Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board hears four water‑and‑sewer rate options as staff weigh affordability and fixed‑cost pressure
Summary
The Water & Sewer Rate Structure Committee presented four options combining step‑rate increases and rises in the quarterly service charge to cover fixed infrastructure costs and declining billable volumes; average household impacts were estimated in the 3.9%–4.4% range. Staff will return with recommended adoption timing.
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Water and Sewer Rate Structure Committee and town finance staff presented four proposed rate structures combining step‑rate percentage increases and higher basic quarterly service fees intended to strengthen enterprise fund reserves while limiting impacts on low‑volume customers.
Deputy Town Manager Dave Davidson said the sewer fund faces structural pressure as billable sewer volumes decline while fixed infrastructure costs remain. The committee proposed two water options (volume step increases of 4% domestic / 8% secondary or smaller step increases paired with a $3 quarterly service fee increase) and two sewer options (a larger basic fee increase to $19/quarter with 3% step increases or a smaller $17/quarter basic fee with 3% steps). Davidson said the most conservative option would result in an average customer bill increase of about $86.40 annually (4.2%), while the lighter option would be about $78.40 (3.9%).
Committee members and board members discussed regressivity of basic fees, affordability concerns, the potential to revisit tier sizing next year, and the town’s hardship abatement program for qualifying households. The committee noted comparisons to neighboring towns and argued that raising the basic fee reduces revenue volatility when consumption is stagnant.
No rate vote was taken; the Select Board will revisit the options at a future meeting, and the committee plans further work on tiering, fixed‑fee allocation by service size, and targeted affordability measures.

