Series of Big Water, Sewer Rate Hikes Start in 2012

It's going to cost a lot more to shower, flush your toilet or water your lawn with city water starting next year.

approved a series of Wednesday starting in 2012 with an 8.5 percent annual hike for the next four years. Rates will level off in 2016, but they will still increase annually by 3 percent through 2017 and beyond.

The rate increases, which city administrators presented to council as a "rate stabilization plan," are meant to pay for major infrastructure maintenance and repair work for water and sewer utilities by spreading out the necessary increases over the next several years instead of creating a large, one-time rate increase.

More than 90 percent of the operational and maintenance costs for Kent's water and sewer utilities are paid by users.

Kent City Manager Dave Ruller said that, historically, Kent and other cities have deferred costs for such maintenance for long periods of time, so water and sewer customers would see years with no rate increases followed by a large, one-time rate increase to catch up with operational costs.

"That, to us, isn’t an effective way to manage our utilities from the manager side, or we could make the case from the customer’s side," Ruller said. "Because you end up with a level of unpredictability the customers can’t plan for.”

The rate increases were born in part out of to determine the costs associated with operating and maintaining the city's water and sewer plants and their associated equipment, which includes 76 miles of water and 64 miles of sewer pipes running beneath the city.

Those studies determined that in the next 20 years the city will have to pay close to $211 million to operate its water and sewer utilities. That cost includes operations, such as employee costs and materials, and replacing equipment that is expected to wear out.

Kent Service Director Gene Roberts said in recent years the city has been forced to delay replacing some equipment that has reached the end of its expected life cycle. The worst-case scenario, replacing equipment during an emergency when it suddenly breaks down, always costs more than preventative maintenance, he said.

"What we’re recommending is a stable rate increase that doesn’t go vertical and gets us back to where we need to be,” Roberts said. "The alternative is to have a major, one-time increase, which we’re trying to avoid."

Starting with the first increase in January 2012, the minimum user will see their monthly bill increase by $1.91. The average user will see their rate increase by $5.90 over their 2011 bill.

If the city implemented a one-time increase to cover its projected $211 million in costs, the minimum user's bill would jump by almost $6 a month and the average user's bill would increase by almost $18 per month.

Two documents attached as .pdf files to this story, provided by the city, explain the rate increases in more detail.

Council voted to approve the rate increase Wednesday, but that vote came during a special committee meeting held after the regular November council meeting. The rate increases are expected to return to council in five weeks for a final vote at the December regular meeting if they are to take effect in January.

"The situation is we’re either going to pay it now, or we’re going to pay it later," Councilman Erik Valenta said. "Rather than having someone get a water bill for an exuberant amount down the road … we’re building up a reserve fund in case of that emergency so we don’t have to have a substantial increase. It makes more sense this way.”

Councilwoman Heidi Shaffer said the stabilization plan helps create a stable business atmosphere by allowing business owners to plan for rate increases instead of getting surprised by very large rate hikes.

"I think people can really understand this is responsible planning," she said. "It would be irresponsible to kick the can down the road. Four years down the road we will have stable rates we can count on."

Councilman Robin Turner tried to delay Wednesday's initial approval vote in favor of getting information about the increases to residents first and then voting on the increases.

"I think first we ought to get people to understand the necessity for it," he said.

Councilwoman Tracy Wallach cast the only vote against the rate hikes — Councilman Garret Ferrara was absent Wednesday. Wallach referred to a recent switch the city made that sends utility bills directly to landlords instead of tenants. As a result of the switch, some disabled, low-income and senior residents who are granted discounts on their utility bills are not getting those discounts.

"I wouldn’t have a problem with supporting these increases if the situation with the low-income and disability rentals was resolved," she said. "Until that’s resolved, I can’t support these increases."

Councilman Jack Amrhein urged city administrators to find a solution to the discount-rate problem before council takes its final vote on the rate increases.

"We absolutely need to look at the senior and low-income discounts, and it has to be resolved," Amrhein said. "And it has to be resolved soon."