Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Carey council gives first reading to 60% water-rate increase after consultant warns of negative reserves
Summary
Consultant Kleinfelder told Carey council the water fund risks negative reserves without rate changes; council gave a first reading to Ordinance 2026-1 adopting Alternative 3 (60% increase in 2026, then phased increases), and voted to drop a loan‑amortization alternative.
The Village of Carey council gave a first reading on Jan. 5 to an ordinance implementing a multi‑year water-rate increase after a consultant warned the water fund could run negative without changes.
Bennett Norley of Kleinfelder told council the village’s water rates have not been updated since 2017 and projected negative reserves by the end of the year unless the borough raises rates or changes financing. Kleinfelder outlined four options; council favored Alternative 3, a multi‑year plan that would raise rates by 60% in 2026, 35% in 2027, 10% in 2028, and 10% in 2029, then hold rates steady thereafter. Kleinfelder said the plan aims to restore reserves to a 25%–40% range of annual revenue.
“Under current projections, we expect reserves to fall below safe levels without rate adjustments,” Norley said during the presentation. Council members pressed Kleinfelder on capital-planning timing, comparisons with other communities, and infrastructure needs.
Administrator Mike Roszman and Public Works Superintendent Neil Puchta told council the village needs a new water tower because the existing standpipe is not functioning properly. Water and wastewater Superintendent Mike Bakies said the system’s desired overhead is roughly two days of water; in a large event the current tower could be drained in about six hours. Council also discussed a recent request from Kalmbach for water service related to a proposed pet-food facility; council was told the system does not currently have capacity to serve that project.
Resident Brandy Conley asked when a rate decision is required and urged spreading increases to ease burdens on lower-income residents. Mayor Tyler Bame said council needed to hold the ordinance’s first reading that night and that Alternative 3 spreads increases to reduce initial “shock,” but would not make the village net‑positive immediately in 2026.
Councilmember Derek Puchta moved to proceed with Ordinance No. 2026‑1 (to amend Section 929.08 and adopt Alternative 3); Stephanie Wade seconded. Roll-call vote: Puchta, Wade, Bleam, Conley, and Hernandez — yes (5); no (0); abstain (0). The ordinance received its first reading.
Council later disposed of Ordinance 2026‑2, the Alternative 4 proposal that would have amortized capital improvements via low‑interest borrowing; that motion passed 5–0 and Ordinance 2026‑2 will not proceed.
