Board reviews 10‑year financial model, staff flags trade‑offs between rates and tax support

District staff presented the long‑term financial plan (2027–2036) and a revised 10‑year capital improvement plan at the Dec. 19 meeting. The package shows a combined water, sewer and general‑fund capital investment of roughly $216 million (in 2026 dollars) and models rate assumptions established by the district’s Proposition 218 rate study.

Ryan Philbunk, the district’s director of finance and administration, said staff used conservative assumptions for inflation, personnel and operating cost growth and that a set of policy choices will affect how the water fund fares in the later years of the model. He said one scenario — increasing the share of new water‑debt service paid from property taxes from 33% to 50% — would materially improve water‑fund cash balances and could reduce the next rate‑study pressure without changing annual rate increases immediately.

During public comment Joanne Hurst pressed staff on the differences between inflation and the rate table customers received: “Why if inflation is less than 3%, why are sewer rates going up 8%?” she asked. Staff and the chair explained that the district’s Prop 218 rate study establishes maximum allowable rates for a five‑year period, and that the board sets rates annually within those bounds during the budget process. Staff offered to follow up with Ms. Hurst with a breakdown of the top budget drivers behind the 2026 rate change.

Board members asked for more analysis of trade‑offs, including the effect of shifting more debt service to property tax support and the impacts to general‑fund flexibility; staff said they will return with more precise scenario tables and the likely effects on other programs before any policy decision.