Bristol Bluff Utility District argues against City of Bristol water monopoly acquisition

The Tennessee Board of Utility Regulation convened on July 17, 2025, to discuss critical issues surrounding water utility management and potential mergers in the region. The meeting focused on the financial implications of utility operations, competition among water providers, and the potential merger between the Bristol Bluff City Utility District (BBCUD) and South Fork Utility District.

The session began with a review of the annual costs associated with the South Fork Utility District, which totaled $31,350. Discussions highlighted the financial structures of the utility districts, including the $250 monthly stipend received by commissioners of the BBCUD, with no additional insurance benefits provided to board members.

A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to the concept of monopoly in the context of water supply. Concerns were raised by various board members regarding the implications of the City of Bristol potentially acquiring the South Fork water treatment plant. It was argued that such a move would eliminate competition, allowing the City of Bristol to set water rates without market pressure, which could adversely affect rural customers reliant on BBCUD for lower rates.

The board also addressed the current competitive landscape, noting that South Fork has the option to purchase water from both BBCUD and the City of Bristol. This competitive dynamic is crucial for maintaining reasonable rates for rural customers. The discussion included a reminder that the merger negotiations had been conducted in good faith, with both parties expressing a desire to avoid monopolistic control over water supply.

As the meeting progressed, the board considered the potential benefits of a merger. It was noted that customers from both utility districts could see a 5% decrease in rates if the merger proceeded. This reduction was presented as a significant advantage for customers, particularly in light of the financial challenges faced by both districts.

The meeting concluded with the board deliberating on whether to continue pursuing the merger. The discussions underscored the importance of maintaining competitive water supply options for rural customers and the potential benefits of collaboration between utility districts to enhance service and reduce costs. The board's decision on the merger will have lasting implications for water utility management in the region.