Council centers infrastructure, capital planning and public‑safety funding in strategic‑plan talks

City of Westminster councilors devoted a large portion of a study-session meeting to the city’s infrastructure needs, asking staff for a clearer 10‑year capital improvement plan and for options to address gaps in fire services, streets and water infrastructure.

Council members repeatedly described core services and infrastructure as the council’s top priority. One councilor said the city must “start yesterday” educating the public about needs and tradeoffs and requested a stand‑alone Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) timeline so council can identify near‑term and long‑term decision points. Staff acknowledged the city’s structural funding challenge: much capital spending has relied on carryover from operating budgets rather than a dedicated capital revenue stream.

On public safety, members pressed staff to revisit fire funding after a fire ballot measure failed. Councilors suggested repackaging a future request—possibly pairing fire funding with streets or using public‑private partnerships—rather than abandoning it. Council discussion included options such as land‑for‑station deals with developers, naming/sponsorship opportunities for training facilities, and coordinated regional training centers.

Streets and water also drew sustained attention. Councilors flagged an approximate $16 million streets funding gap and asked for cross‑departmental asset inventories to show needs and funding sources. On water, staff and council discussed the timing of a potential second train at the water treatment plant and the need to align decisions with debt retirement and borrowing capacity.

Staff said they will reexamine capital planning structure, debt timelines and existing dedicated revenue sources (for example Conservation Trust Fund and other restricted funds), and return with options that reflect the strategic plan’s priorities and realistic funding opportunities.

What’s next: staff will prepare a prioritized, multi‑year CIP with decision points tied to funding windows, options for addressing the fire‑funding shortfall, and a menu of potential public‑private partnership and revenue options for council review.