Westminster water treatment plant approved on second reading

BY LUKE ZARZECKI LZARZECKI@COLORADOCOMMUNITYMEDIA.COM

After Westminster’s council approved the rst reading of a new water treatment plant on Jan. 23, they held a special council meeting and approved it on second reading 6-1 on Feb. 6, after a lengthy discussion and a plethora of public comments.

“ is is the best decision forward. At some point, we have to stop spending years on this to make a decision, otherwise, things will continue to escalate and we will run out of time,” said City Councilor Lindsey Emmons.

Parallel to his vote on the rst reading, City Councilor Bruce Baker remained a no-vote.

e approved plant will cost $100 million less than originally planned.

e improved plant will use existing infrastructure, can treat wild recontaminated water, is exible for future replacement and has robust infrastructure.

It’s estimated to cost $196 million, plus an additional $15 million for ozonation, though in ation may push costs higher. Ozonation is a process that injects pure oxygen into the water to kill a wide range of biological contaminants and to oxidize metals. e Westminster Water Warriors, a group that formed to combat higher water rates, spoke about their concerns. Member Sandy Popisil listed the previous council members who survived a recall but not the general election, such as Former Mayor Anita Seitz, Former City Councilor Jon Voelz and Former City Councilor Kathryn Skulley.

“Do you want to be the next person on this list?” Popisil asked the current council during public comment. “ e citizens of Westminster spoke loudly at the last election and said ‘we can’t a ord these crazy high water rates.”

Some residents spoke in favor of approving the water treatment plan. Carol Campbell cited her concern regarding the risk of PFAS in the future and how it’s important for the city’s future water system to be prepared to address the issue.

In defense of rates e council defended their decision for making water rates what they are today, which have risen and fallen during the last year.

“We’re prioritizing buildings that have the most opportunity to reduce their energy consumption,” Tomlin said.

On Feb. 28, the council voted 5-2 to reduce water rates dramatically by increasing the gallon tier range and lowering the price of the tier structures. at meeting’s agenda said it would have resulted in approximately $4.1 million in reduced revenues. en, the council raised rates on a 5-2 vote by about 4% on Oct. 10. Mayor Pro Tem David DeMott, an advocate for making rates affordable, said the increase was fair because of increased costs.

During a study session on Sept. 26, Brian Donahue, business operations administrator, said the 4% increase came as the water utility saw an increase in cost due to a 19.7% increase in in ation.

Northglenn and ornton increased their water rates too, for similar reasons. Northglenn said their revenue collections will need to increase between 3.6% and 6.7%, and ornton approved a 4% increase in water rates and a 13% increase in sewer rates.

City Councilor Sarah Nurmela at the Jan. 23 meeting pointed to the fact that water rates are a microcosm of a broader issue at hand: the cost of living continues to increase for of those will be approached and asked if they’d like to participate in the program.

Coloradoans.

She noted that in Westminster, the price of a single family home has increased by almost 60% from 2017 to October 2022.

“We’re the stewards of our longterm health as a community and the scal responsibility of maintaining our water supply, of maintaining our city overall and we all took that seriously while evaluating the di erent options that were put before us,” she said.

City Councilor Rich Seymour said it was the second engineering rm the city brought in to help with the water treatment plant plan that convinced him.

“ is is hundreds and hundreds of hours council has reviewed this, it’s not just pulling a number out of somewhere, we looked at the options,” he said.

DeMott said he is open to another discussion regarding the water rates, but explained that there isn’t anything the council can do if costs go up, such as materials and chemicals.

“(Council) can’t pretend that we don’t have to cover the costs of operators, for chemicals for materials, that’s reality,” DeMott said.

nual energy use. With that data, the city will focus on 115 large commercial buildings in Westminster.

Looking at those 50,000 square feet buildings, they’ll decide which ones are lowest performing regarding e ciency. en, 20 to 25

If they choose to, the city will provide the cost-bene t analysis for the chosen owners through hiring an outside contractor or vendor.

According to a news release from the EPA, the project aims to yield large savings. With the life span of 20 years for the systems, the estimated cost savings per building is about $500,000, 2,400,000 kilowatt hours of electricity and 2,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent.