Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Stanhope council adopts five-year electric rate increase after rejecting smaller hike
Summary
On Dec. 9, 2025, the Stanhope City Council adopted Ordinance 700 approving a five-year electric rate increase (5% in FY26 then 2% annually for the next four years) after an earlier, smaller increase proposal failed in a roll-call vote.
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Stanhope City Council voted Dec. 9 to adopt Ordinance 700, approving a five-year increase to the city's electric utility rates. The council accepted a proposal calling for a 5% increase in fiscal year 2026 and 2% increases in each of the next four years.
Council members Beau Jensen and Jill Haman led the motion. An earlier proposal that would have raised rates 3% in FY26 followed by 2% for the subsequent four years was put to a roll-call vote and failed with all voting no. On the successful motion to adopt the larger increase, Jensen moved and Haman seconded; the motion carried.
Three council members were recorded present for the vote: Jill Haman, Mindy Hetland and Beau Jensen. Council Member Sogard and Mayor Pro Tem Young were noted as absent in the attendance record.
The ordinance text in the meeting materials indicates the increases are structured as a 5% adjustment in FY26 and 2% adjustments in FY27—1 through FY30, but the transcript does not specify an effective date or outline customer notice procedures. Those details were not stated during the meeting and are not specified in the record provided.
The council did not record individual yes/no votes by name for the successful motion beyond the motion being carried; the earlier roll-call vote rejecting the smaller proposal recorded an "all voting NAY" outcome.
Ordinance 700 was introduced under the evening's ordinances and resolutions agenda item and carried on the motions reported in the meeting minutes. The city clerk recorded the meeting and attested the minutes following adjournment.
Next procedural steps, including ordinance filing, publication or effective date, were not specified during the Dec. 9 meeting.
