Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Water Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council weighs listing small state water fee on utility bills versus absorbing it
Summary
Council discussed a small state per‑volume water fee (about 1.6 cents per thousand gallons in current proposals) and whether to show it as a pass‑through line on monthly utility bills or absorb the cost into rates. Staff said listing it could improve transparency; a larger, separate statewide fee for projects was noted as a future possibility.
Staff explained the state has authorized a fee that utilities may collect and noted earlier proposals set the fee higher (references to 3 cents per thousand gallons in earlier legislation). The staff presentation emphasized the current figure under discussion is roughly 1.6 cents per thousand gallons, which translates to a modest monthly impact for most customers (staff characterized it as a small dollar amount and more of an annoyance than a material bill increase).
Two options were presented: keep the fee absorbed into existing rates (the city would pay from its utility revenue) or display a separate line on the monthly utility bill explicitly labeled as a state pass‑through so residents see that the charge goes to the state and not the city. Staff noted that displaying the fee could increase transparency without materially changing total cost; some councilors said it was worth showing the fee so residents know where the money goes. Staff and council also discussed a possible, larger second statewide fee to fund water projects in a forthcoming legislative session (House Bill 51 was referenced as a prior, unsuccessful effort), and the council noted uncertainty about that later fee.
What’s next: Staff said it can implement a separate line item on the bill with minimal administrative effort if the council directs it to do so; the council indicated it would likely see an implementation item in a coming council packet.
