This newspaper shares a birth year with the facility that provides water for the Biddeford-Saco area: 1884. And while a newspaper’s advanced age adds to its prestige and standing in the community, that’s not quite the case for a 127-year-old drinking water treatment plant.

Anyone turning on the tap at home to get a glass of drinking water probably envisions a gleaming white, automated facility full of high-tech machinery and loud water pumps. In the case of the Maine Water facility in Biddeford ”“ which supplies water to Biddeford, Saco, Old Orchard Beach and Pine Point in Scarborough ”“ the only part of that vision that’s accurate are the pumps.

The old brick building alongside the Saco River on outer South Street received its most recent major upgrades in 1937 ”“ that’s 76 years ago. Maine Water, which purchased the Biddeford-Saco Water Company in 2010, commissioned a full report on the facility in January, which was completed in October. It cites three major needs: improving safety to bring the plant up to OSHA standards and city codes; adding backup systems and computerized monitoring; and basic building upgrades such as roofing, windows and heat.

Anyone who has been inside the plant can see that it’s far from what one would expect. It’s well-maintained, freshly painted and unquestionably solid, but clearly hails from another time. The plant even has a beauty to it, with its wrought-iron railings with wooden handrails, carved molding, exposed brick and tiled floors. Spiral staircases are used throughout, and the filter room has an arched ceiling and pillars, with a water company seal proudly gleaming on the floor.

While all of that makes for an interesting historical tour, it’s not ideal for a working water plant on which nearly 50,000 people rely for clean water. Those fancy railings, for example, aren’t high enough to prevent a significant fall from some walkways into pumping areas. The building itself is structurally sound, the report states, but needs new roofing, windows and general maintenance. Meanwhile, the plant has rickety, old windows, very little heat and there’s no plumbing in the single employee bathroom ”“ the toilet is regularly pumped out.

A variety of chemicals are used to treat Saco River water to make it safe for drinking ”“ including lime, aluminum sulfate, chlorine and ammonia ”“ and those must be mixed very precisely. Right now, it’s being done manually by experienced water technicians, but Maine Water VP Rick Knowlton noted that training programs for this skill don’t exist anymore, now that most water plants are automated.

There’s no arguing against the existing water plant’s needs for significant improvements, and it’s going to cost an estimated $7 million, according to the engineering report. The company has already begun to invest $1 million to address the most pressing concerns. The water quality hasn’t suffered from the plant’s inadequacies, and no major employee injuries are on record so far, which is a testament to the quality of the employees, but is also undoubtedly the main reason why upgrades have been so long in coming.

Maine Water customers pay far less than others in surrounding communities, at a rate of $10.40 per month for 100 gallons per day, compared to Portland’s $16.45; Sanford’s $16.80 and Kennebunk/Kennebunkport/Wells’ $14.76. That’s going to change as this new company looks to improve conditions for its workers and bring the plant up to the standards of the day. Upgrading the distribution lines, which is another need, will be an additional expenditure, with the most pressing improvements estimated at $1.5 million.

It’s clear that the time has come to invest some money in this integral public utility. The bigger question, however, is whether or not the company’s customers should bear that rate increase to improve this 1884 facility or if they should support a different approach, such as a new, regional plant.

The existing plant is located in the 100-year floodplain and has been shut down by severe flooding in the past. Knowlton said Maine Water owns surrounding land ”“ enough to build a facility that would still be near the river but not in the floodplain. It’s also become clear that major upgrades to the plant might cost more than simply rebuilding: The latex paint on the ceiling of the sedimentation basin room is peeling terribly, for example, but an estimate to repaint ran about $100,000, and a roof replacement has proven cost-prohibitive due to insufficient structural support in that room.

Leaders in the region need to meet and discuss how they intend to move forward with providing quality drinking water for area residents, looking at what is smartest and most efficient for the area. A Southern Maine Regional Water Council report from 2008 shows the Saco River is the most sustainable large source of drinking water for the region, and could support far more than the population it currently serves. The existing capacity at the plant is 12 million gallons per day; they currently only pull five gallons per day.

The water company’s charter restricts it to serve only the towns it currently serves, so a change at the legislative level would be necessary to expand its reach. If a regional approach can be agreed upon, investments in other water districts’ infrastructure can instead go toward a regional system, but whether that is pursued or not, there is no sense in pouring millions into this 127-year-old building if it is going to cost more than a new building.

Maine Water is, of course, a private company providing a public utility, but we applaud them for making a concerted effort to garner public support for improvements rather than simply hiking the rates to upgrade the facility. The company has gone so far as to form an advisory committee of ratepayers to provide input, and their approach to discussing the future of drinking water treatment and distribution in southern Maine shows a great deal of respect for their customers and the role they play for these communities. We hope area leaders will work with Maine Water to agree upon the best solution for the region going forward, with the best use of our money and our natural resources in mind.

Ӣ Ӣ Ӣ

Today’s editorial was written by Managing Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski on behalf of the Journal Tribune Editorial Board. Questions? Comments? Contact Kristen by calling 282-1535, ext. 322, or via email at kristenm@journaltribune.com.