Совет города Юма продлил на четыре года контракт с AgTech на утилизацию осадка сточных вод

The Yuma City Council on Wednesday approved a contract with AgTech for biosolids removal and disposal services, continuing a partnership that has existed for more than 40 years. The contract, worth about $940,000 annually, includes options for renewal each year for the next four years. Biosolids are the solid byproduct of wastewater treatment. Yuma produces about 12 million gallons of liquid biosolids each year, a process that runs 24 hours a day. Director of Utilities Jeremy McCall told the Council the city has no choice but to maintain a reliable disposal method. “We have no choice but to choose a path for managing our biosolids,” McCall told the Council. “We generate about 12 million gallons of biosolids a year. It is a 365 operation, 24/7. There are about 11 semi-truck trailers that visit the two treatment plants every day.” Yuma produces liquid biosolids, which are injected into state‑owned land leased by AgTech, where they are used to grow crops such as alfalfa for livestock feed. McCall added that sending biosolids to landfills instead would be costly and unsustainable. Transporting the material to Copper Mountain Landfill or Phoenix‑area facilities would add roughly $2.5 million to the city’s operating budget. “It sounds like it’s the best option we’ve been utilizing for the past 40‑ish years,” Councilmember Art Morales said during a work session. Some residents have raised concerns about AgTech’s operations, including flies, PFAS contamination, and the volume of biosolids imported from California municipalities. Tyler Woodman, owner of The Lemon Grove, urged residents to oppose the contract and criticized the use of Class B biosolids, calling the practice “cheap and easy.” “Human biosolids are not expensive – they pay you to use it,” Woodman said, referencing California’s payments to haul biosolids to Yuma. Woodman also questioned the scope of an April 9 inspection by the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality, which found no deficiencies. ADEQ reported that soil samples, groundwater data, treatment records, and application practices met state requirements, with heavy metals testing below state limits. Woodman argued the inspection was too limited and said AgTech’s equipment breakdowns pose risks due to the operation’s proximity to key agricultural and water infrastructure. Councilmember Carol Smith asked whether biosolids application could be moved farther from homes and food‑production areas. McCall said the city could discuss alternative locations with AgTech, though space is limited. Woodman supports transitioning to Class A biosolids once Yuma completes its processing plant at the Figueroa Avenue facility, which he says will produce “the cleanest possible” material. Why the Council approved the contract Mayor Doug Nicholls said the city must maintain biosolids disposal regardless of public debate. “We’ve been doing it for over 40 years,” Nicholls said. “We didn’t tonight have the ability to say, ‘Nope, we’re going to do something else,’ because we have no other option at this point.” Nicholls said the city will continue to evaluate AgTech’s performance as Yuma grows and biosolids needs increase. The contract is up for renewal every year for the next four years, and if the City or community feels that AgTech is not doing an adequate job, then the contract doesn’t have to be renewed according to McCall.