Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capacity Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City council approves first reading to lower water and sewer capacity fees to $2,000
Summary
Westmoreland City Council voted 3–1 on first reading to lower per-connection water and sewer capacity fees to $2,000, with discussion about phased increases, a dedicated account for proceeds and concerns about development impacts.
Westmoreland City Council approved on first reading to lower water and sewer capacity fees to $2,000 per connection, a change that drew questions about implementation and future increases.
The measure, introduced as an amendment to the city’s capacity-fee ordinance, passed the first reading 3–1. Councilman Brown moved to begin discussion; Councilman Calvert seconded, and the roll call showed three members in favor and one opposed for the first reading.
Supporters said the council originally set a higher fee — discussed in the meeting as $3,500 — and that starting lower would be less likely to discourage local builders while the program begins. Jackson Thornton, identified in the meeting as the consultant performing the city’s rate study, was cited during discussion as recommending an initial $2,000 fee and a potential phased approach to reach the previously set level.
Members discussed a staff proposal relayed by Thornton to increase the fee by $500 per year until it reached the earlier figure. One council member said they would not support locking in a $500-per-year cap on increases and preferred to revisit any schedule after observing the fee’s effects for a year. Council members also asked that capacity-fee receipts be deposited into a separate account and that the budget or ordinance state what the funds will be used for (meeting participants described the funds as earmarked for future system improvements).
Opponents raised concerns that changing the fee so soon after adoption would make the city appear indecisive and could discourage development or invite contractors to halt projects. A council member warned that if fee revenue proves insufficient to fund needed wastewater-plant expansion, the city could face a moratorium on issuing building permits until capacity is available — a scenario described as “caught between a rock and a hard place” in the meeting discussion.
The first-reading vote means the amendment will return for a subsequent reading and final adoption before the fee change becomes effective. The meeting record shows the first-reading tally as three in favor and one opposed; the council did not adopt a precise annual-increase schedule during the meeting.
