The city wants to increase sewer rates prior to approving a new budget — and not because of the expected need for a new wastewater treatment plant.


The West Branch City Council on Jan. 19 discussed three scenarios to cover a shortfall which last year, fiscal year 2008-09, amounted to about $67,000.

Currently, residents, industrial and commercial customers pay the same rate — $3.65 per 1,000 gallons — which was last set in August 2006. This brought in about $195,000 last year and is predicted to bring in about $198,000 this year.

City Administrator Kyle Soukup offered three scenarios that would increase sewer rates over five years:

• A 5-percent increase per year for five years. By 2015, the rate would increase $1.01 (or 28 percent) to $4.66 and bring in another $51,000.

• A 25-cent increase per year for five years. By 2015, the rate would be up $1.25 (or 34 percent) to $4.90 and bring in another $64,000.

• A stepped increase that starts small and increases annually for five years. By 2015, the rate would be up $2.45 (or 67 percent) to $6.10 and bring in another $125,000.

“It is important to note that even with a larger increase, this will not be enough to cover a new wastewater plant, if that is the end result of (Department of Natural Resources) action,” Soukup wrote in a memo to council members.

Soukup said that if the council approves an increase in the sewer rate prior to ratifying the budget, which the council plans on doing, the new rate can begin by July 1.

He said West Branch is “behind the curve” on expenditures and the city is likely to overhaul a lift station and possibly, at minimum, have to update or replace its lagoon if the DNR does not require a new wastewater treatment plant.

Water use came up as well, and council member David Johnson said the city should consider charging different rates for residential, commercial and industrial users.

“It’s survival versus profit,” he said. “So (businesses) need to pay more. I have no qualms billing them at a higher rate.”

Council member Mark Worrell disagreed, saying that a lot of the city water used at companies “is just employees using the bathroom.”

“It would be different if they were using the water for tooling,” he said.

Johnson countered by saying that companies that use water must realize that it is “part of the cost of doing business.”

Council member Jim Oaks said he did not think it was of high importance to look at what other communities charged for sewer.

“We have to charge what we have to charge to pay our bills,” he said.

City Finance Director Deb Fiderlein said the sewer fund has been running a deficit for two years.

She said increases in salaries, benefits, utility costs and major repairs contributed to the deficit. The sewer fund this budget year will make a final payment on a loan for a trunk line job, freeing up about $48,000.

However, Fiderlein wants to shift about half of the deputy city clerk’s salary to the water and sewer funds because about 50 to 60 percent of that job deals with billing, customers, shutoffs, posting payments and more. That, coupled with projected increased costs, “quickly eroded” that $48,000 savings.

She also said that usage and revenue decreased after a few years of 1.5 percent increases, which is why it is difficult to come up with a “true annual number.”