MANSFIELD — City engineer Bob Bianchi has told City Council he would like to spend $850,000 annually on overdue water main replacements.
The effort would be made possible only if local lawmakers approved a water-rate increase that would generate an additional $3.4 million annually, a proposal originally scheduled for a vote in December and then delayed until January.
But council’s decision Tuesday evening to again delay a vote on the increase could wipe out $849,000 of the projected first-year revenues — likely delaying a launch of those efforts to replace 60 miles of century-old, four-inch watermains.
After the meeting, Bianchi said the projected increase would generate about $283,000 per month. Pushing the vote back another month, if council approves it, means collection of additional funds would not begin until March or April, instead of January as originally planned.
Mansfield went 17 years without a water-rate increase before council approved a series of annual increases beginning in 2019, which have not generated enough additional revenue to adequately fund the department.
Mansfield is in the process of paying off two large bond issues from the water fund — an EPA-mandated $35 million upgrade to the water treatment plant and a $17 million project to replace all water meters in the city, a replacement program that’s not yet complete.
Bianchi told council on Dec. 6 that water revenues are increasing, but have remained less than expenses in the last five years.
The proposal before City Council would eliminate the lowest usage tier and also add a “readiness to serve” charge to each bill.
Eliminating the lowest usage tier would generate an estimated $680,000 in additional annual revenue. The readiness charge is expected to generate another $2.7 million — almost 80 percent of the total increase.
1st Ward Councilwoman Laura Burns made a motion to postpone the legislation to Feb. 7 even before council began to discuss it Tuesday.
2nd Ward Councilwoman Cheryl Meier could not attend the meeting and Burns said all council members should have a chance to participate in the vote.
Afterward, Burns said Meier had not asked for the vote to be delayed, but pushing it back a month would also allow for more community input into a project first proposed in October.
“I think it also gives the public an opportunity to really review everything. If they have any questions, this is their chance to ask. My weekends have been full of phone calls from people.
“They’re asking questions and we’re sitting down and we’re talking about things,” she said. “I think a lot of people at first didn’t notice it maybe. And then the more publicity it’s gotten, the more conversations we’ve been able to have.
“But it also boils down to the fact that every member of this (council) works very hard and they advocate very hard for their people. And I feel that they should have an opportunity to speak,” Burns said.
3rd Ward Councilman Rev. EL Akuchie asked Bianchi about the impact of the delay. The engineer told council postponing the vote would delay the additional revenue and the projects those dollars would fund.
Bianchi said the administration would need to review capital plans if council does vote in favor of the increase next month. He has said there are no capital funds in the water budget without the hike.
“It’s just revenue that each month we will not receive without (the) increase,” he said. “It has to come from (somewhere), something’s got to be cut. We’ll evaluate our capital improvement plan.”
He said little capital has been appropriated for the water treatment plant in the last couple of years, which would take priority over the watermain replacement project.
“There’s going to be come catching up on needed equipment at the plant they need to buy. All the material costs have gone through the roof in chemical costs. This (treatment plant investment) has to be done before we can start extensively planning for a water line replacement program,” he said.
He said even if council approves the increase, watermain replacement would not begin until 2025.
“Our goal is to get a robust replacement program established similar to our (street) resurfacing program every year,” Bianchi said. “We resurface the streets every year or every other year. We hope that the citizens will see new watermains being put in the ground to provide safe drinking water and water for fire protection services.”
Despite the delays, Bianchi said he respects council members for “the hard decision they have to make.”
“This has been very difficult for them and I can’t tell you how difficult it’s been for the administration, as well. This is a tough decision to have to bring before City Council because we know the impact it can have (on residents).
“So I respect the process. If it takes longer, then it does, and I certainly welcome the discussion in the coming weeks,” the engineer said.
During the public comment portion of the meeting, Mansfield resident Eric Miller, a local attorney who helped spearhead the “Pothole Haters Tax” that funds annual street repairs, urged lawmakers to approve the increase.
“We need to assure the safe and reliable delivery of water to our citizens. And that has to begin with passing the rate increase that’s long overdue. Now, we currently pay less than a nickel a gallon for water and sewer. And after the rate increase goes through, it will still be less than a nickel a gallon,” he said.
“That’s a mighty low price for something we have to have,” Miller said, telling council that bottled water is far more expensive.
“Some of you are holding back because you have questions about whether or not there’s an unjustified delay in installing new water meters. The water meters might be a problem. I wouldn’t claim to know about that.
“But sometimes you have to solve more than one problem at a time. You can’t hold up this rate increase because you have concerns about water meter installation. You have to assess the risk of a massive catastrophe. And we’re playing that game by risking a total shutdown of the water system,” Miller said.
At the end of the discussion, 5th Ward Councilman Aurelio Diaz admitted it’s been a tough decision to make.
“We’ve had this discussion for a long time, about health and safety with the (fire) hydrants, with drinking water. I know a lot of people are wanting us to vote for it and quit punting it around,” he said.
“I think that no matter what we do, we’re gonna ultimately not make everybody happy. My whole point is just to let the public know every single one of us up here are not taking this lightly.
“Whether we table it, whether we (do) not, we are just trying to do what is best,” Diaz said.
