Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Birmingham workshop examines funding, consultant options for aging water, sewer and streets
Summary
At a March 9 workshop, Birmingham City officials heard staff estimates that about 38% of the city’s water mains and sewers are over 100 years old and discussed whether to use a consultant or in-house staff to produce a Capital Improvement Master Plan; commissioners also explored funding options, equity concerns, and legal constraints on using the General Fund.
At a March 9 workshop, the Birmingham City Commission discussed the Capital Improvement Master Plan after staff said a substantial share of the city’s underground infrastructure is aged and in need of long-term planning.
City Engineer Coatta and City Manager Ecker told the commission that roughly 38% of Birmingham City’s water mains and about 38% of the city’s sewers are over 100 years old, creating a sizable backlog of repair needs. The session was a workshop, and commissioners made no formal policy decisions.
Why it matters: Commissioners said the choice between hiring a consultant and using in-house staff is central to how the city will sequence repairs, explain trade-offs to residents, and maximize limited resources. A consultant could bring system-wide sequencing expertise and outside perspective, while staff argued the city already has an infrastructure scoring matrix that could be extended and used to build the plan internally.
Commissioners suggested extending the scoring horizon from five to ten years, adding ranking criteria such as street classification and traffic counts, and making ranking logic public. Several commissioners pointed to equity concerns: residents who previously paid special assessments for street work could face paying again under a bond-funded approach, while others who deferred payment face higher current costs.
Legal and funding constraints were a key focus. City staff and legal advisors said the city is currently constrained from using General Fund money for water and sewer repairs because of a prior lawsuit-related restriction, making it unlikely that user fees alone could cover the level of investment commissioners said is needed. Commissioners asked staff to clarify the lawsuit’s implications and to quantify what revenue increases would be required to rehabilitate roughly two miles of infrastructure per year.
Staffing and procurement issues came up as well. The City Engineering department said it lacks the bandwidth to compile a comprehensive project inventory and suggested that hiring one or more full-time staff could expand capacity and improve early notification to residents. Commissioners also discussed using development incentives in the Triangle District and improving RFP responses to secure competitive construction rates.
Public comment: Resident David Bloom urged clarity on prioritization (whether to focus on water/sewer segments or entire street rebuilds), and raised bond and procurement options. Paul Reagan cautioned that creating a detailed inventory could raise public expectations the city might not be able to meet.
What’s next: Commissioners asked staff to define a scope for a potential consultant RFP, consider extending the scoring matrix time horizon, quantify funding scenarios, and return with more detail on legal constraints and staffing needs. The workshop adjourned at 6:48 p.m.
