Petaluma considers water, sewer rate increases

Officials say a raise is needed to cover infrastructure costs, wastewater plant upgrades.|

Petaluma officials are considering a hike in water and sewer rates for each of the next five years as the city looks to cover costs for operations, maintenance and projects to rehabilitate aging infrastructure.

The Petaluma City Council on May 15 will consider the proposed rate structures, which would result in annual increases of 3.5 percent and 1.5 percent for the city’s water and sewer rates, respectively. With the increases, the combined rates will remain in the middle range compared with rates from other regional water utilities, according to data compiled by a city consultant.

The city updates its rates every five years, with the last such update in December 2011. Rates are also adjusted annually to reflect the cost of inflation and increases in wholesale costs from the Sonoma County Water Agency.

With other factors, an average residential user can expect to see a monthly bill increase of 10.8 percent for water, up from $32.03 to $35.50, and a 4.2 percent increase for sewer bills, up from $65.83 to $68.61 for their July 1 bill. For large industrial users, monthly water bills would increase about 1.4 percent, with a 6.4 percent increase for wastewater on July 1.

Those rates also factor in a 4.89 percent increase that the Sonoma County Water Agency approved this week, said Dan St. John, the city’s director of public works and utilities. Rates will be adjusted again in July 2018 to reflect inflation and wholesale increases.

St. John said the increase is necessary to fund projects including replacing water infrastructure systems, bolstering recycled water irrigation systems, and completing upgrades at the Ellis Creek Water Recycling Facility that will convert solid waste to fuel for city vehicles while the city continues to provide service. According to staff reports, rate increases would generate a cumulative $18 million in revenues.

“We don’t want our water lines to look like our potholes,” St. John said.

Despite a historically rainy winter, the city has also been losing out on money as residents have conserved water amid the drought, with an estimated $1.6 million in annual losses for three of those conservation years, St. John said. He said the new rate structure, which increases the fixed monthly service charge, will help to stabilize the city’s revenue stream.

“The folks at the city, and partially the city council level, are very sensitive to any increase in rates,” he said. “The council has sent staff back several times to scrub the numbers to make sure the rate increase is as low as possible to both balance the need for rate stability with sensitivity to lower water users. I think the rate design is a good compromise of all those competing factors.”

The rates have been discussed at a series of meetings, and City Councilman Mike Healy described the increases as the least aggressive of several options presented, but said they will still fund critical projects.

“None of these rates are used to subsidize other city operations, and people should know that we’re being scrupulous about that,” he said. “And, water utility is really a service … what you’re paying for is all the pipes and pumps to get it to your faucet.”

John Nelson, a retired North Marin Water District manager and a past chairman of the Water Advisory Committee to the Sonoma County Water Agency, expressed concern about the “horrendous” water rates. He said the structure is unfair to those who use less water, and ultimately results in high volume users paying less. He said a letter sent to residents understated the impacts of increases, among other concerns.

“They’re definitely going the wrong way … conservation wise it doesn’t make sense,” he said.

The rates also sparked controversy on social media site Nextdoor.

“We all need to write written protests and attend the meetings to protest these rate increases,” Bob Kosoff wrote. “No more drought and no more increases. We pay too much already.”

Others said that while it may be necessary to speak up, the increases were aimed at improving service.

“Petaluma is a city of the right age that probably needs issues like this addressed and supporting clean, modern and safe water delivery is good for everyone. Just ask the people of Flint and parts of Oakland for that matter,” Brenden Morse wrote. St. John said the city has not received any formal protest letters.

Kerry Fugett, the executive director of Sonoma County Conservation Action, said higher water rates should not discourage conservation.

“When we do the conservation, we still have to pay for those fixed costs. However ... we can’t kind of push aside the need for conservation because of that,” Fugett said. “We will eventually be back in a drought again, and the supply is not unlimited.”

(Contact Hannah Beausang at hannah.beausang@arguscourier.com. Press Democrat Reporter J.D. Morris contributed to this report.)

UPDATED: Please read and follow our commenting policy:
  • This is a family newspaper, please use a kind and respectful tone.
  • No profanity, hate speech or personal attacks. No off-topic remarks.
  • No disinformation about current events.
  • We will remove any comments — or commenters — that do not follow this commenting policy.