Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Customer Assistance And Delinquency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Wilmington officials outline customer assistance, delinquency levels and modest bill impacts under proposed FY2026 rates
Summary
Officials said the city’s proposed FY2026 rates would raise an inside‑city household bill by about $4.67 per month for a 4,000‑gallon customer; delinquent water/sewer accounts total about $19 million as of February and existing assistance programs and a $250,000 annual utility assistance fund are part of the six‑year plan.
City and finance officials briefed the finance committee on the projected household bill impact of the proposed FY2026 rates, the utility’s delinquent account balance and assistance programs for customers in hardship.
Bill impact: Under the administration’s proposal, an inside‑city residential household using 4,000 gallons per month would see its combined water/sewer/stormwater bill rise from about $72 to $76.80 — an increase of roughly $4.67 per month under the proposed 6.5% water/sewer and 6% stormwater adjustments.
Delinquencies and collections: Director of Finance Brett Taylor reported that unpaid or delinquent accounts on the water/sewer ledger totaled roughly $19 million as of the February reporting period. The finance office said it typically brings in approximately $20–22 million per year through collections activity, including negotiated settlements, disconnections, sheriff’s‑sale processes and other enforcement tools.
Assistance programs: The presentation noted two existing assistance mechanisms: a rate ordinance discount for elderly and disabled customers (a 30% discount) and a utility payment assistance program budgeted at $250,000 per year. Black & Veatch quantified the monetary assistance built into the six‑year plan: about $475,000 annually for the elderly/disabled discount (projected to total roughly $3.6 million over the study period) and $250,000 per year for the payment assistance program (about $1.5 million over six years). Council members were told that unused assistance funds roll forward year to year.
Council concerns and follow‑ups: Several council members pressed on equity and cross‑subsidy issues. Council Member Darius Williams (questioning the split in testimony) and others asked why New Castle County wholesale sewer payments have not risen commensurately with direct retail increases; staff replied that county payments and capital obligations are governed by a contract that allocates flow and capital responsibility and that the city will review the three years of post‑contract flow and strength data with the county.
Enforcement and policy: Finance staff explained the city’s accounting practice and collection policy: the municipal accounting policy applies a 10% write‑down to delinquent accounts for each year they remain delinquent; at present many delinquencies are older balances reduced over time by such write‑downs. Finance also described the mechanics for reserve use and said draws from the rate‑stabilization reserve are disclosed in the budget ordinance and require council action.
Ending: Officials said balancing affordability and fiscal needs is an ongoing council and administration task; they encouraged customers with hardship to contact the utility and noted staff will supply additional data on DBE subcontractors, allocation of costs to wholesale customers and detailed collection metrics upon council request.
