The Bloomington Common Council on Sept. 30 approved an increase in water rates and authorized the city to issue revenue bonds to fund roughly $84 million of water‑system capital improvements.

Utilities Director Catherine Zager and outside consultants presented a multi‑part justification for the change. Jennifer Wilson of Crowe summarized the revenue requirement analysis, saying the utility needs additional annual revenue to fund an $84 million capital improvement plan and to maintain a target level of annual pay‑as‑you‑go funding. Wilson said the audit and test‑year normalizations produced a recommended overall revenue increase of about 30.5 percent.

Consultant Stantec explained the cost‑of‑service and rate‑design work that translates the revenue requirement into customer‑class rate changes. Danica Katz (Stantec) said the city used AMI meter data to model peak demands and allocate costs across customer classes. The consultants recommended a cap on irrigation volumetric increases (no more than four times the system average increase) to limit short‑term rate shock for irrigation meters while preserving the overall revenue target.

Utilities staff walked the council through major capital projects to be financed by a combination of debt and pay‑as‑you‑go revenue: upgrades and resiliency work at Monroe Water Treatment Plant, sedimentation‑basin rehabilitation, chemical system replacements, high‑service pump and VFD projects, booster station and storage tank work, an ongoing annual water‑main replacement program, and a new service center for field operations.

Controller McClellan explained two appropriation ordinances earlier in the meeting that funded fiber connectivity and ITS needs; those actions were separate but took place the same night. The council then adopted Ordinance 20‑25‑35 (amending Title 9 water rates) by roll call vote, 6‑0. The ordinance sets new fixed charges and volumetric rates and applies a rate design that spreads the 30.5 percent revenue requirement across customer classes while limiting irrigation spikes.

The council later introduced and adopted Ordinance 20‑25‑36 authorizing the issuance of revenue bonds not to exceed $71 million (anticipated in two issuances, 2026 and 2028) to finance the water treatment plant, distribution system and the new service center; the bond ordinance passed 6‑0. Bond counsel and staff said the city expects to issue two series with term lengths up to 20 years and an estimated pricing environment was discussed; director Zager said proceeds will also cover cost of issuance and capitalized interest where necessary.

Council members questioned details including the timing of bond sales, the projected total debt service (discussed as roughly $103 million in total payments to cover principal, interest and issuance costs), the split between bond‑funded and pay‑as‑you‑go projects (about $54 million in bonds, with approximately $28.4 million expected to be funded from revenues), and protections for low‑income customers. Zager and staff said the utility is improving its customer assistance program, expanding eligibility (from 200% to 300% of federal poverty guidelines) and budgeting $100,000 for assistance in 2026.

Both ordinances passed by recorded roll calls; the council and staff said the actions are intended to preserve water quality, system resilience and public health by financing needed rehabilitation and replacement work.