Coeur d'Alene council tables water-rate discussion, requests workshop on $16 million capital plan

Councilmembers in Coeur d'Alene voted unanimously to table action on a proposed multi-year water capital plan and related rate scenarios and directed staff to schedule a workshop for further review. The motion to table was made during a discussion of a proposed $16,000,000 scenario that city staff described as including higher-cost repairs and replacements.

The tabling motion followed questions from multiple councilmembers about the plan's assumptions, projected costs and how a rate increase would affect customers. Councilmember Merritt said he did not want to raise rates without being able to justify them to ratepayers and called several of the plan's risk items "iffy," noting the document used conditional language such as "could" multiple times. "You could be driving to the doctor and get a flat tire," Merritt said, criticizing what he called speculative risk descriptions.

City staff told the council the $16,000,000 figure reflects projects after removing amounts already budgeted in certain years and that staff attempted to be conservative in cost estimates. A staff speaker said the city currently puts roughly $700,000 to $800,000 back into the system annually for mains, services and hydrant replacement, but noted rising material costs have reduced what the city can afford to replace each year. The speaker also said meter box replacements that cost about $3,040 per set when the program began have risen to roughly $1,000 per set now (as phrased in the transcript), and that staff are exploring compatible materials and approaches to lower costs.

Councilmember Amy asked specifically about "scenario 2," and whether a listed $400,000 for new meters, hydrants and lines was included in the $16,000,000 and whether that $400,000 could increase because of repair costs; staff replied the figures were conservative and could change as projects mature. Councilmember Kiki Miller asked the staff to include alternatives to raising rates — such as deterrents or demand-management tools — for reducing peak summer usage rather than relying primarily on a price signal.

Under the plan discussed, staff confirmed scenario 2 would raise the base monthly water rate by $2. Councilmember Gookin and others said they wanted more time to review the longer capital plan (described in the meeting as a roughly 288-page document) and suggested a short workshop later in June would permit more detailed questioning. A motion "that we table this until a time determined by [the] water administrator for a workshop to bring forward to council" was made and seconded; Councilmembers Wood, Evans, Taylor and Gabriel were recorded as voting in favor during the roll call. The motion carried.

The tabling vote halted immediate action on any rate change; staff said the $2 base increase under scenario 2 was the staff's estimate for a base user and that additional details and project-level clarifications remain in the comprehensive capital plan. Several councilmembers expressed concern about asking ratepayers to shoulder increases before the council had time to review the plan's full detail and supporting documentation.

The council did not set a firm workshop date during the meeting. Staff said some information could require additional time to prepare for council review and public consideration.