Milwaukee officials weigh lead pipe replacement plan

There are nearly 9,500 homes with lead pipes in Bay View and the other neighborhoods of Milwaukee's 14th Aldermanic District.

Another 9,166 homes in the 10th District on the city's west side have lead service lines.

And in Sherman Park and the surrounding areas of Milwaukee's 7th District, lead laterals provide water to about 8,100 homes.

They are among the nearly 70,000 residential properties throughout the City of Milwaukee with lead pipes. And officials are now struggling with the daunting job of trying to get rid of them.

One proposal from Mayor Tom Barrett that aims to encourage lead pipe removal is expected to go before the Common Council on Tuesday. The plan would mandate full lead service line replacements in certain situations, such as emergencies and when planned infrastructure projects affect properties. In those cases, Milwaukee Water Works would pay 100% of the cost for the public utility side, and the city would also cover two-thirds of the cost of replacing privately-owned laterals. That would leave the homeowner responsible for picking up the remaining one-third.

"The mayor really wanted to address this in a fair and equitable way, with public health being the driving force behind it — but not being too burdensome to property owners," said Patrick Curley, Barrett's chief of staff. "He made that pretty clear."

This is not just a city of Milwaukee problem. A number of suburbs, especially those with older homes — generally built before 1951 — also face problems with lead pipes that can contaminate drinking water. However, Cudahy, Whitefish Bay, and other older communities in southeast Wisconsin have swapped out the publicly owned sections of lead laterals with copper when mains are replaced. Milwaukee has not done that routinely.

This will be the second time the Milwaukee Council takes up the plan. It stalled last month after some aldermen pushed for more time to get public input about the proposal.

On Saturday, three council members — Alds. Milele Coggs, Russell Stamper II and Khalif Rainey — held a community meeting about the issue.

The plan was also the subject of a lengthy debate at City Hall Friday during a Water Quality Task Force meeting. During that meeting, some bristled at the idea of a mandate, especially because a failure to comply could ultimately lead to a property's water being turned off. Others, however, argued that a mandate was necessary, that replacing only part of the lateral without the homeowner finishing the job is dangerous.

"I know there are questions as to whether or not the city should mandate this," said Ald. Jim Bohl, the committee's chairman. "I think that we've discussed very clearly here what happens when you mix pipes — lead and copper — and how that elevates the lead that winds up leaching into the water."

Carrie Lewis, the superintendent of Milwaukee Water Works, said few city homeowners voluntarily replace privately owned lead pipes. She said that in 2016, the city replaced about 300 city-owned lead service lines, but only about a dozen homeowners replaced the corresponding privately owned side of the lead lateral that goes to the house. Another 50 or so property owners have paid to replace their laterals when leaks occurred on the private property side, and the city has replaced the public side in those cases, Lewis said.

"They are less embracing when it's optional," she said.

Bevan Baker, the city's health commissioner, called for more specifics about what steps would be taken before a home's water would be cut off.

"You cannot live without water," Baker said at Friday's meeting.

Patricia McManus, president and CEO of the Black Health Coalition of Wisconsin, raised similar concerns.

In emergency situations — such as lead lateral fails, leaks or other damage — or planned infrastructure projects, the cost of replacing the private portion would be capped at $1,600 for the owner, who could have as long as 10 years to pay it. That would amount to payments of about $160 per year, or about $13 per month.

Under the plan, an owner would have limited time to respond to a written notice from the city — 45 days for planned infrastructure work, and 10 days for leaks. During that time, an owner could decide to coordinate with the city, or hire a licensed contractor to replace the private portion.

Robert Miranda has repeatedly said his group, Freshwater for Life Action Coalition, opposes property owners having to pay for any of the lead pipe removal costs. On Friday, he cited an 1872 document requiring lead laterals be used to connect from water mains to private properties in the city.

"We feel property owners do not have responsibility for, and so they shouldn't be paying a penny to remove, any of these laterals," Miranda told the committee. "As a matter of fact, we feel that it should be suggested that any money coming from property owners probably should be spent on removing the fixtures within their homes."

Lewis later said that while the Water Works Rules and Regulations, which were approved in 1871 and amended in 1872, required that lead pipe be used, there were limited options at that time.

"Keep in mind that in 1872, wood was the only other material available for water service piping," she said.