Eureka council adopts revised fee schedule, approves $9,000 sewer lateral fee-in-lieu over council objections

The Eureka City Council on July 1 adopted a revised city fee schedule that includes a new sewer lateral fee-in-lieu set at $9,000, a figure staff said reflects an average of three years of contractor bid costs and a 20% enterprise contribution.

City Engineer Willer, presenting background on the sewer lateral ordinance and the city’s consent-decree-driven need to reduce inflow and infiltration to the wastewater plant, described the calculation behind the fee and its rationale: “We rounded that down to 9,000 for a clean number that’s easy for people to deal with,” he said, adding the number was based on averaging recent annual lateral project bids and a policy decision to simplify fee categories.

The fee-in-lieu is an option for property owners who prefer the city to replace a lower lateral via a city-managed project at a reduced cost rather than hiring private contractors. Willer and other staff outlined triggers for mandatory inspection and potential replacement — including point-of-sale transfers, building permits with valuation thresholds, subdivision, and certain public works projects — explaining the measures stem from changes in Clean Water Act implementation and Regional Water Quality Control Board permit requirements.

Public comment was extensive and sharply critical of the $9,000 figure. Representatives of the Humboldt Association of Realtors read a June 3 letter urging a capped fee structure (they proposed $4,000 shallow / $8,000 deep and an $8,000 cap on nonstandard installations) and argued homeowners face significant uncertainty at the point of sale. Multiple residents urged the council to consider city-funded public works, in-house crews, or financing mechanisms to spread costs rather than placing the burden on sellers or individual homeowners.

Council members pressed staff on alternatives. Some expressed discomfort with shifting costs to ratepayers, while others emphasized that, without property-owner responsibility, the expense would have to be borne across the rate base. Staff said the city had used CARES/ARPA dollars to defer previous rate increases during the pandemic, that the treatment plant and permit constraints continue to drive infrastructure costs, and that a new rate study is planned.

Council member Castellano moved to adopt the fee schedule resolution (continuing a public hearing as needed); the motion passed 3–2. Council members Fernandez and Contreras Deloche voted against the resolution, citing affordability and equity concerns.

The council directed staff to continue outreach with stakeholders, to report back on potential financing or subsidy options, and to pursue state and federal grant funding to reduce impacts on ratepayers and homeowners. The fee schedule and the point-of-sale inspection triggers remain part of the municipal code; staff told council they will maintain and publish the five-year street-paving schedule to help homeowners anticipate opportunities to coordinate lateral replacement with public projects.

Next steps: staff will continue the stakeholder process requested by council and return with additional analysis and implementation details, including any proposed mitigation for low‑income or vulnerable residents.