Jackson City Council rejects proposed volumetric water and sewer rate increase

The Jackson City Council voted 6-0 on April 20 to oppose an ordinance that would have codified revisions introduced by the interim third‑party manager of the city’s water and sewer systems and raised volumetric rates for water and sewer customers.

The vote followed public comments from apartment owners and residents who warned the increase would hit renters harder than single‑family homeowners and councilmember remarks pressing Jackson Water for clearer cost and collection data.

Apartment‑complex owners’ representative Robert Ireland told the council he used Jackson Water’s own example figures to calculate that tenants could see increases of about $22 per month, not the $9 monthly figure Jackson Water had cited at an earlier meeting. Ireland said operational expenses in the utility’s 20‑year plan rise from about $104,000,000 in fiscal 2025 to about $177,000,000 in 20 years, and that $450,000,000 in federal capital funding has been discussed without a clear schedule for when capital work will reduce operating costs.

Several councilmembers said they sympathized with the utility’s work to restore and improve reliability but were unwilling to approve a rate increase while collections lag. Councilman Banks said he had requested information about non‑rate cost reductions and had not received it. Councilman Foote and Councilman Hartley urged Jackson Water to improve its collection rate — which council discussion put at roughly 70% — before the council would support higher rates. The council president said she would join colleagues in sending a message that the proposed increase was excessive for residents.

Council discussion also referenced a federal stipulated order and the role of U.S. District Judge Wingate; speakers said certain approvals go to the court. The city council noted that while the federal court and the interim manager have roles in the process, the council needed more documentation showing that proposed operational expenses were necessary and could not be deferred or offset by other measures.

Outcome and next steps: Council members voted to oppose the ordinance. Speakers on the record asked Jackson Water to present a clearer, itemized explanation of ongoing operational expenses, a timeline for the $450 million in capital improvements, and a plan to raise the utility’s collections rate before returning with another rate proposal. Several councilmembers said they expected continued public engagement and follow‑up at future meetings.

Sources: Public comment by Robert Ireland; resident Oliver O'Quinn; floor remarks from councilmembers during item 9; council record of the vote on April 20, 2025.