Topeka staff proposes multi‑year utility rate frameworks to rebuild old water, sewer and storm infrastructure; council asks for more data

Utility department leaders briefed the governing body on June 2 about the long‑term condition of Topeka’s water, wastewater and stormwater systems and presented alternatives for raising funding over multiple years.

Utilities Director Sylvia Davis told council the city is responsible for roughly $6.3 billion in assets and that an 'ideal' industry‑standard replacement schedule across those assets would require about $1.2 billion over 10 years. Staff proposed a reduced, phased replacement schedule — roughly $775 million over 10 years — and described a four‑year initial investment that would raise approximately $51 million to address prioritized infrastructure needs while maintaining financial viability.

Davis presented two demonstration approaches: an across‑the‑board multi‑year increase (an illustrative example that would raise combined water and wastewater revenue by roughly 64% over four years in the slide shown) and an alternate the department described as a 'reduced residential impact' option that phases commercial and industrial rates toward a single consumption rate while limiting base‑charge increases for smaller residential meters. Staff emphasized options such as not increasing base charges on meter sizes under 2‑inch, adjusting wholesale multipliers and examining the irrigation rate separately.

Staff provided example bill impacts: an average single‑family residential customer using 3,500 gallons per month currently pays about $91.34 across the three utilities; under the illustrative across‑the‑board scenario the example household would see an increase of about $5.22 in the first year in staff’s slide example, while the reduced residential‑impact model would produce a smaller increase (~$2.87 in the same example). Larger commercial and industrial customers would experience larger percentage and dollar increases under the residential‑protective alternative.

Council members pressed staff for additional data before any vote: requests included detailed debt‑service amounts and their share of operating budgets, delinquency rates and balances, the percentage of revenue contributed by each customer class, neighborhood‑level maps of recent main breaks and repair plans, and an analysis of alternatives such as level‑pay programs and removing readiness‑to‑serve charges on inactive accounts. Several council members also requested modeling that would remove base charges on vacant properties and show which customer classes would have to make up that revenue instead.

Davis said staff will provide detailed memos, meeting notes and survey results, and scheduled further rate discussions on June 9 with potential action delayed if the council requests more time. No rate ordinance or vote occurred at the June 2 meeting.