Consultants from Willdan presented a water and wastewater rate study and a separate utility user‑fee review to the Rockport City Council on Aug. 13, 2024, saying system costs, outside supplier increases and $67,900,000 in planned capital work require higher rates.

The consultants recommended a five‑year rate plan with automatic annual adjustments Oct. 1, 2024–2028 and no change to the basic rate structure. Dan Jackson of Willdan said the plan would raise the average inside‑city customer’s combined water and sewer bill by about $5.58 a month in the first year — about a 6.5% increase — and similar amounts in subsequent years. "For the majority of ratepayers, the average increase for inside city customers under this plan would be about $5 a month," Jackson said.

Why it matters: Willdan identified inflation, increasing purchased‑water costs from the San Patricio Municipal Water District and nearly $68 million of capital improvements as the principal drivers of higher rates. Jackson’s presentation noted the plan assumes the city will issue debt (about $47 million wastewater, $20 million water) and sets rates to cover future debt service and operating costs.

User fees: Consultant Dennis Gorrell described the user‑fee calculations, which use fully burdened hourly rates to recover the full cost of discrete services. Staff proposals include raising some connection and deposit fees (meter connections to $60, residential deposit to $170, commercial deposit to $780) and capping NSF fees at $30 in line with state law.

Outside‑city premium: Willdan applied standard AWWA methodology to outside‑city customers and found the cost to serve those customers was higher. The consultant recommended a 20% premium for outside‑city water customers (phased to 2027) and a 20% wastewater premium phased to start in Oct. 2025, saying the premium is set slightly below calculated cost to avoid charging inside customers more than cost.

Public comment and council questions: Rockport resident Patrick Kane, who said he had helped lead a citizen petition, thanked the city for the study and said the consultant’s 20% outside‑city recommendation aligned with citizen expectations. Council members pressed staff on the study’s assumptions, the size and timing of the capital improvement program and how franchise fees and administrative allocations were treated in cost calculations.

Next steps: Council did not adopt rates at the meeting. The consultants and staff said they would bring ordinance language for rate adoption and the five‑year schedule to upcoming meetings for formal readings and adoption.

Ending: The presentation and public hearing gave council members a multi‑year projection to consider; staff and consultants will return with ordinance language and more detail before any votes to adopt new rates.