Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parlier council hears water‑rate study as groundwater charges push rates higher
Summary
City engineers told the council an updated water‑rate study shows state groundwater recharge costs and higher Sigma/GSA charges have created a budget gap; council directed staff and legal counsel to study tiered or revised rate structures and the city’s legal path before returning the item for a decision.
Parlier — City engineers and consultants told the Parlier City Council on Oct. 3 that previously projected water‑rate increases no longer cover recently higher groundwater recharge charges and that the city’s available settlement funds are restricted for filter operations.
The city engineer said the TCP filter project is fully grant‑funded, freeing roughly $9.3 million that must be used for the treatment plant’s operations and maintenance. The consultant, Dan Bergman, said the larger new cost driver is Sigma/GSA groundwater recharge charges, which rose from a projected $193,000 to roughly $476,000 this year and produced an unexpected shortfall the study estimated at about $555,000 compared with about $439,000 in savings from removed loan payments.
“Those groundwater expenses overall in your GSA are astronomical compared to other places,” Bergman said, noting the city’s water enterprise would move into the red without action. The presentation showed that with the 12% rate increase already adopted in the 2021 plan, the water fund would roughly break even; without it, the fund faces roughly a $300,000 deficit next year.
Council members pressed staff on options that would reduce burden on fixed‑income residents while asking larger users and non‑metered customers — including farms, schools and businesses inside city limits — to pay their fair share. Mayor Alma Beltran emphasized that some properties inside city limits are not currently billed through the city and said the council should pursue equity in contributions.
Council discussed several rate design options: keeping a fixed/volumetric mix, shifting more to strictly volumetric charges, or adopting tiered rates that raise the per‑gallon price for heavy users. Bergman cautioned that tiered rates require a legal justification and public noticing process; the mayor asked the city attorney to review whether the 2021 rate resolution still applies now that the TCP project is grant‑funded.
Rather than voting on a rate change, the council gave staff and legal counsel direction to research: (1) whether the 2021 resolution remains operative; (2) what legal steps and notices are required to adopt tiered or alternative rate structures; and (3) a breakdown of businesses and agricultural users inside city limits that are not currently billed so the council can determine enforcement or metering strategies. The council asked staff to return the item with recommended next steps.
The council also asked for scenarios that show bill impacts on typical single‑family customers under different rate designs and for an estimate of how long the settlement and restricted funds will cover TCP O&M if costs rise further. The city did not adopt a new rate on Oct. 3; follow‑up work will determine whether a new study or a formal rate hearing is required.
