According to the plans executive summary, “the plan serves as a planning and management tool to help ensure that the operations and capital improvement needs of the Amador Water system can be met in a financially sound matter.” Daly explained that Jackson is a unique customer that began purchasing treated water from the AWA in 1999. As a treated wholesale water customer, the City of Jackson is identified in the rate study, according to Daly.  The study evaluates rates based on the type of customer, meter size, highest demand for water and general service retail and industrial water users. The report proposes that the City’s average water charge increase by approximately 22% on August 1, 2007, then increase by 12% each of the next two succeeding years. Daly indicated that the average rate increase for all Amador Water System customers is about 12%, with some classifications having higher rates. Daly said that, “The City’s charge for service is based on a combination of two rates; first a flat rate monthly service charge and 2nd, a commodity rate based on the amount of water used each month.”

The City’s monthly service charge is proposed to increase by 91.3% the first year and 12% each of the next two years. The commodity rate increases by 6.8% the first year, then 11.7% the second year and 12.4% the third year.” Daly indicated that they had budgeted for a 9% increase in the water purchase based on the 7% increase that the AWA traditionally asks for and then another 2% for growth. He said the increase is significant and in turn, the City will have to re-examine their rates to make sure they can balance it in their budget. He said that the AWA Board of Directors will be reviewing the item June 28th themselves. Daly concluded by recommending that the City Council consider appointing a sub-committee to meet with AWA representatives to ensure that Jackson is being treated fairly. The Council and Public made it clear throughout the rest of the discussion that they had question after question about the rate increase, and the plan, and indicated that it was frustrating not having a water agency representative available to answer them.

One of the concerns presented was the fact that the plan alluded to the fact that the AWA is preparing for future development. The public made it very clear that existing customers should not be paying for future development; developers should pay for what is needed to accommodate their projects. A public workshop was also suggested so that the AWA could be present to answer the questions from the public and city council, as well as go over their rationale for the steep raise. The public also was concerned with the lack of community in attendance and felt that a notification needed to go out to water users to notify them of the potential increase. Former Council woman Marie Louise Solaja said she can’t understand why everybody is so surprised with the increase, because the AWA made it clear when they were discussing the figures associated with the pipeline that their costs would have to be recouped.  The council asked legal counsel exactly what their foothold was in the situation and what legal position the City had in this circumstance. Gibson explained that the AWA is subject to legal requirements and that if the City feels they are being charged inappropriately then they can challenge the agency in court. After more discussion it was decided that a sub committee consisting of Council Members Al Nunes and RosaLee Pryor-Escamilla would meet with the AWA, as well as see about a date for a public workshop. Escamilla expressed some concern about not being an expert in the field of water and suggested that the sub-committee have a “subject matter expert” available to them. Councilman Andy Rodriguez felt that the City was cutting it very close, as the AWA board would be meeting in late June. The sub-committee agreed to meet within a week to discuss the issue further.