Westminster’s $250 million question is answered

Cross Currents

We stminster’s Water 2025 water treatment project was sailing along before the November 2021 election under the guidance of City Manager Don Tripp, Mayor Anita Seitz and a liberal council e touted $250 million replacement water treatment plant project was tied to acquiring 40 acres of prime developable land next to Westminster Boulevard towards U.S. 36. Construction plans and land negotiations were well underway.

Needless to mention, water rates had been raised beyond belief to help pay for this “gold-plated” project. With the 2021 election results, voters wanted a change in direction. ey put Mayor Nancy McNally in o ce, re-elected David DeMott and solidi ed a more conservative council majority. At the end of November, the construction plans and the land acquisition process for the Water 2025 project were put on hold while alternatives could be identi ed and evaluated.

City Manager Don Tripp was gone and Deputy City Manager Jody Andrews was appointed Interim City Manager.

Comprehensive options for the new water treatment plant

Now, a year later, the city un- veiled four options on how best to achieve a 44 million gallons per day (MGD) water treatment plant capacity for the future. is compares to the original plan’s assumption that a 60 million gallons per day capacity is needed. e di erent options consisted of (1) upgrading the existing Semper treatment plant on the current site ($172 million), (2) building a new facility on an alternate site ($201 million), (3) building a new facility on the existing Municipal Service Center/Fleet Maintenance site on 88th Avenue ($286 million) or (4) building a new right-sized facility on the condemned Westminster Boulevard site ($196 million).

Last week, the council digested a thorough, well-thought-out sta presentation of the four options. A part of the analysis showed reduced water consumption which resulted in reducing the original plan from a 60 million gallons per day plant to the revised 44 million gallons per day capacity.

Factors used to evaluate each option consisted of (1) leveraging existing infrastructure i.e. pipes, (2) wild re water quality and future regulations, (3) exibility for future replacement, (4) robust infrastructure, (5) updated cost and (6) a separate ozonation process to enhance the treatment to cope with water pollution from a wild re. By the way, the original $250 million Water 2025 plan now costs $304 million.