Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Arcata staff present options to raise water and sewer rates as infrastructure needs mount
Summary
Consultants told the Arcata City Council the water and wastewater utilities face multi‑million‑dollar capital needs and two rate paths: an immediate recovery with higher upfront increases or a phased approach that costs more over time. Staff signaled plans to begin the Proposition 218 notice process and public outreach this winter.
Consultants presented two paths for covering major water and wastewater repairs and upgrades that would raise rates for Arcata households.
Tabitha, a city staff presenter, and Eric Helgeson of Bartle Wells Associates told the council the city faces immediate capital needs and a long‑term investment deficit. "There's about $36,000,000 of capital over the next 5 years," Helgeson said, summarizing the water enterprise's projected project list. He added the water fund will likely need debt financings and a possible bond to stabilize reserves.
Tabitha described two rate scenarios for the water enterprise: an "immediate revenue recovery" option with larger up‑front increases and a "phased‑in" approach spread across years. "If you when you look at your first year…the combined water and wastewater bill…It'll be a 14% increase or $19 a month, $19.01 per month for the average single‑family home," she said, illustrating the near‑term impact under the immediate option.
For the wastewater side, consultants recommended moving single‑family accounts to a fixed monthly charge and removing the current limited volumetric cap tied to winter use. Helgeson noted wastewater serves about 5,600 accounts and that the system faces roughly $51,400,000 in capital needs over five years. Staff gave an example of the proposed first‑year change: "moving from a base charge of $77.61 to a fixed charge of $86.24 for residential customers," the presentation said.
The consultants framed the recommendations around three goals: financial sufficiency, legal compliance with Proposition 218, and limiting customer impacts where possible. Helgeson explained Prop 218 procedures for raising rates and the required public notice and protest process that follows: the council must mail notices and hold a hearing; a majority protest by property owners could block increases.
Council members thanked the consultants and asked for detailed comparisons of the two scenarios at future meetings. Staff said the next steps would likely include authorization to begin the Proposition 218 notice process, public outreach and an open house to answer resident questions before a public hearing scheduled this winter.
The council did not adopt rates at the meeting; consultants and staff emphasized the presentation was informational and that further direction and public comment would precede any formal action.
