenges, further evaluations and community engagement will be essential to determine the most viable path forward for Sedona's water future. The council plans to continue exploring these options in upcoming meetings, aiming to balance economic feasibility with environmental responsibility.