Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears proposed utility rate increases; staff to model alternatives for water increases tied to PFAS mitigation
Summary
Finance and utilities staff proposed rate changes across water, sewer, stormwater and trash funds to cover operating and capital costs including PFAS mitigation. Council asked staff for alternate scenario modeling and additional outreach before finalizing water increases.
City staff presented proposed rate increases for Thornton’s four enterprise utility funds — water, sewer, stormwater and trash — and explained the drivers, including capital projects, regulatory costs and a water treatment project to address PFAS. Council asked staff to run alternate scenarios for the water fund before final action.
Staff described each fund as an independent enterprise that must cover operations, maintenance and capital costs through rates and fees. The presentation included a proposed 11% increase for the water fund (driven by PFAS mitigation needs and debt‑coverage requirements), a 6% increase for sewer, a 6% increase for stormwater and a proposed modest increase for trash; staff calculated the combined effect would raise the average winter household utility bill by roughly $6.41 and summer bills by about $12.63 under the proposed package.
Staff said the water increase is required to support capital commitments and debt coverage for treatment work to address per‑ and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), and that the city has sought state and other funding but cannot rely on potential litigation settlements or uncertain grants. Staff proposed implementing the rates Jan. 1, 2026, and removing two inspection fees from rate ordinances to the city fee schedule for greater transparency.
Councilors raised concerns about the size and timing of the water increase and asked staff to model alternative approaches (for example, smaller or phased increases and the timing of effective dates) so council can weigh the trade‑offs before the budget is finalized. Council also asked for follow‑up information on the new advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) and the WaterSmart leak‑alert system, and requested performance data and customer‑notification metrics. Staff said they would return with scenario modeling and additional detail on AMI outcomes and customer assistance programs.
Staff noted several customer supports, including an assistance program that covers qualified residents’ indoor water usage and discounted hauling services for eligible households, and described ongoing customer outreach and rebate programs aimed at reducing summer irrigation use.
