Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utility Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Isanti staff recommends phased sewer, larger water-rate increases; council debates equity and conservation incentives
Summary
Staff proposed sewer rate increases (5% in 2025, then 3% subsequently) and recommended a water-rate alternative that raises the base fee (about $2 / ~14.4% in year one) and creates a fourth consumption tier to discourage excessive irrigation; council discussed fairness for fixed-income households and options to target higher users.
At the committee meeting staff (Speaker 6) presented E7, the city's water-and-sewer rate-study recommendations. For sewer, staff proposed a 5% across-the-board increase in 2025 followed by 3% increases in subsequent years; staff said sewer had not been raised for three years and was cut in 2021.
For water, staff described several alternatives and recommended a path that balances base-fee increases with consumption-rate adjustments. In the staff's original outline, the base fee would rise roughly 14% in 2025 (about $2 monthly) with 5% consumption increases in the first year and 3% in subsequent years under one option. Staff cautioned that even with those changes the city could still face future water-revenue bond issues (staff estimated potential future bonds of about $5.5 million each) unless per-capita water use declines.
Council members examined whether rates should be raised more sharply on the highest users to drive conservation. Speaker 2 advocated larger increases in the top tiers to change behavior, saying the only way to curb overwatering is to "hit them where they actually care." Staff said the rate study includes a new fourth tier intended primarily as an incentive for excessive users to reduce use rather than to be a permanent revenue source; staff said the expectation is most customers would exit the fourth tier when notified.
Equity concerns were raised for low-income and fixed-income residents. Speaker 11 asked about the possibility of protecting low-water users from increases; staff replied that the bottom tier represents a very small per-gallon charge and that the likely bill impact for very low users would be roughly $40/year or less under the proposed changes.
Commercial irrigation and unusual accounts (car washes, large irrigation users) drew questions about carve-outs or special treatment; staff said such exceptions are possible but cautioned carving out too many cases could undermine program integrity. Staff also said the city has roughly 2,200–2,300 billed water accounts (the record included a staff estimate in that range).
No formal rate ordinance was adopted at the committee meeting; staff will return with final recommendations and data to allow the council to judge how per-capita use trends after outreach to large users and letters sent to high-use accounts.
