The Broomfield City and County Council on Oct. 14 approved on first reading a proposed ordinance to raise water, wastewater, reclaimed wastewater and stormwater fees — a 15% nonresidential and base residential increase that staff said would add about $16.89 per month to the average single-family household using 9,000 gallons a month. Council also unanimously approved three bond ordinances on first reading to finance two new water storage tanks, a phased expansion of the wastewater facility, and a police and courts building project.

Council finance director Graham Clark introduced the utility-rate proposal as the second year of a five-year plan developed after multi-year forecasting and outside modeling. “The increase, to the single family home this next year would be $16.89 a month,” Clark said during the presentation, using the 9,000-gallon average that staff used for comparisons. Clark and other staff said the five-year approach is intended to move enterprise funds to a sustainable asset-management footing after years of underfunding.

Why it matters: staff said water and sewer enterprise funds have accumulated deferred maintenance and require new capacity, and that capital needs and federal/state regulatory requirements for wastewater make near-term financing necessary. The council’s votes on the rate ordinance and the related bond measures will affect monthly bills, the city’s ability to sell bonds at favorable rates and the timing of construction contracts.

What council approved and what follows: the council voted 7–3 to approve Ordinance No. 2286 on first reading (the ordinance order publishes and the second reading will be at a later meeting). Council approved three bond ordinances on first reading by unanimous votes: Ordinance No. 2288 (water activity enterprise water revenue bonds, series 2026), Ordinance No. 2289 (sewer activity enterprise revenue and refunding bonds, series 2026) and Ordinance No. 2290 (certificate of participation for police and courts financing). Staff said the bonds will be sold in the coming months and that some construction work is expected to begin next winter, contingent on final bond closings and contract awards.

How staff tied the rate increases to the bonds: Clark and water utilities director Ken Rutt described the enterprise-level link between the rate plan and the debt service on planned bonds. Michael Persakiti, the city’s municipal advisor with RBC Capital Markets, told council that rating agencies review the enterprise’s rates, revenues, audits and debt coverage as part of a bond rating — “It’s like your FICO score,” he said — and that a higher rating reduces interest costs for the city.

Construction and market timing risks: staff repeatedly warned that supply-chain and tariff uncertainty affect contract pricing. Ken Rutt said vendors are holding current prices for only a short window and that “we are running really close to that deadline. We’re within about 2 weeks after October, so about November is when, we will lose that, current pricing.” He and others said delays could require rebidding and could raise equipment and material costs by substantial amounts in some cases. Bond counsel explained that the city can adopt a reimbursement resolution allowing the city to start work on certain pre-issuance costs and later reimburse those costs from bond proceeds, but noted federal tax rules limit how far back some capital costs can be reimbursed.

Assistance program and equity questions: council also discussed the utility-rate assistance fund (URAF). Staff recommended continuing the URAF but changing eligibility from 100% of area median income (AMI) to 60% AMI because most applicants previously clustered at or below that level. Clark confirmed the program amounts would remain the same in 2026 and said payments/credits will be annual. Staff said URAF payments come from the enterprise fund (not the general fund). Several residents urged larger protections for low-income and special-billing households; for example, resident Shalinda Lund said she lives in a mobile-home park that receives a master meter and reported: “The increase we experienced was my bill went from $30 to $70.” Councilmembers asked staff to explore ways to reach or help communities on master meters, and staff said it would review legal and administrative options.

Public comment and council debate: dozens of residents and callers addressed the budget and utility items during the hearing. Several speakers urged careful pacing of increases or criticized prior policy choices that staff said led to deferred maintenance. Resident Sandy Anderson said the current problems are “the product of choices” and urged a “gradual and responsible rate.” Rick Fernandez and others pressed for clearer budget presentation and historical comparisons.

Council members pressed staff on alternatives, the relationship to growth and the consequences of delay. City manager Hoffman and finance staff said the 5-year plan and the bond package were developed after multiple years of study, and warned that delaying bond issuance could increase construction costs and jeopardize vendor pricing and contractor availability. Staff also noted regulatory timing for the wastewater expansion: the plant must meet state and permit thresholds that drive design and construction timing.

What the numbers mean: staff said the city’s outstanding debt is roughly $200 million and that the three pending bond issuances would add roughly $300 million (staff later referenced roughly $314 million in bond proceeds), figures staff used to explain long-term debt service and amortization planning. Clark said debt service for bonds is shown in the budget documents and that bond proceeds appear on both revenue and expenditure sides for the year of issuance because proceeds fund capital spending.

Next steps and schedule: the council approved the first readings and directed staff to proceed to the next steps. Clark said the council and staff will seek final budget and bond adoption on Oct. 28 (staff earlier reminded the council that the 2026 operating and capital budget final vote will be at the Oct. 28 meeting). Staff said construction contracts are expected to be awarded this winter if bond proceeds are available and that if the city delays awarding contracts it risks losing vendor pricing and contractor teams.

Votes at a glance (formal actions recorded during the meeting)
- Ordinance No. 2286 (change water, wastewater, reclaimed wastewater and stormwater fees/service charges) — first reading approved 7–3. Mover: Mayor Pro Tem Schaff; second: Council member Leslie. (Vote tally shown by council; individual roll-call names not recorded in the transcript.)
- Ordinance No. 2288 (water revenue bonds, series 2026) — first reading approved unanimously 10–0. (Mover: Council member Leslie; second: Council member Ward.)
- Ordinance No. 2289 (sewer revenue and refunding bonds, series 2026) — first reading approved unanimously 10–0. (Mover: Council member Wynne; second: Council member Leslie.)
- Ordinance No. 2290 (police and courts financing via COPs) — first reading approved unanimously 10–0. (Mover: Council member Henkel; second: Council member Leslie.)
- Consent items including approval of minutes, denial resolution for Trails at Westlake (Resolution No. 2025-150), ordinance amendments to water/sewer license chapters (Ordinance No. 2287) and a request for an executive session were approved as part of the consent agenda (10–0).
- Ordinance No. 2285 amending the municipal code for disposition of unclaimed property (second reading) — approved unanimously 10–0.

Ending: Council will take final votes on the 2026 operating and capital budgets and on resolution 2025-152 (reimbursement resolution tied to the bond financings) at the Oct. 28 meeting. Staff advised the council that continuing uncertainty in bond and construction markets creates trade-offs between timing (to preserve current vendor pricing) and waiting for potentially different market conditions; staff and bond counsel said the city can use a reimbursement resolution to allow limited pre-issuance activity but must follow federal tax rules on timing of reimbursable capital expenditures.