Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge council to ease rising water bills as developers request city support
Summary
Several residents used the citizens forum to criticize consecutive water-rate hikes and the city's tiered system; a developer separately asked the city to fund off-site road infrastructure for the Church Mountain subdivision, prompting public pushback that the timing is poor given high household bills.
Get email alerts on the Utilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At the start of the meeting residents pressed council about the impact of consecutive water-rate increases and the structure of the new tiered water rates. "For 6 consecutive years, we've had water rate increases," said Daniel Haul Becker, who addressed the council as a resident and asked the city to consider funding offsets such as impact fees on development to reduce the burden on existing citizens.
Another resident, Ray Payne, described a personal example of rising bills and opposed a developer request tied to the Church Mountain agenda item. "My average water bill was $66 a month. It was $195 this last time," Payne said. He told the council that a proposed $1.3 million request for off-site infrastructure would divert funds from local street repairs that many residents were being asked to finance.
Council members acknowledged the concerns but noted infrastructure needs and long-term projects that also drive costs. Staff described upcoming large water projects and a pending application for a Texas Water Development Board grant to offset infrastructure costs; council also signaled they will review fee and funding options but did not announce immediate rate changes.
The citizens forum also included community announcements and lighter items: Dana Wall invited residents to a community —goat hike' at Ogletree Gap Park, and Louis Hunter asked staff to follow up about the type and density of development planned behind Summers Road; staff indicated they would provide additional information after the meeting. Public comment was limited to five minutes per speaker and 30 minutes total for the forum.

