Santa Rosa BPU rejects Pump Station 9 bids, recommends sewer code edits and a multi‑year rate increase package

The Board of Public Utilities for the City of Santa Rosa took three formal actions on capital procurement, sewer code compliance and rates during its meeting.

Reject bids for Pump Station 9: The board, by motion, rejected all bids received for contract C‑02438 (Water Pump Station 9 electrical upgrades) after staff reported the only bid — about $2,900,000 — was roughly 78% above the engineer’s estimate of $1,600,000. Rachelle Maeda, an associate civil engineer with the city’s capital projects team, said staff interviewed expected prime contractors and electrical subcontractors and that reasons for nonbidding included project labor agreement (PLA) requirements, limited time to prepare bids, sole‑source equipment constraints and an unexpectedly high temporary bypass pumping cost. A motion by Board Member Wright, seconded by Vice Chair Arnoni, passed unanimously on roll call (yes: 5; no: 0; abstain: 0; absent: 1). Maeda recommended redesigns to reduce cost and re‑solicit the project.

Ordinance recommendation to update sewer code for EPA pretreatment changes: The board voted unanimously to recommend that City Council adopt an ordinance amending portions of Santa Rosa City Code Title 15 (Sewers) to remain in compliance with EPA Industrial Pretreatment Program revisions. Martin St. George, environmental compliance supervisor, said the proposed edits correct wording in the categorical industrial user definition, make periodic self‑monitoring reports explicitly mandatory, and add record‑keeping language about best management practices used in lieu of pretreatment. The motion to recommend the ordinance and waive reading of the text passed unanimously on roll call (yes: 5; no: 0; abstain: 0; absent: 1).

Recommendation on rates and optional Proposition 218 procedures: After presentations by Hildebrand Consulting and city staff, the board recommended that City Council enact a proposed multi‑year rate schedule for water and wastewater services and support two optional Proposition 218 notice procedures intended to reduce legal risk.

- Proposed rate revenue changes presented by the consultant Mark Hildebrand were: water revenue increases of 6% for three years followed by 7% for two years; wastewater revenue increases of 5% for each of five years. The staff presentation included a bill‑impact table showing typical single‑family customer impacts and a proposed pass‑through mechanism for Sonoma Water wholesale costs. The board voted unanimously to recommend the rate package (yes: 5; no: 0; abstain: 0; absent: 1).

- City attorney briefing and optional Prop 218 items: Interim city attorney Dustin Cooper described two recent legal changes staff recommended using. First, a government code provision that one presenter described as creating a 120‑day statute of limitations for challenges to rates, which Cooper called “an absolute no brainer” to include in the public notice. Second, a statutory change — effective Jan. 1, 2025, as discussed at the meeting — that would require exhaustion of administrative remedies: objectors must submit written objections with specified detail during a defined preliminary period before they may pursue litigation. Cooper said the exhaustion step would require careful public communication because it creates two deadlines (a written‑objection deadline and a later written‑protest deadline that coincides with the council’s public hearing). The proposed schedule in staff materials set a written‑objection deadline of Feb. 28, a council response to objections on April 1, and a protest hearing and potential rate adoption also tentatively scheduled for April 1.

Board discussion and staff follow‑up: Board members pressed staff on whether PLAs were limiting contractor participation and on the consequences of delaying safety and resiliency upgrades. Transportation and Public Works Director Dan Hennessy said the city has seen fewer bidders per project since PLAs were adopted and that prices have been higher when only a small set of contractors can meet PLA requirements; staff said they are collecting comparative bid data from before and after PLA implementation to inform council. On the Pump Station 9 item, staff recommended redesigning the project to reduce cost and resolicit.

Votes at a glance (formal roll calls): - Consent calendar: adopted unanimously (yes: 5; no: 0; absent: 1). Motion by Vice Chair Arnoni, seconded by Board Member Bartholow. - Reject all bids for contract C‑02438 (Water Pump Station 9 electrical upgrades): motion by Board Member Wright; seconded by Vice Chair Arnoni. Passed unanimously (yes: 5; no: 0; absent: 1). - Recommend City Council adopt ordinance amending Santa Rosa City Code Title 15 (Sewers) to maintain EPA pretreatment compliance: motion by Vice Chair Arnoni; seconded by Board Member Bartholow. Passed unanimously (yes: 5; no: 0; absent: 1). - Recommend City Council enact proposed water and wastewater rate schedule (multi‑year increases and wholesale pass‑through) and implement optional Proposition 218 procedures: motion by Vice Chair Arnoni; seconded by Board Member Wright. Passed unanimously (yes: 5; no: 0; absent: 1).

What to watch next: Staff will revise and re‑advertise Pump Station 9, gather more data on PLA effects on bidding, finalize Prop 218 notices and a public outreach campaign (the city’s “Value of Water” outreach was described as active through July 2025), and proceed toward the tentative Feb.–Apr. Prop 218 timeline for objection, council response and protest hearing.