Sewer Rate Hike Goes to Council for Action

A proposed sewer rate increase that would raise the typical homeowner’s monthly bill by 63% was sent to the San Diego City Council without recommendation from a council committee that debated the issue Wednesday.

Arguments against the proposed increase were lodged by homeowners who said that the proposed hike would unfairly penalize homeowners who are proud of their landscaping and use substantial amounts of water on their lawns.

Under the proposed sewer rate change, a single-family home would pay a sewer charge based on the amount of water it used, rather than an $8-a-month flat fee. An average single-family home would pay nearly $13 a month, a 63% increase, according to Water Utilities Department projections.

Those who spoke out Wednesday in favor of the proposed change in assessing sewer bills included representatives of Citizens Coordinate for Century III and the Sierra Club. Emily Durbin, speaking for the Sierra Club, said that tying the residential sewer rates to water usage would provide an incentive for water conservation by property owners.

Hookup Fees

In addition to the proposed increase in residential sewer charges, the utilities department and city manager’s office is also asking council members to consider a 20% increase in fees paid by developers to hook into the sewage system. The increase would raise the current $1,141 charge per new home to $1,369.

City administrators say the increases are needed to finance sewer and maintenance projects. The rate increase package, scheduled to go into effect July 1 if approved by the City Council, is expected to be scheduled for council debate in two or three weeks.

Henry Pepper, city water utilities spokesman, told the council’s Public Services and Safety Committee that the utilities department will be $9 million in debt by June 30, the end of the current fiscal year, and $29 million in the red by mid-1988 if the rate increases is not approved.

Pepper blamed the failures of Pump Station 64 in Sorrento Valley and the increasing costs of maintenance and repair of the city’s aging sewer system for the majority of the increase request, which would raise a total of $60 million.

About $10 million raised by the increase will be set aside to help pay consultants to begin planning for an estimated $1.5-billion secondary sewage treatment plant, required by the federal government for environmental reasons. Sewer users will be asked in the future to help pay the $1.5-billion price tag for construction of the plant, say water officials--anticipated increases that could result in average residential sewer bills of between $28.80 and $36.80 a month.

Councilman Bill Cleator, whose vote was required for the committee to make a recommendation for or against the increases, declined to join in any recommendation on the proposal “because I am still not convinced that all the answers are before us.” He moved to send the issue to the full council for discussion without any recommendation.

The council committee took no action on a related city manager’s report outlining alternative ways of making up the utilities department’s increasing deficit, proposals that included various methods of borrowing funds.

Councilwoman Abbe Wolfsheimer asked that the committee be allowed to study the alternative means of making up the utilities department deficit before any action is taken on the rate increases.

Among the alternative funding measures proposed in a report by Assistant City Manager John Fowler were:

- A general obligation bond issue which would provide the funds at a relatively low interest rate but would require a two-thirds approval from voters. The city would also have to wait about two years before funds became available if voters approved the bonds.

- Revenue bonds, secured by sewer charges, which would carry a higher interest rate, but only require an approval by a majority of voters. The city would again have to wait two years before it received the funds.

- Certificates of participation, under which a private firm builds necessary facilities and then leases them back to the city. Such financing does not require a vote of the people, but carries a higher rate of interest than do bonds.

- Use of the city’s general fund monies, which consist of property tax receipts. Fowler labeled this the “least desirable” method to fund sewer improvements because of the scarcity of general funds for other city services, such as police and fire protection.

No new water rate hikes have been proposed, but a 13.2% increase was approved in 1986.