Pataskala committee hears staff brief on proposed multi-year utility rate increases and minimum bill options

Pataskala City utility staff told the utility committee that the proposed multi-year utility rate increases will be phased over several years and will affect minimum-bill customers by roughly $15 in the first two years and about $10 in subsequent years for those who remain on the 3,000-gallon minimum.

Staff said the minimum bill (set at 3,000 gallons) has been part of the city's billing structure for years, that about 1,300 of roughly 3,700 accounts used less than 3,000 gallons last month, and that keeping or removing the minimum bill would be a bookkeeping decision with the same revenue outcome unless the city shifts the revenue to a labeled service charge.

In a briefing to the committee, staff said the planned increases are structured as three steps: an initial 8% increase (about $15 annually for a minimum-bill account), a subsequent 5% (about $10.08 annually), and a final increase the staff estimated at about $10.44 annually for minimum-bill accounts if all increases go through. Staff framed the change as a fund-balance math problem — the utility fund needs more revenue to stay solvent — and said the distribution of that required revenue can be described as an increase to volumetric rates, a minimum bill or a service/delivery charge. "It was a math problem. It was ... this is the amount of money that the fund needs, injected in it to stay afloat," the staff presenter said.

Committee members asked why Pataskala maintains a minimum-bill structure. Staff said the minimum makes billing easy in the current system and that nearby jurisdictions use different approaches: some neighboring communities have minimum bills at higher volumes, others do not have a minimum but charge a service or delivery fee; two nearby communities (Granville and Heath) have higher overall rates and do not use a minimum bill. Staff said roughly one-third of the city's accounts are paying the minimum bill without using all of the covered volume.

The committee discussed whether eliminating the minimum bill would shift costs to higher-volume users and whether a service charge would be a more transparent way to recover fixed costs to keep water service available at a property even when not used. Staff noted other utilities and companies use a fixed charge or line charge, citing examples such as AEP and AT&T line charges to illustrate the concept that customers pay for service availability.

Staff also said there had been public confusion where some residents mistakenly believed the city was imposing a new minimum bill; staff emphasized the minimum has been in place and that the rate increases will be applied to the existing minimum structure. Committee members asked staff to be prepared with talking points for the upcoming council third reading and to clarify public communications.

No votes or formal actions were taken by the utility committee on the rate briefing during this meeting.