Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears extended updates on regional water reclamation project and utility finances
Summary
Council members and the utilities commission reported detailed cost and schedule information on the regional water reclamation facility and related projects; estimates include a roughly $77.8 million cost and a 30‑month construction critical path, with concerns raised about demolition, grants, and financing.
Council members reported on recent Utilities Commission discussions about the regional water reclamation facility (WRF) and a separate stormwater/irrigation project. Council Member Altieri summarized a utilities‑commission briefing that included a near‑final (90%) cost estimate, contingency and escalation factors, and a construction critical path.
According to the commission report as read to the council, the WRF estimate was presented at roughly $77,784,000 and included a contingency (noted in the commission report as 10.6%) and a 4.5% escalation allowance. The construction schedule presented was approximately 30 months. Council discussion noted the package was expected to be presented to the city council (the utility owner) in May and that construction could begin late summer or early fall.
Council members and others raised several outstanding concerns: whether the estimate accounted for demolition of the existing lagoon‑side plant (the commission report said demolition and certain regulatory costs did not appear to be included), how anticipated grants might be affected by audit status, and how the project would be financed—commission discussion referenced potential short‑term borrowing to begin preparatory work, and council members pressed for competitive financing rather than a single‑source bank loan. A council member referenced a previously estimated $52 million cost that has grown in subsequent estimates.
The utilities commission report also noted a constituent concern about how the increased plant costs would translate to ratepayer increases; one cited figure discussed in the meeting was an illustrative increase of about $300 per year for ratepayers, though the transcript records this as a comment rather than a final rate study.
Council members said they would continue to seek more detailed financial analyses and asked commission members to ensure transparency on financing and grant impacts as the project proceeds. No town action or vote was recorded on the WRF at this meeting; the item was discussed as part of committee reports and information sharing.
