Mount Airy council postpones vote on proposed water, sewer rate increases after public criticism

Mount Airy — The Town Council postponed action on Ordinance 2025-519, a proposed three‑year schedule of water and sewer rate increases, following more than an hour of public comment and council debate about affordability, transparency and the town’s long‑term capital and operating plans.

The ordinance would have raised consumption rates by 8% annually in 2026, 2027 and 2028; opponents and several council members said they need a clearer long‑range capital and operating plan before approving the increases. The council voted to postpone consideration to a future meeting to allow staff and commissioners to provide additional documentation.

Council members and residents framed the issue as both fiscal triage and a question of public accountability. During public comment, resident Kiara Kovalyova said the increases “place Mount Airy residents on a rate escalator with no written review requirement or accountability” and urged the council to limit future increases to the rate of inflation and require reauthorization in 2028. Water and Sewer Commission Chair Swanson said the proposed increase is “necessary, unfortunately, but necessary,” and urged the council to adopt a multi‑year capital and operating budgeting framework to prevent recurring shortfalls.

Council debate reviewed the town’s recent history of deferred revenue and capital spending. Several council members and staff described a current operating shortfall in the water and sewer fund (during the meeting a council member characterized the town budget as showing roughly a $500,000 deficit). Commissioners asked for clearer schedules of upcoming capital projects — for example, a planned inspection and likely replacement of a water tower and continuing concerns about PFAS contamination at specific wells — and for a one‑ to five‑year projection that shows how rate changes would close the gap.

Water and Sewer Commission members discussed PFAS testing strategies and residential sampling, saying some wells (the commission cited Well Number 7, at Water Station 3 in the Twin Ridge area) may feed nearby homes with higher, less‑blended concentrations and that targeted tap sampling could better measure exposure. Commissioners also told the council the town had previously experimented with managing well usage as a mitigation step in early 2023 but later discontinued routine well switching due to operational challenges.

Council members said they support stabilizing the utility’s finances but differed over timing and the structure of increases. Councilmember Munder criticized the ordinance’s approach — saying it applied uniform percentage increases without re‑examining the underlying rate structure and conservation incentives — and said he could not support the current draft. Other council members said an 8% annual increase was in line with recent national trends for municipal water costs and could help halt the town’s recurring deficits if enacted.

Mayor Hushauer and staff agreed to produce a concise memo for the council summarizing: (1) a multi‑year capital and operating plan; (2) a forecast of revenues and expenses that shows how different rate scenarios affect reserves; and (3) a comparison of neighboring municipalities’ recent water‑rate increases. The ordinance will be brought back for council consideration after those materials are provided.

Community members and council members asked the town to prioritize clearer public communications about where new rate revenue would be spent and to show specific capital timelines and contingencies if unexpected failures occur.

The postponement vote was announced on the record; the council did not adopt Ordinance 2025-519 at the October 6 meeting.