The southeastern Twin Cities suburb of Hastings is suing Maplewood-based 3M over “forever chemicals“ in the city’s drinking water.
The lawsuit, filed on Aug. 26 in Dakota County District Court, alleges that chemicals known as PFAS emitted from the smokestacks of 3M’s Cottage Grove facility were carried downwind and deposited onto the soil, where they leached into Hastings’ public wells.
PFAS — short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances — is a large class of human-made chemicals found in a variety of consumer products, including furniture, cookware, carpet and water-repellant clothing.
They’re known for being extremely durable and tend to accumulate in the environment and the human body. Long-term exposure to some PFAS has been linked to negative health effects, including cancer, liver and thyroid disease and fertility problems.
3M manufactured a type of chemical known as PFOA at its Cottage Grove facility for decades, beginning in the 1940s until it was discontinued in the early 2000s.
Hastings’ lawsuit claims 3M concealed the fact that the release of the chemical through air emissions caused the contamination in the city’s wells.
Hastings is building water treatment plants to remove PFAS and meet new federal drinking water standards. It wants the court to hold 3M liable for the cost, which is expected to be tens of millions of dollars.
The state of Minnesota reached a landmark settlement with 3M in 2018 over PFAS contamination in the Twin Cities east metro. The company agreed to pay $850 million to help provide safe drinking water to affected communities.
However, Hastings initially wasn’t eligible for funding from the 2018 settlement, because state officials hadn’t directly linked its contamination to chemicals manufactured by 3M.
However, in 2024, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency announced it had tied PFAS in one of Hastings’ wells to 3M’s Cottage Grove site. Hastings received about $15 million from the settlement fund, far short of its total treatment costs.
In 2024, a federal court approved an agreement by 3M to pay at least $10.3 billion to public water suppliers across the U.S. that have detected PFAS or might do so in the future. Hastings’ lawsuit notes that the city opted out of that settlement.
City spokesperson Isabella Lugowski said in an email that Hastings filed the lawsuit to protect public health and recover the cost of addressing PFAS contamination in its water.
“The lawsuit alleges that 3M is responsible for this contamination and that 3M should pay the high costs of building and operating treatment systems to remove PFOA from drinking water,” she stated.
In a statement, a 3M spokesperson called Hastings’ decision to sue “unfortunate.” He said the company has led the industry in addressing PFAS in the environment, and discontinued making PFAS globally last year.
“3M remains willing to engage with the City to discuss any legitimate concerns it may have,” he stated.
