Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Water Rates topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Houston County approves three-year water rate increase, establishes tiered structure and CPI adjustments

2391018 · February 18, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Houston County Board of Commissioners unanimously approved a three-year, tiered adjustment to county residential, commercial, municipal and industrial water rates and a plan to tie future increases to the consumer price index, citing rising production costs and upcoming capital needs.

The Houston County Board of Commissioners voted unanimously Feb. 18 to approve a three-year adjustment to county water rates and to tie future annual increases to the consumer price index.

County leaders said the changes are needed after an audit showed the water enterprise fund operating at a loss and to finance planned capital projects — including new wells, storage tanks and larger distribution mains to support growth and fire protection. Commissioner J. Byrd moved the measure and Commissioner Touton seconded; the motion carried unanimously.

The vote follows a staff presentation that described Houston County as one of the state’s largest groundwater-permitted systems, with a permit size staff stated as about 23,400,000 gallons per day and steady production increases since the 1990s. The presentation said fiscal 2024 production costs averaged $1.53 per 1,000 gallons and noted some existing retail rates were below that level.

Under the approved plan, county (unincorporated) residential customers will move to a three-tiered price schedule with a $14 monthly base (including 2,500 gallons). Staff presented the proposed residential per-1,000-gallon blocks as approximately: 2,500–10,000 gallons at $2.00 (year 1), $2.25 (year 2) and $2.50 (year 3); 10,000–15,000 gallons at $2.50 (year 1), $3.00 (year 2) and $3.50 (year 3); and 15,000+ gallons at about $3.00 (year 1), $4.00 (year 2) and $5.00 (year 3). Commercial, municipal and industrial schedules were presented separately (commercial base $28, with per-thousand rates rising from about $2.00 in year 1 to $3.50 in year 3; municipal and industrial rates were shown rising from roughly $2.00 to $3.00 over the three years). Staff also proposed annual review of meter tap fees and hydrant meter costs.

“Primary objective is to provide safe and reliable water to its customers,” Commissioner Byrd said during the presentation. County officials emphasized the need to fund multiple future storage tanks, test wells (a test well near Matt Arthur Elementary School was mentioned), larger transmission mains for new road corridors, and treatment capacity that can accept multiple deep wells and remote well connections.

The board opened a short public comment period on the item. Thomas Reynolds of Bonanza Drive questioned some of the numbers in the presentation and said he did not understand how the system could be losing money if current retail rates in some classes appeared higher than the stated production cost. “I just don’t see the math,” Reynolds said. County staff responded that some city and commercial rates are lower than production costs and that the proposed structure is intended to protect lower-volume residential users while encouraging conservation among high users.

The approved motion directs staff to implement the three-year schedule and to apply 100% of the Consumer Price Index for water, sewer and trash thereafter, with the first adjusted bills effective July 1 (the first billing cycle of that month). The board also approved annual review of tap and hydrant fees.

County commissioners and staff framed the move as an effort to maintain water quality, fund infrastructure for growth and preserve fire protection capacity rather than as an immediate revenue grab; several commissioners said the proposal was the result of extensive review by auditors, consulting engineers and public works staff.

The board’s action was unanimous.