Senate committee advances bill to restructure Birmingham Water Works board after heated public hearing

A Senate committee voted to give SB 330 a favorable report after a public hearing on governance of the Birmingham Water Works Board, the authority that supplies water to roughly three-quarters of the region's service area. Sponsor Senator Rob Roberts introduced the bill as an effort to install professional management and address longstanding billing and infrastructure problems.

The bill drew sharply divided testimony from municipal officials, Water Works leaders, employees and other legislators. Supporters said the board's current structure has produced recurring service and billing complaints and that a reconstituted board of professionals is needed to protect customers and economic development. Opponents said the proposal would strip local control from Birmingham and Jefferson County, risk interrupting current recovery efforts and represent a governmental taking of a locally developed asset.

Senator Roberts told the committee the measure aims to secure "competent and efficient management of Water Works boards" and to protect public health and economic viability. He listed national examples of catastrophic water-system failures and said the legislature needs to act. In his opening, Roberts asked to reserve closing remarks until after public testimony.

Tericia Huffman, chairwoman of the Birmingham Water Works Board, spoke in opposition and said the board has focused its work over the past nine months on pipeline replacement, customer service and correcting billing errors. "Providing the best quality of water to our customers remains our top priority," she told the committee, and said recent management changes and a new customer advocate office have reduced customer-related issues.

Mac Underwood, general manager of Birmingham Water Works, said the board's management changes have cut billing errors and put automated meter reading (AMI) on track. "We've been able to reduce the number of billing errors significantly," Underwood said, noting bids for an AMI project went out in April and that implementation could start Jan. 1, 2026. He cautioned that changing the board now could delay planned projects.

Employee and municipal testimony backed the board's progress. Derek May, who identified himself as chairman of the employee association at Birmingham Water Works, said employee morale has improved and offered "a vote of confidence" for the current board and management team.

City officials from Birmingham also opposed the bill. Birmingham City Council President Daryl O'Quinn said the proposal "does not reflect the demographics of the cost customers of the waterworks" and described it as "fundamentally about taking control" from the city. Councilman Hunter Williams, an owner in Jefferson County and chair of Birmingham's economic development committee, warned the legislation would allow elected officials in smaller jurisdictions to appoint themselves and called that a path to corruption.

Several legislators framed the debate as a question of local control and equity. Senator Sam Smitherman described the measure as a "governmental taking" and said it does not reflect the customer base in Jefferson County and Birmingham; Representative Kelvin Dasher called the bill "anti-democratic," citing disparities in customer counts between Birmingham and surrounding counties. Representative John Carnes, a supporter, argued the original municipal assets were sold in 1999 and said the system today serves 775,000 customers across the region.

Speakers disagreed about customer distribution and historical ownership. Underwood said 91.78% of customers are in Jefferson County and about 41% are city of Birmingham ratepayers; Representative Carnes said a different calculation yields about 25% of customers in Birmingham (195,000 of 775,000). Former board member William Mohammed described several past takeover attempts and emphasized the board's creation under a 1936 statute; he said city residents financed earlier bonds to buy the system in the 1950s.

Witnesses on both sides raised operational specifics. Supporters cited what they described as chronic billing and service complaints across municipalities in the Water Works service area; opponents said recent management and staff changes have materially reduced billing errors and improved communications with municipalities, and warned that changing governance now could stall projects such as the AMI rollout.

After public testimony, Senator Chambliss moved, with a second from Senator Hovey, to report the bill favorably out of committee. The clerk called the roll and recorded audible votes in the hearing: Senator Albritton (Aye); Senator Carnes (No); Senator Hatcher (No); Senator Kelly (Aye); Senator Coleman-Madison (No); Senator Chambliss (Aye); Senator Elliott (Aye). The committee adopted the motion and the bill received a favorable report from the committee.

The hearing brought repeated references to the bill's local history and past attempts at similar legislation. Several speakers urged that Jefferson County's delegation and municipal leaders be involved in crafting remedies; others said statewide action is necessary because complaints continue across municipal lines. The committee did not take up an amended text during the hearing and directed the bill to the next step after the vote.

The tension at the hearing centered on two factual claims: supporters urged the legislature to impose a new governance structure to bring professional oversight to a system they described as suffering chronic management failures; opponents said the current board and management team have begun to address those problems and that the bill would strip local control and could delay technical projects and reforms already underway.

With the committee vote complete, the bill will proceed along the Senate's legislative process; the committee did not set an implementation date or specify follow-up reporting in the hearing record.