Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Decorah council debates major changes to water and sewer billing, metering and service ownership
Summary
Staff proposed switching to monthly billing, changing units from cubic feet to per 1,000 gallons, removing the embedded 'first 500' consumption from the base charge, adding a $1 monthly paper-bill fee, and exploring city ownership of service lines from main to curb stop; council asked for additional data and a rate-study tie‑in before committing to citywide ownership changes.
City utilities staff presented a package of proposed amendments to Title 13 of the Decorah Municipal Code governing water and sewers. The major proposals included:
- Move all customers to monthly billing (currently a staggered quarterly schedule) to accelerate leak detection and billing regularity. - Bill consumption in gallons (per 1,000 gallons) rather than cubic feet for clearer public understanding. - Remove the 'first 500 cubic feet' consumption credit embedded in the water base charge so the base better reflects fixed delivery costs and consumption is billed starting with the first gallon; staff estimated this rebalancing could increase monthly revenue by approximately $20,000. - Charge a $1 monthly fee for receiving mailed paper bills to offset postage and printing costs and encourage electronic statements. - Adopt a final-solution enforcement (e.g., a $100 monthly surcharge) for a small number of remaining customers who still have legacy meters and refuse to convert, with the council suggesting the fee could be waived if property owners upgrade their meter promptly. - Consider a policy change to make the city responsible for the service from the main to the curb stop (curb-to-curb approach) rather than leaving that portion as owner responsibility. Staff and several council members said such a change would spread risk more equitably across the rate base but also increase city infrastructure liability and would likely require a rate study or phased approach; one comparative example cited was Independence, which recently made a similar conversion paired with a modest rate increase.
Council discussion was lengthy and technical. Several members supported separating base (fixed) and consumption charges now and revisiting a comprehensive rate study after the new meters and monthly billing have settled in. Others requested scenario-based cost estimates (for full curb-to-curb adoption citywide) before directing staff to change ownership. Staff warned of a federal lead/galvanized pipe replacement obligation that could create a large, time‑sensitive replacement burden (200–300 services potentially affected) if the city assumed ownership of services consistently.
No final policy change on curb-to-curb ownership was adopted at the meeting; council members asked staff to include curb-to-curb scenarios and cost estimates in a future rate-study or budgetary analysis and to report back after initial months of monthly billing.
