Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council debates NewGen water/sewer rate study, unsettled on staffing cost allocation and tier design
Summary
Councilors and staff reviewed NewGen's draft rate model and spent extensive time debating whether to prioritize stable fixed fees or variable tiered rates, how to account for 'people costs' (public‑works staffing) in the utility fund, and tier breakpoints; staff asked councilors to bring concrete tier proposals for the December session.
Councilors spent the longest portion of the work session on the NewGen water and sewer rate study, focusing on three central questions: how to treat personnel costs in the utility fund, whether to favor fixed fees (stability) or tiered variable rates (users pay for use), and how to structure tiers to avoid unduly burdening residential customers.
Staff and several councilors described a recent sharp increase in customer bills (members cited a prior ~48% rise), and public‑works staff provided context about routine maintenance and staffing demands for water towers, wet wells and 50 miles of pipe. Council discussion ranged from proposals to keep the utility fund self‑sustaining by retaining people costs in the fund to suggestions to move some personnel costs to the general fund and adopt simpler flat fees.
Members asked NewGen to return better‑scoped models and asked colleagues to bring specific tier proposals (e.g., four tiers or expanded breakpoint numbers such as 9/18/27k gallons) to the December work session. Staff committed to delivering additional data and modeling support so the council can test options ahead of the budget cycle.
No formal rate vote occurred; the council set a process direction to produce concrete tier options and verify personnel‑cost allocations before making final decisions.
