City moves forward with proposed sewer, water rate increases
Notices will be sent to thousands of Bakersfield residents next month informing them of the process by which they can protest a massive increase in water and sewer rates proposed by the city.
Faced with significant costs to update water and sewer infrastructure, city officials have proposed increasing water rates by 50% over five years and sewer rates by nearly 300%.
If approved, the rate changes would go into effect July 1.
The increase would impact roughly 166,000 people, or 50,000 households, said city spokesman Joe Conroy, and 106,200 parcels will be sent notices regarding the sewer increase.
Water rate notices are expected to go out April 25 and sewer notices April 11.
The city's water system serves about 40% of Bakersfield's population, with the remainder served by CalWater or smaller water providers.
After extensive debate Wednesday evening, the Bakersfield City Council voted to send notices to customers regarding the rate increase as required under Proposition 218. Proposition 218 is a 1996 law that requires local governments to receive voter approval for tax increases and says that a public hearing must be held within 45 of notices being issued.
If more than 50% of voters object to a rate increase, it can't be adopted.
Following motions approved Wednesday, protest hearings on the water rates will be held at the council's meeting at 5:15 p.m. May 28, and June 11 for the sewer rates.
Written protests can be submitted to the City Clerk's Office during regular business hours through the dates of the hearings.
The rate increases had been recommended by the city's Water Board, consisting of councilmembers Manpreet Kaur, Bob Smith and Andrae Gonzales, at a meeting earlier this month.
The council spent more than an hour debating each item Wednesday, and ultimately voted to move ahead with rate increases.
The decisions weren't unanimous. Ward 1 Councilman Eric Arias was the only member to vote against sending notices for the water increase and both he and Ward 2 Councilman Andrae Gonzales voted against sending notices for the sewer increase.
Ward 4's Ken Weir and Ward 7's Manpreet Kaur were both absent.
Ward 5 Councilman Larry Koman put forward a motion that would have returned the water rate proposal to a consultant for reevaluation, a process city staff said would take at least six months.
That motion failed to pass with only Koman and Arias voting in favor.
Council members and staff repeatedly said the decision to raise rates was not easy, but noted Bakersfield ratepayers pay significantly less than other comparable cities.
Furthermore, a series of state-mandated water quality and conservation measures will require the city to make significant upgrades to its infrastructure in coming years.
City staff developed a 10-year master plan to bring the city into compliance, said Kristina Budak, director of water resources, adding that the proposed increase would keep the city's financial reserves healthy.
"This allows us to stay above our target reserve," Budak said. "(It) ensures that we have a healthy fund moving forward to address any concerns or issues that are not identified in our 10-year plan."
City Manager Christian Clegg said there is a structural imbalance.
"We're spending more than we're bringing in every year," Clegg said. "And in the next two years, we will spend all of our savings down. And by fiscal year (2028), we won't have enough money to pay for operations."
Council members acknowledged the impact on residents, but also said if the city waited, the cost of improvements would rise.
"The other consideration is it only gets more expensive the longer that we wait," Gonzales said. "So the capital expenditures only, it doesn't get less expensive, it gets more expensive to actually construct some of these projects, and, again, we can defer it, but we will be paying more in the future."
But if the city moves ahead with its sewer rate increase, it's going to be too late for Kern County to hold its own Proposition 218 hearings by July 1 for the 600 or so county residents impacted by the change.
That means without approval from its residents for a rate increase, Kern County will have to make up the difference out of its own funds for a year.
"I can't put that fee on the county people because I would also have to do my own Proposition 218 (hearings) and allow them the voice to protest out of that fee as well," said Joshua Champlin, director of Kern County Public Works.
Speaking to The Californian, Champlin said he wouldn't be able to get that done before July 1, meaning the increase on the county side wouldn't be reflected until the next fiscal year.
About 600 customers in an area of unincorporated Kern County receive city sewer services under an agreement between the two governments.
"It says in the agreement that the county shall pay the current city rate for all of its users. So it doesn't, it doesn't say there's any allowance for this in our agreement," Champlin said. "It doesn't say we can pay less if our people don't pay it. It just says the county shall pay them at the same rate that the city charges their people."
The issue has come up before but in lower amounts, Champlin said, but because of the size of the increase he estimated the county would have to make up more than $400,000 in costs.
Champlin commented on the increase at Wednesday's meeting, where he asked the council to put off the item so it could be discussed further between the city and county.
But the city is on the same deadline to get the increase on its own tax rolls before July 1, the start of the fiscal year.
In voting against sending out the notices, Arias said there were large cuts being planned at the federal level that will impact families in the coming year, and that the timing of the increase troubled him.
"We have to do everything that we can at the local level to help folks literally survive and fight for the next day," Arias said. "It's very clear that we need to update the sewer plant. I just don't know that now is the time."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time Magazine
4 days ago
- Time Magazine
Eric K. Ward
Ward is executive vice president of Race Forward, a senior fellow at the Southern Poverty Law Center, and the only American to receive the Civil Courage Prize.
Yahoo
11-06-2025
- Yahoo
LA protests fuel California drive to hide data from Trump
SACRAMENTO, California — President Donald Trump's aggressive response to anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles is fueling a California push to insulate state residents' personal data from Washington. Tech-skeptical California lawmakers and activists fear the Trump administration will leverage tech tools to track and punish demonstrators accused of interfering with Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. One possible instrument at ICE's disposal: location data, a highly detailed record of people's daily movements that's collected and sold by everything from weather apps to data brokers. California Democrats introduced at least a half-dozen measures this year aimed at bolstering the state's already-tough data protections, but several died as Sacramento grapples with a $12 billion budget deficit. Those efforts are taking on new meaning as the protests and ICE raids gain national attention. California Assemblymember Chris Ward, a San Diego Democrat, told POLITICO he may reintroduce a bill next year that failed this spring, which aimed to close a loophole on location data. California's existing privacy laws limit local law enforcement from sharing license plate data with ICE and other federal agencies, but standards for online location data are weaker. Ward said he 'absolutely would not' put it past Trump to leverage location data in ICE investigations, citing the Department of Government Efficiency's fight to access sensitive personal information stored in Social Security records. 'Who knows how they could package that and repurpose it for their interests,' Ward said in an interview. Devices and apps collecting location information can share it with data brokers, which in turn can sell the information to federal agencies like ICE without asking for user consent. A 2022 report from the Georgetown Law Center on Privacy and Technology, updated last month, found ICE has extensive purchasing contracts with data brokers like LexisNexis and Thomson Reuters. California Attorney General Rob Bonta in March pledged to investigate businesses that appear to be breaking California's rules for protecting location data, citing concerns about Trump's immigration policies. He declined to comment on the investigation when POLITICO asked for updates this week. Privacy advocates argue the president's vow to quash the Los Angeles protests with troops — a move Gov. Gavin Newsom cast as 'authoritarian' — highlights why California Democrats should guard sensitive personal information from the Trump administration. 'Clearly the president is looking for a fight with California,' Leora Gershenzon, policy director for the nonprofit California Initiative for Technology and Democracy, told reporters during a press call this week. Federal law enforcement agencies have a 'huge number' of tech tools at their disposal to track protesters' location, like data from cell phone towers and automated license plate readers, said Catherine Crump, a technology law professor at the University of California, Berkeley. Trump-appointed officials are already using tech to investigate Los Angeles protesters. Bill Essayli, a former state Assembly member who recently became the U.S. attorney in Los Angeles, told Fox LA this week his office will comb through every piece of available video and social media evidence to track down demonstrators accused of interfering with law enforcement. 'Just rest assured, the FBI is monitoring everything,' Essayli, a Southern California Republican, said Monday, singling out people accused of throwing projectiles at officers or damaging federal property. 'We will come get you.' Gershenzon said location data-sharing could open the door for a free speech crackdown. 'It is just scary to think of what could become with all of that location data in the hands of this government.' Ward's failed measure, which would have prohibited companies from selling location information to federal agencies and private parties like data brokers, stalled after California's powerful Assembly Appropriations Committee blocked it from proceeding to a floor vote. Ward said he wasn't sure why the Appropriations Committee blocked his bill, though pro-business groups argued it would inflict 'significant' costs on businesses. A spokesperson for Appropriations Chair Buffy Wicks didn't return a request for comment. Notably, there's no concrete example yet of federal officials using location data to track anti-ICE protesters in Los Angeles. Spokespeople for ICE and Essayli's office declined to say whether investigators would leverage the technology to pursue people accused of impeding immigration enforcement. But privacy advocates said Trump's response to the LA protests should prompt lawmakers to reconsider Ward's bill. "We are learning from the rise of authoritarianism around the world,' said Samantha Gordon, chief program officer at nonprofit TechEquity, pointing to how other countries have used online surveillance to target protesters. 'This is part of us trying to make sure that we're prepared.' A version of this story first appeared in California Decoded, POLITICO's morning newsletter for Pros about how the Golden State is shaping tech policy within its borders and beyond. Like this content? POLITICO Pro subscribers receive it daily. Learn more at
Politico
11-06-2025
- Politico
LA protests fuel California drive to hide data from Trump
SACRAMENTO, California — President Donald Trump's aggressive response to anti-ICE protests in Los Angeles is fueling a California push to insulate state residents' personal data from Washington. Tech-skeptical California lawmakers and activists fear the Trump administration will leverage tech tools to track and punish demonstrators accused of interfering with Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids. One possible instrument at ICE's disposal: location data, a highly detailed record of people's daily movements that's collected and sold by everything from weather apps to data brokers. California Democrats introduced at least a half-dozen measures this year aimed at bolstering the state's already-tough data protections, but several died as Sacramento grapples with a $12 billion budget deficit. Those efforts are taking on new meaning as the protests and ICE raids gain national attention. California Assemblymember Chris Ward, a San Diego Democrat, told POLITICO he may reintroduce a bill next year that failed this spring, which aimed to close a loophole on location data. California's existing privacy laws limit local law enforcement from sharing license plate data with ICE and other federal agencies, but standards for online location data are weaker. Ward said he 'absolutely would not' put it past Trump to leverage location data in ICE investigations, citing the Department of Government Efficiency's fight to access sensitive personal information stored in Social Security records. 'Who knows how they could package that and repurpose it for their interests,' Ward said in an interview. Devices and apps collecting location information can share it with data brokers, which in turn can sell the information to federal agencies like ICE without asking for user consent. A 2022 report from the Georgetown Law Center on Privacy and Technology, updated last month, found ICE has extensive purchasing contracts with data brokers like LexisNexis and Thomson Reuters. California Attorney General Rob Bonta in March pledged to investigate businesses that appear to be breaking California's rules for protecting location data, citing concerns about Trump's immigration policies. He declined to comment on the investigation when POLITICO asked for updates this week. Privacy advocates argue the president's vow to quash the Los Angeles protests with troops — a move Gov. Gavin Newsom cast as 'authoritarian' — highlights why California Democrats should guard sensitive personal information from the Trump administration. 'Clearly the president is looking for a fight with California,' Leora Gershenzon, policy director for the nonprofit California Initiative for Technology and Democracy, told reporters during a press call this week. Federal law enforcement agencies have a 'huge number' of tech tools at their disposal to track protesters' location, like data from cell phone towers and automated license plate readers, said Catherine Crump, a technology law professor at the University of California, Berkeley. Trump-appointed officials are already using tech to investigate Los Angeles protesters. Bill Essayli, a former state Assembly member who recently became the U.S. attorney in Los Angeles, told Fox LA this week his office will comb through every piece of available video and social media evidence to track down demonstrators accused of interfering with law enforcement. 'Just rest assured, the FBI is monitoring everything,' Essayli, a Southern California Republican, said Monday, singling out people accused of throwing projectiles at officers or damaging federal property. 'We will come get you.' Gershenzon said location data-sharing could open the door for a free speech crackdown. 'It is just scary to think of what could become with all of that location data in the hands of this government.' Ward's failed measure, which would have prohibited companies from selling location information to federal agencies and private parties like data brokers, stalled after California's powerful Assembly Appropriations Committee blocked it from proceeding to a floor vote. Ward said he wasn't sure why the Appropriations Committee blocked his bill, though pro-business groups argued it would inflict 'significant' costs on businesses. A spokesperson for Appropriations Chair Buffy Wicks didn't return a request for comment. Notably, there's no concrete example yet of federal officials using location data to track anti-ICE protesters in Los Angeles. Spokespeople for ICE and Essayli's office declined to say whether investigators would leverage the technology to pursue people accused of impeding immigration enforcement. But privacy advocates said Trump's response to the LA protests should prompt lawmakers to reconsider Ward's bill. 'We are learning from the rise of authoritarianism around the world,' said Samantha Gordon, chief program officer at nonprofit TechEquity, pointing to how other countries have used online surveillance to target protesters. 'This is part of us trying to make sure that we're prepared.' A version of this story first appeared in California Decoded, POLITICO's morning newsletter for Pros about how the Golden State is shaping tech policy within its borders and beyond. Like this content? POLITICO Pro subscribers receive it daily. Learn more at
