Brentwood City Council Votes 5-0 to Increase Water, Wastewater and Solid Waste Rates

The Brentwood City Council voted 5-0 Tuesday night to increase water, wastewater and solid waste rates beginning in 2014 and will take place through 2018.

To prevent a fee increase, it would have taken a majority of the 19,781 potentially impacted parties to file a protest by November 12. Meaning that 9,891 needed to file a complaint. Brentwood City Clerk Margaret Wimberly reported that at the close of council discussion Tuesday, a total of 510 protests were filed which was far short of the requirement and allowed the council to move forward with a vote on whether or not to increase rates. 

Using a simple 12-unit fee increase this is what the increase looks like.

• Water: $1.68 increase/month
• Wastewater: $1.18 increase/month
• Solid Waste: $0.64 increase/month
• Total: $3.50 increase/month = $42 annual increase

According to the staff report, here is the reason or the increase:

REASONS FOR THE PROPOSED SERVICE CHARGE ADJUSTMENTS

Service charge increases are necessary to cover the rising cost of services and supplies, specifically utilities, as well as to comply with increasingly stringent State and Federal environmental regulations and to anticipate long term supply and infrastructure for existing customers. Anticipated capital construction projects to service existing customers include:

• Water Treatment Plant maintenance and capital upgrades
• Long Term Supply and Conveyance of surface water
• Wastewater Treatment Plant upgrades and retrofit for environmental regulation compliance
• Reclaimed water storage and expansion of distribution system

 Mayor Bob Taylor wanted to make it clear that the city cannot make money on water. Staff shared that  State Law requires that you should charge only what it cost to provide the service.

Taylor asked a series of questions to clarify types of water starting clean water is in, waste water is out.

Can we make money on garbage asked Taylor. Staff replied no and that they are subject to Proposition 218 which requires they cannot charge more than what it costs to provide service. They also cannot use this money to pay for anything other than the service.

Public Comments

Margaret Berry, a realtor, stated she has seen all the bills and compared to other cities in her line of work and disagreed with the chart. She stated that this was a hardship on homeowners to increase their rates.

“I have to say personally in my experience Brentwood is the highest,” said Berry. “A lot of people have told me they have not have had a salary increase in 10-years. I am proposing to the council all these statistics are well and good but I also took college 101 statistics and I know you can manipulate them to what you want them to be. That considered, I think you ought to think this is a hardship on homeowners to increase are rate and we have not seen any improvement despite the testimony of Erick Stonebarger to the fact that it has increased. I’ve lived in Brentwood for five-years and paying this bill, its hard, it stains my dishes, stains my tile, my bathroom, I have to get super powerful stuff to get out the hard water it leaves. I don’t see any improvements. You haven’t talked about any improvements in our water. It’s terrible”

Marie Ornellous (spelling)

“The rate increases are too high, I’ve never gotten a 3% raise on anything so I don’t think it should pass. You don’t really even know what is going to be happening after this year. Yes, the economy may pick up for some,but not for all. You need to look around the whole city and look around that there is a lot of empty spaces. It doesn’t matter who owns them, they are not being rented. I don’t think any of the rates should be raised.

Shirley Payne, an 8-year resident, questioned the notice and said it looked like junk mail and not adequate to the public.

“The letter was misleading because it starts off with utility owners or customers and so a lot of people thought it didn’t apply to them and wouldn’t have the rights to protest… not everyone was informed about it,” said Payne. “I’ve not had a raise in 5-years, as far as raising the rates, even if its $3.50 cents, its not a good time in this economy. I disagree with all the increases.”

Francine Huerta questioned the graph about the rates and chromium levels.

“I can’t remember we saw our bill for $113, right now we are paying $160 and we are a family of three in a 1-story, 3 bedroom home…  our water is not drinkable and we have to use a salt that cost $24 a bag and use 8-bags to fill up 3-times per year to just use our water to wash our cloths, take a bath. So when you say quality has gotten better. I’ve lived her since 2005 so I don’t agree with that.

Larry Fleener stated regarding the water quality, I have to agree with previous speaker.

“I’ve lived here only 4 ½ years and have not seen any difference in the quality. The only difference is we invested in a water softening  purifying system that cost $3,000 so we can at least drink water, shower, and clean without leaving  white substance on your tile.”

He accused Brentwood of not comparing apples to apples on their graph and stated that in Concord they paid less and got twice the amount of service per week and didn’t get runaround on customer service

“I’ve received no customer service except an argument to pick up trash. Its to many rules and its like calling into a dictatorship when calling in there. I was able to speak with a supervisor to calm down the situation… quite honestly I would pay a few extra dollars a month in order to get better service but not for what we get now.”

Mr. Fleener also questioned the charge on water in and water out because he states not all water in is water out.

“I drink out of the stupid water hose so I hope to god it’s not water out or I’d be in a mess,” said Mayor Taylor.

Steven Hill stated he is adamantly opposed to the rate increase.

“I’ve seen no specific reason that the water rates should be increased,” stated Hill. “When I saw the charts up there, it did not occur to me was what are the other underscore type of increases during each of the five-years that also increase the rates. Are we increasing salaries, insurance benefits, providing pension benefits to employees. Are those part of the increases as well? That is a question to you Mr. Mayor.”

Mayor Taylor responded that his understanding was we cannot use the money that we bring in for any purpose other than water.

Mr. Hill further requested clarification and was not happy with the explanation by staff. Mayor Taylor suggested he speak with staff, however, Mr. Hill wanted to speak with the Mayor on record during the hearing about the increase.

“I’ll be honest with you sir, I refer this back to staff. Your mayor drinks water, uses water, and will pay his water bill as per every citizen within this community,” said Mayor Taylor. “I am with you, I am in Summerset 1 and will be the first one to complain, but then you guys all complain to me so its how it works so if you have issues that I am not answering then you can talk to staff as I am.”

Mr. Hill shot back with asking whether or not any increase will be postponed and delayed until he get a response, specifically from the staff.

Mayor Taylor stated he did not say that.

“What good is it for me to talk to the staff then I am specifically asking you tonight that particular question,” said Hill.

Taylor responded, “Because Sir, I do not know the answer.”

Mr. Hill asked the mayor to not interrupt him while he was talking and wanted to finish.

“Are any of the increases going to salary, pension, healthcare benefits increases?” asked Hill.

“I’ll refer you to staff,” said Mayor Taylor.

Mr. Hill then spoke in a foreign language and the Mayor asked if he was finished. Mr. Hill shot back that was a question. He was informed that he had 35-seconds on the clock remaining. Mr. Hill then stated he would wait 30-seconds for a response to his question.

“I don’t know what question you asked,” said Mayor Taylor.

“Does anyone up there not know what the question was? Gene tell them what I said,” said Hill.

Vice Mayor Joel Bryant said he was going to read—then was cut off. Vice Mayor Bryant said he was not asking, but telling Mr. Hill what he was going to do and read the policy that states the City Council cannot address questions from the floor personally.

Joyce Turner stated that 90% of the residents will have a 3% increase for the next 5-years. The 1^st year, there was a 1% increase for non-residents. She asked who was that.

Staff explained commercial, industrial, other than residential which come under non-residential.

“So business pays 1% for the first year and residents pay 3%?” asked Turner.

Staff explained this was for the wastewater only. These rates should be charged to recover cost of service.

“So the business are customers too. So why are they getting a break that first year and those trying to make a living pay 3%?” asked Turner. “I’d like to have that same break for the4 first year. This is so troublesome. The consultant used the word calibration and that is a great word… was it size and service you looked at? Is it apples to apples?”

Staff stated they looked at all the information.

“When I worked in corporate America when we wanted to deliver bad news, we hired consultants to tell us what we already wanted to tell the people so that we would have somebody to tell the people we were told this by the experts and so that is my concern on this,” said Turner.

Laura Wilka (Spelling) explained how when she was buying a short sell home and was forced to turn on her utilities and paid for her water, garbage, and is out the money even though they were not in the home or using the water except for when the person came to the home to turn on everything and made sure it works. Yet every single month, my bill was close to $100 and I wasn’t even using the water.

“When I called, I was told we look at the size of the house and estimate how much we think you would use and that is what we charge for,” explained Wilka. “Even though I am not using the water, I have to pay all this money to not use it. There is nothing anyone can do. Now that I am living in my house, it has gone up, and up, and up.

She explained how she joined a gym membership so her family can shower there so she didn’t have to pay for the water. Explained how she didn’t have a finished backyard or plants because she didn’t want her bill to approach $300.

“For me this rate increase is ridiculous and its way to much. Way to much for me to handle and so not worth the quality we are receiving. I refuse to cook with it, refuse to feed it to my children. I have looked over the quality report over the years and one year it stated if you are going through cancer treatment, have a brain tumor, if you have any of these serious conditions we recommend you do not drink the water. That to me is a huge red flag. Do not drink the water if you are sick or healthy,” said Wilka.

Marcus Higher stated a 3% increase a year is a lot considering he knows people are not getting 3% raise or equal to cost of living. Everything keeps going up and it’s hard to keep up with.

“Living out here the water is outrageous and its terrible water. You showed the charts of other peoples water and it was based on 12-units a month. It’s just my wife and I and we don’t have anything in the backyard and I don’t know if we want to because we don’t want to pay for it but we alone use 8-units. I know you have an adjustable rate so the more you use the more you pay so those rates are to me just kind of hand over our eyes to say we don’t charge as much. But when you start showing what you really use which is not 12-units, it’s actually a lot more than what other cities charge,” said Higher.

Council Discussion

Councilman Erick Stonebarger explained that in response to Mr. Hill’s question on this increase being used on salary, pensions, personnel, He looked at the breakdown of personnel services.

“To answer his (Mr. Hill) question, yes, portions of the rate increase go to increase in employee costs. Employee costs are total compensation whether its salary, whether its pension, whether it’s medical, ,” said Stonebarger.

Stonebarger admitted that the water is not great, and they are not proud of it, but did state it’s gotten better and have to rely on the tests. His goal is to continue to improve the water quality.

Councilman Gene Clare asked if they were not to pass this proposed rate increase, in a five year period that expenders vs. revenue would be at a deficit of $2.9 million for water, $1.6 million for wastewater, and $1.5 million for solid waste. Staff concurred.

Without the increase, water will be in a deficit spending within 2-years and have no reserves to observe it.

Mayor Taylor asked if there was a program in place for hardships for billing.

Staff explained that there is an existing program for seniors and permanently disabled with income limits. According to staff report, they are recommending to discontinue those programs due to funding rules by the state.

“I don’t like the word manipulation but that was used tonight, are the consultants held responsible through codes, ethics, regulations, or any of that?” asked Taylor. “Are they held accountable?”

Staff replied they are professionals and some require licensing .Deepening on the field, one could lose their license and cannot do anything unethical or not professional. Staff said it was not only a consultant but two departments and everyone crosschecking through a long process—for over a year.

Councilman Steve Barr asked if the notice to the rate study met legal requirements. Staff concurred that it followed the law.

He also asked about the water in vs. water out and if they ever calculated the amount they actually billed for vs. the amount they actual treat and check to see if they are close. Staff stated they have not specifically checked. Staff said they fall within the average and to make sure they are billing correctly as a form to double check.

“We looked at these rates and were quite surprised where they are going and educational where they have been. One of the comments I get in the public is how high our rates are,” said Barr. “It is a difficult bill to understand because it’s not individual and I think that’s where the confusion and anxiety comes from. The other part is the bills are high. The comment that makes the most sense to me is as we look at these rates and the only way to change the rate increase is on the expense side and we need to look based on the fact the rate increase reflects the revenue necessary to keep the same level of service,” said Barr.

Barr stated he would not change the level of service at this time. He also explained the commercial rate increase of 1% vs. 3% for residential is because commercial business are actually paying a little bit higher and it’s a way to get everyone on the same playing field—stated it should have been explained better.

“This is difficult for all of us knowing the challenges the families in this community face,” said Barr.

Vice Mayor Bryant stated these numbers are not pulled out of thin air and are finite numbers.

“If we don’t maintain the revenue to maintain the same services we currently have. What are we going to do without in order to be able to afford the number that it’s going to reflect? You can’t say you want a steak if you can afford a hamburger. That is basically a very simple third grade math this is what it cost. Am I willing to pay for the cost or am I not willing to pay for it?” said Bryant.

He further stated that if we don’t pay to maintain, there is going to be an extreme spike in rates in the future which is something that he did not want to do.

“I personally think it would be very foolish not to do the minimum of maintaining what we have. We are not asking to increase, but maintain what we have,” said Bryant. “We are going to have to pay for what we have and what we use. I don’t want to do without simply because it’s a difficult choice.”

The City Clerk stated that the city has received 510 valid protests which is short of the 50%+1. The council can move forward based on staff’s recommendation to increase the rates.

Council voted 5-0 to increase water, wastewater and solid waste utilities for Fiscal Years 2013/14 through 2017/18

For more information on this action, please review the staff report. We also encourage you to review the council meeting video.