Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utility Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultant presents five‑year water and wastewater rate plan for Weatherford
Summary
A NewGen consultant told the Weatherford utility board a five‑year plan would fund major water/wastewater capital needs while limiting rate shock: recommended system increases translate to about 2% per year for water, 8% per year for wastewater and a small hydrant class adjustment.
At a midday meeting of the City of Weatherford Municipal Utility Board, consultant Tony Georges presented a five‑year cost‑of‑service and rate‑design study that would fund roughly $45 million per year in capital needs while limiting annual customer‑facing increases.
Georges said the financial forecast translates to about 2% annual increases for water and 8% annual increases for wastewater over the five‑year plan, with the small hydrant class seeing about a 3% annual adjustment. He described a financing mix that relies heavily on long‑term debt to spread capital costs and limit short‑term rate pressure.
"We maintain 90 days cash on hand," Georges told the board, emphasizing that the plan is structured to preserve reserves while meeting capital requirements. He said the study reflects about $225 million in capital needs over five years and roughly $165 million in planned bond issuances for the water and wastewater systems.
The presentation translated system‑level changes into customer bills. Using a conventional residential profile (3/4‑inch meter, 6,500 gallons of water, 3,500 gallons of sewer), Georges showed a current combined bill of roughly $105 (water about $79.77; wastewater about $25.40). Under the study assumptions, the combined monthly bill would rise gradually to roughly $125 by fiscal 2029 — about $3.50–$5.00 incremental per year.
Rick Schafer, director of water utilities, told the board the report and the draft rate recommendations will be used to prepare an ordinance for a joint utility board/city council meeting, with possible adoption dates cited by staff. Georges said the first implemented step would begin Oct. 1, in the start of a fiscal year under the proposed schedule.
Board members pressed on the distribution of rate impacts between customer classes, with one member noting that rate design can be policy driven. Georges replied that Weatherford’s classes are largely balanced and that the presentation used a "gradualism" approach to avoid large class‑to‑class shifts.
The board took no formal action on rates at the meeting and asked staff to return with ordinance language and the additional debt schedule presented later in the agenda. The consultant and staff repeatedly described the item as informational at this stage.
Next steps: staff will prepare the draft rate ordinance based on the board’s feedback and present it at a joint utility board/city council meeting for consideration and adoption.
