Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Water topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bluffdale signals support to join WaterPro project to tap effluent water, estimates $4 million connection cost

Bluffdale City Council · September 24, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

City staff proposed joining WaterPro to access effluent water from the local treatment plant; council members gave staff informal direction to proceed with design coordination while staff develops budget adjustments and bonding plans.

Bluffdale city officials signaled support for joining WaterPro’s project to take effluent water from the local treatment plant and inject it into the city’s irrigation system, a move staff said would help the city secure additional water resources as it grows.

City Engineer Bruce told the council the city’s current water right tied to the treatment plant is about 1,100 acre-feet and that the work to connect to WaterPro’s pump house and electrical infrastructure would cost roughly $4,000,000 — about $3,600 per acre-foot under the current estimate. Bruce said the city also holds about 200 acre-feet purchased previously that it is not currently using.

"We will tell WaterPro that we're on board and move forward as they're designing," Bruce said, urging that acting now would lock in the right to that water while the opportunity remains available.

Mayor Hall and several council members framed the project as long-term planning. "Water's gold," one council member said during discussion, arguing it would be short-sighted not to pursue the resource. Staff said the $4 million would likely be financed through a combination of operations funds, impact fees and future bonds; estimates for the full bond package range from $10 million to $14 million depending on impact-fee allocation.

Staff proposed phasing rate impacts so customers do not face a single large increase. Bruce estimated the likely utility-rate impact would be about $0.30 per 1,000 gallons phased in over several years, with the city absorbing some costs initially from fund balance.

Council members asked about logistics and treatment. Bruce said the plan is to take an easement from WaterPro and tie into the city's existing irrigation line on Loomis Parkway, then inject effluent into the irrigation system for non‑potable use. He said mixing with existing secondary water should dilute salts to viable levels for irrigation; culinary reuse was left for later study.

Council did not adopt a formal resolution at the meeting but directed staff to continue coordination with WaterPro, pursue possible state and federal grants, and return with budget adjustments and bonding proposals next summer.

Next steps: staff will refine cost estimates, explore grant funding opportunities, draft any necessary budget amendments for the current fiscal year, and bring formal bond proposals for council consideration before issuing bonds.