Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Wastewater Bonds topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Provo Council authorizes revenue bonds to finish wastewater plant after lengthy hearing
Summary
After an extended public hearing and staff presentations, the Provo Municipal Council approved a resolution authorizing up to $37 million in wastewater revenue bonds to complete a multi‑phase upgrade to the city’s sewer treatment plant to meet state phosphorus rules.
Provo’s City Council voted to authorize the issuance of wastewater revenue bonds with maximum parameters of $37 million principal and up to 25 years’ maturity to complete upgrades at the city’s wastewater treatment plant.
The council’s action follows a public hearing and detailed staff presentations that laid out a funding shortfall for completing the treatment‑plant improvements required by the state Water Quality Board. Public Works Director Gordon Haight and engineer Dave Torgerson described the project history: Provo received earlier Water Quality Board support and loans but remains roughly $30 million short of completing the third bioreactor, electrical upgrades and a new lab/administration building.
“This 36 (million) is going to take us where we need to be,” Gordon Haight said, summarizing staff confidence that the proposed bond package will fund phase‑1 completion. Dave Torgerson told council the city had received prior Water Quality Board loans and grant‑forgiveness totaling tens of millions and that the remaining scope must be finished to meet regulatory deadlines.
Finance and utility staff described options considered, including pay‑as‑you‑go funding and additional state borrowing. Jimmy McKnight, responding to concerns about rate impacts, said the wastewater fund can service loan payments without an immediate utility rate increase because of existing fund balances and funding plans.
Councilors asked about contingency and schedule. Staff estimated a modest contingency (about 5%) and said much of the work is already designed and a contractor is on‑site; construction to finish the remaining phases was estimated at roughly two years. Councilor Rachel Whipple pressed whether the bonding would be undertaken before final design was fully locked down; staff replied they have tight cost estimates and contractors familiar with the project.
Councilor Craig Christiansen, who has been skeptical of borrowing in general, said the bond approach was fiscally justified in this case, echoing staff that pay‑as‑you‑go would likely cost more over time.
The council approved the resolution 7‑0. The resolution establishes the maximum bond parameters, authorizes execution of required documents and ratifies the public hearing record; staff said a follow‑up public hearing may be held once state agency commitment packets are received.
What’s next: Staff will finalize financing documents and pursue the bond sale consistent with the authorized parameters; construction sequencing will proceed with the contractor already mobilized on site.
