Plain City residents will soon receive a letter detailing a potential increase in Village water and sewer rates.
During Monday’s council work session, Village officials discussed correspondence with residents regarding potential changes to utility rates.
A letter that will soon be sent to Plain City residents will explain why council is considering a utility rate increase and how it would affect residents’ bills.
Council members are considering increasing water and sewer rates by 2% each year for three years. Council is also considering reducing the sewer capital surcharge fee by $0.50 each year over the same timeframe.
According to Village Administrator Nathan Cahall, the proposed increase would result in a total bill increase of $0.31 monthly for a typical residential user with 3,000 gallons of usage per month.
Cahall said he hopes the series of increases over the three-year period would help prevent “sticker shock.” If Plain City officials postpone a rate increase, he said residents could eventually see a $20 to $30 increase, as opposed to $0.20 to $0.30 gradual increases.
Rate increases are necessary, Cahall said, due to significant increases in operational costs for the Village’s utility system.
Since 2017, Cahall said the cost of water operations has increased by approximately 14% while sewer costs have jumped 11%.
Despite the increase in operational costs, he said village utility rates have not been adjusted in three years.
“We’ve deferred as long as we can,” said council member Darren Lee. “Our rates are still very competitive – lower than most.”
Cahall said the Village has previously “absorbed cost increases by using existing water and sewer operating fund balances” from the residual fund intended to address unexpected issues.
He said the rate adjustment isn’t enough to fill the gap in operational costs, but would prevent the Village from needing to “significantly deplete existing fund balances below prudent levels.”
The proposed increase would generate less than $6,000 during the first year, according to Cahall.
“What’s on the table right now, it’s a start,” he said.
Council was generally in favor of sending the letter to residents, but council member Jody Carney felt there could be better communication still.
“I feel that there is a disconnect between the Village and residents… as far as what’s going on day-to-day,” she said.
She said she felt residents would like to know more information about future plans for utility costs and systems in the Village.
Paul Lafayette, Plain City Solicitor, recommended against adding information about capital improvements to this specific letter and instead suggested creating additional pieces of correspondence for residents.
“I think if you add that here, you start confusing the issue,” he said.
Council ultimately advised Cahall to send the letter and agreed to consider sending additional correspondence regarding other water and sewer projects.
“I think this letter does exactly what you ask it to do,” said council member John Rucker.
Council is expected to make a final decision on utility rates in early 2020.
In other business:
– Council approved amendments to a draft contract with the Miami Valley Steam Threshers Organization. The draft contract will include a four-year lease option with negotiation of rates.
The option is on top of a six-year contract, which would allow Steam Threshers to negotiate with national shows and vendors who desire a 10-year contract.
– Discussed potential changes to Plain City’s Personnel Policy Manual.
No changes have been made, but Cahall asked for council’s feedback regarding the village’s health insurance rebate, cell phone reimbursement, tuition reimbursement, established holidays, vacation accrual and sick leave donation.
“There’s no desired timeline for a decision one way or another,” Cahall said. “Staff just wants to get council’s opinion moving forward.”
– Heard from Cahall about potential options for the horse barn owned by the Village.
Cahall said he has received quotes for demolition and restoration of the structure. He said demolition will cost approximately $15,000 while restoration will be “north of $100,000.”
He clarified that restoration would be “just to have it not fall down,” and would make the structure usable just for cold storage.
Council members favored demolition of the horse barn.
Cahall said he would begin moving forward with the process and expects the structure will come down within the next few months.