Montrose workshop explores phased water and sewer rate increases to fund wastewater work

City of Montrose staff and workshop participants spent the session reviewing how the city’s water and sewer base rates and tiered per‑unit charges compare with nearby towns and asked staff to return with budget scenarios that model phased rate increases to fund planned wastewater work.

Participants walked through a spreadsheet showing combined base rates and per‑thousand water and sewer charges for peer communities. The table flagged that Montrose’s combined base rate appeared lower than several peers (the spreadsheet listed a combined base figure of 22) and that some towns use steep tiered pricing that sharply increases per‑thousand charges once usage exceeds thresholds often discussed as about 2,000 gallons.

Workshop members emphasized two priorities: (1) build a multi‑year plan so the city can front‑fund wastewater treatment work without scrambling for local dollars if external grants or federal allocations do not arrive, and (2) avoid creating an immediate “shock” for ratepayers by considering phased increases rather than a single large hike. Staff noted the example bill shown in the materials used a 5,000‑gallon assumption to compute totals and asked for scenarios that show impacts on typical household bills under different phasing options.

The group flagged several concrete data points for follow‑up: the spreadsheet lists a sewer per‑thousand charge shown as 11.99 and a per‑thousand sewer line that was referenced as about 1.05 in the materials; staff also noted the base charge applies every month — including for seasonal property owners — so base rates account for recurring revenue. Participants discussed the possibility of splitting a larger increase into two smaller steps (for example, increments in consecutive years) to smooth the impact on customers while moving toward revenue targets that would fund the wastewater project.

Several speakers cautioned against relying solely on federal assistance. Workshop remarks noted that a related federal measure had passed one chamber of Congress and was awaiting action in the other, but participants said the city should plan for scenarios both with and without federal funds so projects can proceed without delay if outside dollars are not awarded.

Next steps: staff were asked to prepare budget projections and phased rate schedules showing revenue and household‑bill impacts and return to the council/workshop for further consideration. No formal motion or vote was taken during the workshop.