Gilbert looks to engage public on rates to overhaul sewer system

By Tom Blodgett
Mail |
X: @sp_blodgett

Gilbert Town Council approved on Tuesday moving forward with a notice of intent for sewer and reclaimed water rate increases and promised the “mother of all communications plans” to engage residents in the coming weeks.

A public hearing on the potential increase of up to $29 per month was set for Feb. 11 upon the council’s 6-1 vote with Councilmember Jim Torgeson dissenting.

The decision marks a critical step toward resolving what town officials describe as “urgent and overdue” infrastructure issues.

It would raise money to implement a five-year, $230 million plan to address deficiencies within the system, including investments in the sewer lines, manholes, lift stations, force mains and reclaimed water facilities.

Some of the projects had been planned but delayed because of construction and other economic pressures, officials said. The $46 million annually represents nearly the amount the town takes in rates now, which is $48 million.

Wastewater is considered one of the town’s “enterprise” funds, meaning services are completely supported by the rates customers pay. The money collected all stays in the fund, and no other monies are used to support it.

The infrastructure crisis

Town staff delivered a stark assessment of the condition of Gilbert’s sewer system.

Recent inspections on three 500-foot sections of ductile iron pipe under the 202 freeway revealed alarming levels of corrosion, with some pipes exhibiting complete material failure, Assistant Public Works Director Eric Braun said.

“Ductile iron pipe was a best practice 20 years ago, but is no longer recommended due to its corrosion potential,” Braun said.

Repairs to these critical sections are expected to cost millions, with Braun emphasizing the potentially catastrophic consequences of inaction, such as potentially fatal sinkholes under busy highways.

The broader challenge, however, is systemic. Much of Gilbert’s wastewater infrastructure requires replacement or substantial upgrades due to decades of insufficient investment, Braun said.

These issues mirror a nationwide trend; the Environmental Protection Agency estimates a $630 billion funding gap for water infrastructure in the U.S., with Arizona alone needing $4.8 billion.

Proposed rate increases

To address these challenges, the council considered two primary options for rate increases.

An “all-cash” option would fund necessary improvements without borrowing but would result in a $29 monthly increase in sewer bills for residents starting in April 2025, a 95% increase from the current $33.

Alternatively, a “phased cash-bond mix” option would split the cost between rate increases and a $110 million bond issuance, smoothing out the impact on residents by introducing an $8 increase in 2025 and an additional $6 the following year.

The town’s Public Works Advisory Board, after months of deliberation, recommended the all-cash option.

Braun read remarks from Sam Elliott, chair of the advisory board, about how the board did not make its recommendation lightly.

“Gilbert has a longstanding tradition not kicking the can down the road when it comes to addressing our tenant's needs,” Braun said on behalf of Elliott. “Taking on this level of debt would've meant that the next generation, which includes many of our children and grandchildren, would be left to pay for the decisions we make today as stewards of the community, we felt this was not the responsible course of action.”

The all-cash option, while more costly upfront for residents, avoids $72 million to $89 million in bond interest payments over 20 years. However, both options will remain on the table for council when it considers the matter in February.

The town also did a rate study on its environmental compliance fund, which addresses stormwater, but is recommending no change to that rate.

Communication plan

The potential rate increases sparked discussion among council members about how best to engage the public.

At the request of council at its retreat last month, Office of Digital Government Kandice Kwan outlined a communications plan for the topic with an emphasis on digital and social media outreach to match Gilbert’s relatively young population but also with a traditional media component so as not to overlook the older population.

However, some council members voiced concerns about whether residents’ voices were truly being heard.

“I see a very thorough plan of teaching and telling,” Councilmember Chuck Bongiovanni said. “I don't see any hearing. Did I miss something about listening for feedback from our residents? I just see one way, this is what it is. This is why. I'm not seeing anything coming the other way.”

The urgency of the timeline also weighed heavily on the council, particularly Torgeson.

“I'm not happy with presenting people with yet another increase in things, and nobody has knowledge about it up to this point, as far as the public, and I feel that there needs to be more time,” he said. “I don't even feel good about saying, ‘Hey, we're considering an increase,’ because there's no information for anybody to look at. It's like we're considering an increase and we're going to get back to you on educating you a little bit.”

Statutory requirements dictate a 60-day notice before any rate changes, plus 30 more days before the actual change, meaning the process must begin now to meet the April 2025 implementation target.

Delaying the rate increases, Braun said, would only worsen the financial burden, potentially requiring even steeper hikes in the future.

Public reaction and future steps

Though only one resident submitted a formal objection during the meeting, council members acknowledged the need for greater transparency and public understanding.

“Education and participation is everything in this,” he said. “And the general public does not have a large appetite for this, and just telling them won't be enough. There has to be buy off.”

The council ultimately approved the notice of intent, including provisions to explore both the all-cash and phased options. The Feb. 11 public hearing will provide residents a formal opportunity to weigh in, but there will be an open house and online chances to provide feedback as well.

As Gilbert continues to grow, the town faces the dual challenge of maintaining aging infrastructure while meeting the demands of new development, Braun said. The decision, while difficult, represents an effort to preserve the community’s quality of life.

“If we don't follow through on this commitment to our community, then degradation, extreme incidents of service failures and exponential emergency costs will be the future for Gilbert,” Braun said.

Councilmember Yung Koprowski, the council’s liaison to the Public Works Advisory Board, said it is a heavy and difficult topic to discuss.

“But it is a basic service that we provide, and it's the reason why municipalities exist, to provide water and sewer for our residents and that quality of life that is different from a rural lifestyle,” she said.

We would like to invite our readers to submit their civil comments, pro or con, on this issue. Email AZOpinions@iniusa.org. Tom Blodgett can be reached by email at tblodgett@iniusa.org or follow him @sp_blodgett on X.

Tom Blodgett
Senior News Editor | Gilbert

tblodgett@iniusa.org

Meet Tom
Tom Blodgett joined Independent Newsmedia, Inc., USA, in 2022, when the company acquired Community Impact Newspaper's Phoenix-area properties. Raised in Arizona, he has spent more than 35 years in journalism in the state.

Community: He has served as an instructional professional in the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism and Mass Communication since 2005, and is editorial adviser to The State Press, the university's independent student media outlet. He also is director of operations for an 18U girls fastpitch softball team from Gilbert.

Education: Arizona State University with a BS in Journalism. 

Random Fact: He lived in Belgium during his freshman year of high school.  

Hobbies: Tweeting enthusiastically about ASU softball (season-ticket holder) and grumpily about other local sports (pessimistic fan).