WARRENTON — City commissioners are considering an ordinance that could remove requirements for fluoride in the city’s drinking water.

For decades, cities across the United States have added small amounts of fluoride to their drinking water as a means of reducing cavities and tooth decay, especially in lower-income communities that lack access to dental care.

In recent years, however, the topic has sparked debate across the country, with opponents raising concerns about potential impacts on neurocognitive development. Earlier this week, U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said he planned to instruct the Center for Disease Control to stop recommending fluoridation.

In Warrenton, a similar conversation has unfolded. One consideration is cost.

At a meeting Tuesday, Kevin Gorman, the city’s public works director, told commissioners that the city anticipates a roughly 24% increase in costs due to recent tariffs imposed against China by the Trump administration. The city sources its fluoride exclusively from China, and there are no known domestic suppliers, Gorman said.

Gorman estimated that removing fluoride from the water would save the city around $23,000 annually, including avoided costs from materials purchases, hazardous materials fees, shipping charges and maintenance impacts. That number could change with escalating tariffs, though — as of Wednesday morning the president announced plans to pause reciprocal tariffs for most countries, but increase tariffs to 125% for Chinese imports.

Mayor Henry Balensifer and Commissioner Paul Mitchell both expressed concerns over a dependence on China for the city’s fluoride. The mayor added that he’s received correspondence from around 50 constituents calling for the removal of fluoride from the city’s drinking water, but only a couple in favor of keeping it. Generally, he said it seems the public sentiment is for people to be able to choose whether they consume the mineral.

“I think in terms of cavities, there’s always the choice to do fluoride mouthwash, there’s a choice to provide that,” Balensifer said. “There’s not necessarily a choice if it’s your tap water.”

Fluoride supplementation isn’t a state required practice in communities of less than 10,000 people. Warrenton’s population is around 6,000. Given those parameters — along with concerns staff have raised over handling and storage — Commissioner Tom Dyer said he sees fluoridation as unnecessary.

“My concern is that if we don’t have to have this, why have chemicals in one of our buildings?” Dyer said.

Commissioner Jess Sollaccio, who has a background in public health, said she has some concerns about the risks of removing fluoride from the water supply in a rural area that already lacks access to dental care. If the city were to move forward with the change, she said she’d be interested in seeing the money saved put toward implementing a dental program in Warrenton schools or improving public health education around fluoride and teeth brushing.

“I agree that there’s a lot of unknowns and risks, and it’s worth always weighing the evidence and revisiting and using the best information possible to make the best decision for our community,” Sollaccio said. “But we don’t have a backstop. We don’t have an alternative to provide the community right now, and that’s where my biggest concerns come in.”

In preparation for Tuesday’s discussion, Sollaccio reached out to state Rep. Cyrus Javadi, a Tillamook Republican and practicing dentist. In a written statement to commissioners, Javadi said he has supported water fluoridation for many years and described the practice as a “proven tool” for reducing cavities.

However, the representative also referenced a recent study suggesting a link between fluoride exposure during pregnancy and lower IQ scores in children. The exposure levels were around twice what’s added to public water in the U.S., but still below the Environmental Protection Agency’s maximum allowable level.

Javadi commended commissioners for approaching the topic thoughtfully, adding that he trusted the commission to reflect on both the “long-standing benefits of fluoridation and the need to consider the latest data with care and humility.”

“This isn’t a call to abandon fluoridation. It’s a call to examine whether our current standards provide an adequate margin of safety — especially for the most vulnerable populations,” Javadi wrote. “Fluoride clearly reduces cavities. But like any medical intervention, we should be open to weighing the benefits against emerging risks as the science evolves.”

The City Commission is working to set a date for a public hearing on an ordinance to repeal the water fluoridation requirement in the city’s municipal code.

This story has been corrected. A previous version misstated a detail about a study on fluoride exposure.

The Astorian regrets this error.