Clark Well & Treatment Plant – Episode 1: History and the questions that remain | Column

Published 1:30 am Wednesday, March 4, 2026

By Cory Harrington

Orcas Island

Eastsound Water’s general manager recently released the first installment of a new email series titled “The New Clark Well & Treatment Plant.” The full text is available on the EWUA website here: https://www.eastsoundwater.org/clark-well-story-episode-1/.

Episode one focuses primarily on the historical background of the Clark Well site. It outlines the 2004-2005 drilling and hydrogeologic evaluation, the Joint Well Development Agreement recorded in 2005 and the technical construction details of the well. The message emphasizes that the site was secured as part of a long-term strategy — described as “control without commitment” — allowing EWUA to protect a future groundwater source without immediately committing to construction.

The historical and technical explanation is informative. Understanding the aquifer conditions, the legal framework and the system’s past limitations provides useful context for why the site was originally secured.

Notably, the webpage currently reflects a posting date of Dec. 18, 2025, which may simply reflect website formatting or publication timing. Clarification on when this installment was formally released to members would be helpful for transparency and recordkeeping purposes.

While episode one looks back nearly 20 years, many members are seeking clarity about the present-day execution of the project — particularly its financial and governance aspects.

The Clark Well project is now a major capital investment. As ratepayers, members have a reasonable interest in understanding not only the geology, but also the fiscal oversight behind the construction phase.

Questions that remain unanswered include:

• What was the original board-approved construction budget and timeline for the Clark Well project, and where is that approval reflected in meeting minutes or board records?

• What procurement process was used? Was the project competitively bid, and if not, what justification was documented?

• What are the total project costs incurred to date?

• What is the current projected final cost and estimated completion date?

• Has the board formally amended or reauthorized the project budget or scope since its original approval, and if so, when?

These are not political questions. They are standard governance questions for any public utility undertaking a substantial capital project.

Technical diligence and financial transparency should go hand in hand. Providing clear information about budget approvals, procurement processes and cost changes would strengthen public confidence and allow members to fully understand both the engineering and fiscal dimensions of this investment.

Transparency builds trust.