Print edition: 
Experts have analyzed the city’s underfinanced water and sewer utility. Citizens have weighed in at multiple meetings and a public hearing. It’s time for the Wichita City Council to be as equitable and foresighted as possible as it raises rates — again.
This depressing situation seems to have been going on forever. But it mostly dates from the revelations in March 2010 that revenue shortfalls, stemming from wet weather and the recession, could endanger the city’s Equus Beds recharge project and, as a result, that users likely would face steep and regular rate hikes far into the future. Compounding the offense, some recent rate increases seemingly punished water conservation.
A cost-of-service analysis by Raftelis Financial Consultants helped chart the way forward last summer, as citizen input this fall underscored the need for improved billing and metering procedures and better customer service.
At today’s council meeting, the big choice for 2012 will be whether to move toward ending residential customers’ subsidization of commercial and industrial users, or to hike rates 5.9 percent for everybody.
Making the best of a no-win situation, the council should go with the staff-recommended first option, raising rates between 2.6 and 3.9 percent for residents (wisely depending on how much water they use), as well as 8.3 percent for commercial users and 8.2 percent for industrial users.
Admittedly, that would be a tough increase for businesses at a time when Wichita needs more commerce and jobs. But residential users pay an estimated $2.05 more a month for their water than it costs to serve them, subsidizing businesses’ water by $3.3 million a year. Fairness dictates that everybody start paying his own way as soon as possible and, in the process, equitably sharing the cost of capital improvements vital to assuring the quality and quantity of Wichita water for the long term.
Even with water-rate parity, the city will have ample tools it can use to assist businesses and foster development, as today’s and most City Council agendas demonstrate. As City Manager Robert Layton observed last summer regarding commercial users: “We have very competitive rates. Also, we’re not really sure water and sewer should be considered an economic incentive.”
With either option, the city estimates it could raise $2.6 million more for its water fund and $3.6 million for its sewer fund, providing not only the needed funding for infrastructure obligations but some stability for the future. That said, the consultants’ study suggested that more increases will be needed beyond 2012, though the city is looking for ways to reduce costs and increase efficiencies.
While they’re at it today, council members and city staff might want to find an official-sounding way to say they’re sorry about all this. The higher rates may be a necessity, but they’re also a pain.
For the editorial board, Rhonda Holman
