Council committee questions $240,000 water‑softening salt request and tables proposed streetlight utility
Loading...
Summary
The City & Safety Services Committee reviewed an annual water‑softening salt purchase request that would raise the line-item to $240,000 — a 26.2% rise from 2025 — and discussed a proposed $2.50 monthly streetlight utility to shift roughly $160,000 in costs off the general fund; members asked for further pricing and year‑end financials and agreed to revisit the streetlight proposal in two weeks.
The City & Safety Services Committee spent much of Monday evening probing two operational proposals: authorization to purchase up to $240,000 of water‑softening salt and a proposal to create a streetlight utility that would add approximately $2.50 per month to customer utility bills.
Chair Paul Isherwood explained the salt purchase is an annual requirement for the water system because Athens’ well water is hard and must be softened. The mayor and other members said the proposed $240,000 authorization represents a 26.2% increase over 2025 ($190,000) and asked administration to verify the market reasons for the jump (supply, commodity price spikes, or sourcing). Member Alan Swank requested comparisons with other Southeast Ohio communities and the auditor’s year‑end carryover figures; the treasurer later reported the city’s 2025 general fund income‑tax receipts finished at $11,106,146, a 5.44% increase over 2024, and members asked staff to return with more data before advancing a spending ordinance.
On the streetlight proposal, Isherwood said Athens currently pays about $160,000 a year to rent roughly 700 AEP‑owned lights and maintain about 400 city‑owned lights; the administration estimated a $2.50 monthly assessment would generate roughly $167,000. Public commenter Mary Abel and several councilors flagged equity concerns for fixed‑income households, urged greater use of income‑tax messaging or NOPEC funds to offset low‑income impacts, and suggested considering higher charges for commercial accounts to reduce the residential burden. Members also discussed service expectations if a fee is charged (timely repairs, AEP responsiveness) and whether a proprietary fund structure would restrict use of revenues to operation and maintenance.
Committee members agreed the item required more financial detail, outreach, and options (including differential commercial rates and NOPEC grant offsets); they asked staff to bring year‑end auditor figures and additional cost modeling and agreed to resume the streetlight discussion in two weeks rather than adopt the utility now.
The committee adjourned at 07:57 p.m.
