Residents urge council to reconsider street fee, question water rates and budget priorities

Several Amarillo residents used the public-comment period to press the City Council on fiscal priorities and proposed utility billing changes. Alan Feingold, a city resident who has spoken to council before about water rates, described the meter or access charge as mandatory regardless of usage and said the ratio of residential meter fees to commercial charges appears “unjust.” He asked the council to hold a longer session to review how water rates were set.

Chris Pittman urged the council to shift long-term infrastructure strategy away from car-centric projects and toward protected bikeways and urban tree planting. Citing the Rock Island Rail Trail, he said bike facilities cost “a fraction of what car lanes cost” and argued they can reduce road maintenance needs, pollution and flooding while creating safer routes to school.

Other speakers challenged a proposal to place a street fee on water bills, saying property and sales taxes, state and federal grants and developer contributions already help pay for streets. One resident asked whether labeling the charge a “fee” was a way to avoid voter approval that might be required for a tax.

Several commenters also pressed the council on larger budget questions, including an advertised shortfall the council has discussed and recent discretionary spending choices. Mike Fisher called for deeper cuts to nonessential spending and said the city should exhaust internal savings options before adding new charges to residents.

Council response: Mayor Stanley and staff confirmed public comment procedures and said members had heard the concerns. No formal council action was taken during the public-comment period; a number of those topics appear later in the meeting during budget and policy discussions.