Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rates Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press district on transparency and sharp water-rate increases tied to Tall Cedars project
Summary
Two residents told the Sewer & Water technical committee they lacked timely notice and accountability for large infrastructure spending and reported steep personal bill increases; staff said grant pursuit, legal limits on rate use and a recent rate study shaped funding and project timing.
Residents at the June 12 Sewer & Water technical committee meeting raised sharp concerns about transparency, billing increases and how the Tall Cedars/Top of Cedars water‑system reconstruction will be paid for.
"My water bill in 7 years since you guys took over has gone at 442%," said Randall Johnson, a resident who testified during the public‑comment period and cited additional figures for other accounts. Johnson and another resident asked who the stakeholders would be, how the district will notify property owners, and whether projected investigation and construction costs (one figure cited by speakers was $3,400,000) would be added to local water bills.
Committee members and staff responded in detail. Sean (staff member) told the public that by law rate revenue must remain in the water fund and cannot be diverted to parks or golf projects. He said the district pursues grants aggressively and has "been successful in securing probably close to $30,000,000 in grants now over the last 8 to 10 years" to offset capital costs. Staff also noted the district completed a Proposition 218 rate study last year that locks in the rate structure for five years and that the Tall Cedars costs have been contemplated in current allowable rates.
Both sides emphasized limited control over future rate trajectories: staff cautioned it cannot predict long‑term rate levels and said the necessary work on the aging system and public‑safety upgrades are expensive. Residents pressed for clearer outreach and for accountability mechanisms so homeowners understand the timing and magnitude of charges.
The committee heard the concerns as part of the meeting's public‑comment period; staff said more project‑specific notifications will follow as design work produces parcel‑level impacts and schedules.
