The Problem With BiCARBUS Is That It Works

I have written two articles about the BiCARBUS situation in Italy. The first documented how the system was installed without council approval. The second covered TCEQ's claim that the city had regulatory approval since January, a fact the council was never told. If you have not read them, I would start there.

This piece is different. This is my opinion, clearly labeled as such, and I want to be more direct than I have been.

I Thought It Was Snake Oil

When BiCARBUS first appeared on the Italy City Council agenda, I was skeptical. The name sounds like a miracle product. The marketing materials promise everything short of turning your tap water into a fountain of youth. I had the same reaction a lot of people in town had: this sounds like snake oil.

I was wrong about that.

I Did the Research

After the February meeting, I started digging into BiCARBUS as a product, separate from how it was handled in Italy. I looked into the company. I looked into the chemistry. I talked to people. Here is what I found.

BiCARBUS appears to be a legitimate sodium hypochlorite solution. It has been used in at least a couple of other cities with documented success. The short version of how it works: it treats the water in a way that is safer for human consumption while reducing the need for other chemicals. It breaks down mineral buildup and corrosion inside the pipes and leaves a protective coating that prevents future scale. It is NSF/ANSI Standard 60 certified. It has been researched by the University of Houston.

If everything I have read about this product is true, every small town in Texas dealing with aging water infrastructure should be looking at it. Italy's water system has real problems. E. coli at ten times the permitted limit in 2021. Water loss that has more than doubled. Rates that have nearly doubled since 2022. A product that genuinely addresses corrosion and scale buildup is exactly what a system like Italy's needs.

I mean that. I am not being sarcastic. This appears to be a good product.

I Also Looked at the Budget

Italy's City Administrator wrote in his own September 2025 budget letter that the city's budget has been "challenged with large unforeseen infrastructure expenses this year, that will continue because of aged infrastructure." He described the upcoming fiscal year as "another tight budget year." The city's budget surplus last year was roughly $90,000.

That is not an abstract description. In April 2025, the council approved $135,721 to replace the failed pump and motor at Ground Water Well #2 after the city's own internal memo described the failure as a "critical risk" to the water supply. Two months earlier, in January, another $8,400 went to repairing Trinity Well #2. Utility Fund expenses increased 23% year-over-year. The council raised water rates to try to keep pace. Every month, the consent items in the council packets show a steady stream of water line repairs, equipment failures, and emergency maintenance that reflects a system under constant stress.

There is one more pump decision worth naming, because it shows how these choices actually get made. On June 9, 2025, the council took up a proposal to rebuild the circulation pump at the cooling tower. On a 3-2 vote, they tabled it and directed staff to obtain additional bids. When the bids came back the following month, Jurgensen Pump LLC of McGregor submitted a professional, itemized estimate on company letterhead: $15,730 total, fully scoped, with a 30-day validity. ATS Construction of Mabank submitted a handwritten note on plain paper, no letterhead, with the total scrawled across the page: "TOTAL PRICE $44,800.00." The handwritten note also offered a payment plan: "WE COULD LET THEM PAY THIS OUT AT 0% PERCENT INTEREST IF THIS COULD HELP. 24 PAYMENT AT 1,870.00 = 44,800.00." On July 14, the council voted 4-0 to accept the ATS bid. The written justification cited the company's existing familiarity with the cooling tower's SCADA system. The end result: the council specifically asked for more bids to compare pricing, received a quote from a professional pump company for $15,730, and voted to pay $44,800 to the vendor whose submission was handwritten. The same pump rebuild scope, both quoting the same Flowserve 12EHL-2 repair, for $29,070 more.

At the same March 9 meeting where the council deferred BiCARBUS for the second time, they also approved $38,615 in water infrastructure spending in a single consent vote: $16,780 for a new pump at the water house, $14,912 for a pump at the Taylor Street lift station, and $6,923 for concrete repair from a water leak on South Ward Street. That is three separate water emergencies addressed in one meeting. The month before, in February, the consent items included $8,400 to CCS Water Specialist for yet another well repair, this time on Trinity Well #2.

The police department is burning money too. In November 2025, the council approved a $6,000 contract with Clear Career Professionals for a police department organizational review. Two $3,000 payments followed: one on November 14 and another on December 14. In December and again in January, the council voted to allow Danny W. Smith, a former DPS commander, to conduct chief of police interviews, both times conditional on a contract being finalized by the City Attorney and, on the second vote, the City Administrator. The Smith engagement never actually happened. The reason, as I understand it, is that the city attorney was not comfortable with Smith's offer to provide the service for free. Rather than bring a replacement option back to the council for a vote, the City Administrator re-engaged Clear Career Professionals. On February 5, Clear Career billed the city another $3,000 for "CHIEF POLICE SELECTION ASSISTANCE-ASSESSMENT, VIRTUAL INTERVIEWS." A check was cut on February 11. That engagement never appeared on a council agenda. The council never voted on it. At the February 9 meeting, I asked the mayor directly who was doing the police chief interviews and why Clear Career's contract scope had been modified without a corresponding price change. The Clear Career chief-interview process then produced an offer of employment to a candidate, which the City Administrator extended without council authorization. On March 9, the council voted to rescind that offer, describing it as "not authorized," and created an advisory council to start the interview process over again. The unauthorized offer is now on the record as rescinded. The unauthorized $3,000 payment that produced it has never been publicly addressed.

The BiCARBUS system costs roughly $22,700 in its first year: $9,653 for equipment and $13,057 for the annual chemical supply. The 90-day demo is free. The ongoing cost is not. Against a surplus of $90,000 and a budget that the City Administrator himself describes as tight, that first-year commitment represents roughly a quarter of the city's entire budget cushion. This is a city that is spending $38,615 on emergency water repairs in a single meeting, $135,721 to replace a failed well pump, $44,800 on a cooling tower pump rebuild it could have gotten for $15,730, $6,000 on a council-approved police review, another $3,000 on an unauthorized chief-interview engagement the council never voted on, and then restarting the entire chief search after the City Administrator extended an offer nobody authorized him to make. BiCARBUS is not an unreasonable expense if the product delivers what it promises. But it is exactly the kind of expenditure that a city in Italy's financial position needs its elected council to weigh, debate, and approve with full knowledge of every dollar. Instead, the equipment was installed before the council had finished discussing it.

So What Is the Problem?

Here is where I need the community to pay attention.

One Italy resident, Tobi Owen Beesley, posted publicly that she supports the idea of BiCARBUS but raised a concern I think every water consumer in Italy should hear:

"I'm NOT fine that it was 'installed without approval from council' and Lied to us about it. As no one has said if they have been using it or not, BUT why are they flushing our pipes now? Why am I getting rust and junk in my toilet and sinks when I have house filters? Even Google says the pipes need to be flushed when applying BiCARBUS!!"

She asked the question the city has not answered. When BiCARBUS works, it breaks down the scale and mineral deposits inside the pipes. All of that material has to go somewhere. That is why flushing is required. The city is supposed to flush the lines aggressively so the loosened debris does not end up in people's homes. Residents are supposed to know this is happening so they can flush their own systems and watch for discolored water.

Instead, Italy posted a vague Facebook notice on February 13 about flushing water lines "every second Friday of the month." No mention of BiCARBUS. No mention of potential debris in the water. No advisory to residents about what they might see coming out of their taps. One resident reported her water was out for three hours, not the "few minutes" the city described.

I worry that the lack of notice may have caused damage to plumbing, fixtures, or appliances that would not have happened if the city had simply told the public what was going on. A product can work exactly as intended and still cause harm if the people on the receiving end do not know it is being used.

Tobi put it plainly: "We have 2000 people in this town and stuff being put in our water without approval. Isn't that a crime? Isn't that illegal?"

I cannot tell her whether it is a crime. What I can tell her is that Texas Health and Safety Code Section 341.0351 requires notification to TCEQ before making significant changes to a public water supply system. Violating that notification requirement is a criminal offense under Section 341.047, classified as a Class C misdemeanor, with each day of a continuing violation treated as a separate offense. Whether that statute was violated depends on facts I do not yet have, specifically who applied for the TCEQ approval and under what authority.

What I Cannot Figure Out

TCEQ says Italy was granted approval to use BiCARBUS on January 21, 2026. The city council has never approved it. Three meetings. Three deferrals or rejections. October 2025, February 2026, March 2026. The council said no every time. Nobody in city leadership ever mentioned that TCEQ had already signed off.

Who applied for TCEQ approval? The council never authorized anyone to do that. As of January 12, 2026, the City Administrator's independent spending and contracting authority had been eliminated by council ordinance. Nine days later, TCEQ issued the approval. Nineteen days after that, the system was physically installed at the water plant on the same day the council tabled the matter for the second time.

I have asked TCEQ directly: when one level of the approval mechanism is bypassed, who is the responsible party?

On April 1, after TCEQ closed the complaint, I responded within minutes. I asked for an expedited reply given the April 13 workshop. I made clear that I had only contacted TCEQ in the first place because the city refused to discuss the matter with me directly. I told them this was a complaint follow-up from a resident of more than thirty years, not a media inquiry. I asked them to focus on the substance of my concerns rather than how I should "correctly contact" them. I asked specific questions about what happens when the council approval mechanism is bypassed and who bears responsibility when that occurs.

That was eleven days ago. The workshop is tomorrow. TCEQ has not responded.

I do not know what conclusions to draw from that silence. I am not accusing TCEQ of anything. But the residents of Italy are walking into a workshop tomorrow with questions that the state regulatory agency has had nearly two weeks to address, and the only information those residents have is what I have been able to document on my own.

The Community Is Watching

I am not the only person asking these questions.

Patrick Odell wrote on social media that he wants to see which council members "speak up about all the crap Keith has pulled and who doesn't." He wants to know who will address the fact that BiCARBUS was installed while the mayor says he knew nothing about it. He said he is looking forward to what Billy Long and Raymond Mosley have to say. He is looking for courage and integrity from the people elected to represent this town.

Karen Maida, who first brought the BiCARBUS installation to my attention and is on the record as the person who discovered it, posted publicly: "I hope the city will be honest and tell the citizens that the BiCARBUS equipment was installed on February 9th before the meeting. The council has not approved of it yet."

These are residents who care about their town. They are not trying to cause problems. They want answers.

What I Want to Hear on April 13

A workshop to discuss BiCARBUS is scheduled for April 13, 2026 at 5:30 PM at Italy City Hall, before the regular council meeting at 6:00 PM. Keith Whitfield specifically directed me to attend the workshop if I wanted more information. He refused to give me anything over the phone.

I plan to attend and record that session. I had hoped to go into this workshop with TCEQ's response to my questions about the dual approval mechanism. That has not happened. So I will go with what I have, and here is what I want to hear:

Who applied for TCEQ approval, and when? Who authorized the application? Was the council informed at any point before the January 21 approval was granted? Was the city's TCEQ compliance consultant, who was billing $650 per month during this period, aware of the application? Was the system activated at any point, even briefly? What was the purpose of the line flushing that began days after installation?

I want to hear the city take accountability for the lack of public notice. If flushing was necessary because of a new treatment system, residents deserved to know. If the product is as good as the research suggests, the city had every reason to tell people about it. Instead, they said nothing.

Where I Stand

I believe BiCARBUS is probably a good product that Italy's water system probably needs. I believe the people who installed it may have genuinely thought they were doing something good for the community. I also believe that good intentions do not replace due process. You do not connect something to the water supply of two thousand people without telling them, without getting council approval, and without making sure the regulatory agency that oversees public water knows about it.

Italy has real water problems. BiCARBUS might be part of the solution. But the solution has to start with transparency, and what happened here was the opposite of that.

This Meeting Is About More Than BiCARBUS

I have focused this piece on BiCARBUS because that is my primary concern going into Monday. But BiCARBUS is item L on the April 13 agenda. There are fifteen other items on the regular session, and several of them deserve residents' attention just as much.

Item O is titled: "Discussion regarding the 4th of July fireworks within the City limits, including but not limited to the hiring of additional officers and signage regarding parking on city streets." This is the first time in years that the city has put a proactive 4th of July conversation on a posted agenda before the event. Raymond Mosley appears to have pushed for this to happen on the record, in front of the public, rather than after the fact. If you had concerns about the parking restrictions that got dropped on the community with little warning last year, or about how fireworks enforcement has or has not been handled in recent years, Monday is the conversation. This is not a rhetorical invitation. The council is going to discuss it, and what residents say will shape what happens.

In July 2024, while I was covering Italy for ITXN at itxn.net, I wrote about a young resident named Nate who suffered a traumatic brain injury at an unauthorized fireworks gathering inside city limits. The city has had ordinances restricting fireworks within the city since June of 1995. Those ordinances have not been consistently enforced. The city's response to the fallout from 2024 was not to enforce the existing fireworks rules. It was to impose parking restrictions on residential streets that surprised the community on very short notice. Police presence and actual fireworks enforcement would have addressed the underlying problem. Locking down the streets did not. If that matters to you, item O is the agenda item where the city is supposed to hear from you.

The agenda has more. Item H is the presentation of the 2024-2025 audit by Anderson, Marx and Bohl. Item J is a Police Department request for FLOCK surveillance cameras in the 2026-2027 budget. Item M is a one-year $36,000 wastewater operation and maintenance contract with Bowman Environmental Enterprises, LLC. Item N is an open discussion of the Public Works Building bidding process, construction, remodel, and current condition. And after executive session, the council will take action on three personnel matters: evaluation of the City Administrator, duties of the Public Works Supervisor, and the hiring of the Police Chief.

Each of those items is its own story. If even one of them matters to you, Monday is the meeting.

Show Up Tomorrow

The BiCARBUS workshop starts at 5:30 PM. The regular council meeting follows at 6:00 PM. I would encourage anyone who plans to attend to arrive by 5:00 PM if you can. If you show up at 5:30 for the workshop, you are already late.

Italy City Hall is at 161 W. Main Street.

When you walk into the chamber from the lobby, there will be a citizens comments sign-in sheet on the desk. If you want to speak during citizens comments, put your name on it. You can fill in your address or leave it blank. Addresses are not required, and leaving the line blank is within your right as a resident. If you want to go last, sign toward the bottom of the sheet. People have been known to draw their own line under the last signature just so they could speak after everyone else. That is allowed.

You do not need to prepare a speech. If you want to say something short, say it. If you want to ask a question, ask it. Nobody remembers what anyone said at a council meeting a week later unless it was extraordinarily memorable, so do not worry about sounding polished. Say what is on your mind. If you want your comment to carry weight in the minutes, be clear and specific. If you want to just say thank you or just say you are worried, that is also fine.

I will be there. I plan to record the open portions of the meeting so residents who cannot attend can hear what was said.

If you care about any of these issues, stay through the entire council meeting, all the way to council member comments at the end. That is where the real conversations happen. That is when the people you elected get to speak freely on the record about city business, without being limited to a specific agenda item. It is worth hearing what they have to say, and it is worth them seeing the community in the room when they say it. Show up for them. Let them know their constituents are paying attention.

It is going to be a long meeting. Bring water. Bring your questions. Bring your patience. The best conversations tend to happen at the end.

If you have experienced water quality issues since February, document them before you come. Take photos of discolored water with timestamps. Write down the dates. Save any notices from the city. You can also reach us at [email protected] or contact TCEQ directly at 512-239-1000.

I hope to see you at Italy City Hall, Monday, April 13, at 5:00 PM.