Commissioner Brown urges using $37.6 million utility reserve to ease burden on low‑income ratepayers

At the April 9 Albany Utility Board meeting, Commissioner Diana Brown — who spoke as a resident though identified earlier as a commissioner — criticized customer fees and urged the board to use utility reserves to support low‑income and senior households.

Brown said the utility is "facing a poverty" while holding what she described as "over $37,600,000" in reserves and cited what she called "actual revenue" figures in the transcript. She said those funds make it possible to create a "three‑year $5,000,000 investment" and proposed measures including a modest 3% credit‑card upcharge on transactions, a roughly $1,000,000 community initiative, and targeted credits for vulnerable households. "We are personalizing perfect credit rate over dignity of a senior citizen who just wanna pay her water bill without being penalized," she said.

Brown also criticized fees charged to customers — including a $30 late fee and what she described as roughly $700,000 in costs the utility currently "absorbs" for card‑payment convenience fees — and argued that some small per‑transaction charges "violate the city charter." "Our people paying to this corporation, and these fees are unacceptable," she said.

City staff did not accept the $37.6 million figure as stated in the hearing. When a board member asked whether the $37,600,000 amount referred to utility reserves that the board controls, a staff speaker replied "No" and said the city CFO could provide specific reserve figures. Staff also explained that merchant/credit‑card convenience fees charged by payment processors average up to about 3% and that the utility currently absorbs roughly $700,000 of those fees systemwide rather than billing them directly to card‑paying customers.

The transcript records Brown's proposals and assertions in the public‑comment period; board members and staff asked for and were promised follow‑up numbers from finance staff. The board did not take formal action on Brown's proposals during the meeting.

Why it matters: Brown framed her remarks as a call to reorient utility budgeting toward vulnerable residents, arguing reserves should be a tool for community stabilization rather than a passive balance. Staff responses indicated some of her numerical claims required confirmation from finance staff; the board requested follow‑up information before the next meeting.

What’s next: Staff said it will provide clarified reserve and revenue figures and the board will receive the proposed utility rates at the next utility board meeting for consideration. No policy change or vote on Brown’s proposals occurred at this meeting.