New Sewer Rates…

At the April 2025 Beulah Village Council meeting, a proposal was discussed to raise Sewer “Ready to Serve” fees by some $250 per quarter over the next 2+ years was discussed. Specifically, ready to serve fees (billed as fees per Residential Equivalent Unit or REU) would increase $50 per quarter in July 2025, with an additional $50 per quarter added to your bill every six month for the next two years. That’s about 400%, or a sewer bill 4 times bigger than your 1st quarter 2024 bill. This includes the $40 per quarter Sewer rates were raised in December 2024.

During a presentation by Baker-Tilly, consultants to help us through resetting our water and sewer infrastructure to comply with State issued orders, led us to believe that a rate structure had already been established to repay the pending 9+ million dollar loan.

They also advised us, at the April council meeting, that their initial estimates for meeting debt payments were based on typical usage of 13,400 gallons per quarter per REU. Maintaining that they could not reliably estimate sewer revenue for bond payments using the amount (gallons) of water billed because people would lower usage to offset increased sewer fees. Correspondingly, the bulk of the currently proposed sewer bill increases were allocated to the quarterly “ready to serve” fee.

At the April council meeting, Baker-Tilly was allowed to present, and to take questions, on the proposed Sewer system upgrades. Questions were asked regarding options to raise $$$ for bond payments:

• Use more / Pay more?
• Dedicated Property Tax millage?
• One time Special Assessment?
• Increasing usage and ready to serve fees?

During this presentation we were told that Special Assessments could not be made retroactively. That a dedicated property tax would not be offered to Beulah voters for some 2+ years. And that Baker-Tilly could not rely on usage numbers of 13,400 gallons/quarter to impose usage based fee increases.

A big problem with the Baker-Tilly (and council supported?) proposed rate structure is that the biggest users of Village water and sewer services are the reason our sewer system requires such an expensive overhaul. Shouldn’t they be made to pay a bigger share of our debt repayment?

BUT

Specifically, the County Jail and administration building, Airbnb and other Short Term Rentals (STRs), local motels and restaurants, (others?) pay less and use more. How about a graduated, across the board, usage rate increase to reduce these ridiculous ready to serve fees? The county and our increased tourist generated sewer usage account for a significant percentage of the sewage requirements used to size the new Sewer Project upgrade. Let’s bill the folks that are using more a higher per gallon usage rate! Depending on overall Village wide usage, we could adjust rates annually, as needed, to cover bond payments for the following year. Or would this be asking to much of our overworked and underpaid Village council members to consider?

And the proposed ballot measure two years out to impose a dedicated property tax increase? Why are we waiting two plus years.? Basic accounting here, paying more up front on the bond will reduce overall interest expense over the 40 year repayment schedule.

Or is this another ploy to override the Headlee provision in our tax code? Resetting the Headlee numbers would have increased Village property taxes by some 40%. The Village tried this last year and failed, representing that the increased tax monies would be used to offset some of the Village’s expenses on the Sewer Project. Problem here was that wording on a ballot initiative to override Headlee requires that the override dollars received be used “for general operating expenses”.

A closing note, how are the current $9,000 connection fees representative of the level of service provided for fee? Current ordinance states that using the village water and sewer services are a “privilege” and that all contractor associated costs with connecting to the village mains are now the responsibility of the property owner requesting service. Connection fee here is sounding more like a tax or special assessment.