YORKTOWN, N.Y.— The Yorktown Town Board on Oct. 22 voted 3-1 to end fluoridation of the town’s public water supply. Councilwoman Susan Siegel voted against the measure; Councilman Patrick Murphy was absent. The decision also affects the public water supply used by some Somers residents.
After a number of contentious conversations and a lengthy public hearing the week before, the board’s decision to adopt a local law giving it the power to decide — by resolution and without a public hearing — whether or not it will fluoridate the town’s water supply.
In compliance with the state’s Public Health Law section 1100-a, the board will announce to the public its plans to stop adding fluoride to the water. It will also notify both the state and county health departments with written notice of its intent to discontinue fluoridation. The anticipated date of discontinuance is Jan. 21, 2025.
According to Supervisor Ed Lachterman, what he calls an “unreasonable risk to children” is enough of a reason to end the fluoridation program.
“You have it in toothpaste, you have it naturally occurring, you have it in mouthwash, you have it in dental treatments,” Lachterman said of fluoride during the Oct. 22 meeting.
Lachterman later told Yorktown News that the board is still studying the issue.
“There’s part of the law which says to offer some type of fluoride supplement or not,” he said. “We’re at least doing the research.”
Lachterman said there are still too many unknowns.
“The way I was raised, if there’s an unreasonable risk to the reward, you don’t take it,” he said. “It’s really an important thing.”
Fluoride had been in Yorktoewn's water supply for decades before it was stopped for equipment repairs a number of years ago. The town received nearly $1 million in grant money to complete the repairs and had only restarted the program in August before shutting it down the following month.
On Sept. 26, Lachterman reversed an earlier decision to resume the long-delayed return of fluoride in Yorktown’s water supply which had drawn criticism from a small but vocal group of residents who believe it is harmful. At the time, he said it was a "pause".
Lachterman's decision to suspend fluoridation—just weeks after resuming it—came in response to a Sept. 24 ruling by U.S. District Judge Edward Chen that ordered the EPA to strengthen its regulation of fluoride in drinking water. In his ruling, the federal judge said high levels of fluoride may pose an “unreasonable risk” to children’s intellectual development.
Siegel, the board’s lone Democrat, claimed that Lachterman was in violation of public health law and that he did not consult health officials prior to the decision to pause.
According to Adam Rodriguez, the town attorney, fluoridation at 0.7 milligrams per liter a level which was “previously considered optimal” now “poses an unreasonable risk to the health of children,” disagreeing with the notion that the board violated section 1100-a of Public Health Law.
“There was an emergency suspension,” he said during the meeting. “If the town didn’t intend to pursue discontinuation, there would be no purpose and no rationale to pursue the procedures in 1100-a which we’re now intending to do via this resolution.”
In addition to the resolution proposed by Lachterman, Siegel also proposed a resolution that would have required the reactivation of fluoridation while the town adhered to the 90-day notice required by Public Health Law. However, the resolution was rejected when no one seconded the motion.
“I’m not trying to argue tonight the pros and cons for fluoridation. I’m arguing complying with the public health law,” Siegel said during the meeting, adding that her resolution states that the decision to end violated both the public health law and the town's own code.
Rodriguez cautioned the board against “adopting a resolution that says the town violated the law.”
Councilman Sergio Esposito called Siegel’s resolution “nothing more than a dog and pony show” and said she was being “divisive.”
After the decision was made, Siegel told Yorktown News that “it was disturbing to see my colleagues openly ignore science and the facts about fluoridation.” She said she believes the other board members weren’t listening to public health professionals.
“More importantly, it’s discouraging and disheartening to know that because of their vote, going forward, too many Yorktown children will experience more cavities and related health problems and that their parents will have to deal with the increased cost of dental bills,” she said.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here