Water Authority's Rate Increase Put On Hold, For Now

The Suisun-Solano Water Authority voted against increasing water rates by an average of 4 percent twice over the next two years in a Tuesday night meeting.

The vote may not have been an official one, however, since the public hearing was never officially closed, leaving members to question if their “vote” could actually be considered a vote.

“What we’re going to do tomorrow is talk to our attorney and say, ‘Ok here’s what happened. What legal options do we have or don’t have?’ And
then go from there,” said Mark Joseph, Financial Services manager.

For a rate increase to have been approved, the agency, made up of City Council and Solano Irrigation District members, needed three supporting votes from each side. All members from the irrigation district approved the increase, but only Pete Sanchez and Sam Derting gave yes votes from the council’s side. Board member Jane Day was not present and Mike Segala and Mike Hudson voted against the proposal.

Hudson stated one of his main concerns was the amount of reserves in the plan that would total 25 percent of SSWA’s annual operational expenses.

Segala stated his concerns that a rise in non-residential rates was eliminating an incentive of low water rates for businesses considering Suisun City. Non-residential customers currently have a portion of their water usage paid for through their metered rates. The new proposal would make non-residential customers accountable for usage without the benefit of receiving “free water.”

“Nothing’s going to happen too soon because, obviously,” Joseph said. “We need to take the time to reevaluate the rates and come up with a different proposal and run that by the board and make sure they’re a little more comfortable with it.”

Of the 8000-plus customers SSWA services, only three submitted a formal protest to the proposed increase, two of which attended the meeting. One user suggested the board keep rates low by negotiating with suppliers for better pricing.

Another customer stated it was impossible to know whether the proposed increase would help cover expenses in the future since there was not enough knowledge of what the city is being charged to provide treated water to its customers.

The last time water rates were increased was 2009. Since then SSWA had been using reserves and funding from cuts to the city’s budget. Extensive studies have been done and previous proposals submitted to the board for increases by as much as 23 percent in the next two years. Board members urged to keep the increase as modest as possible.

Sanchez said the current proposal amounted to a few more pennies per day for ratepayers. He attributed the lack of protest from customers to mean ratepayers understood the importance of passing such a proposal  at this time.

SSWA’s next meeting is scheduled for Dec. 20. Joseph said by then the board should know whether the vote will hold up and if they need to revisit the proposal to make more changes. If the vote is not counted as an official one, ratepayers may not legally need to be notified of the board’s plan to vote on the current proposal again. Still, there may be more changes to the plan before a final agreement is met.

“Certainly at this point we are going to be looking at any feedback.” Joseph said. “In a nutshell we have to listen to the concerns of those who vote no because they’re the one who we’re trying to address their concerns.”