Columbia weighs $93K consultant to plan water utility’s future
COLUMBIA, Mo. (KMIZ)
The Columbia City Council is considering spending nearly $93,000 on an outside consultant to evaluate the city's water utility and develop a plan for maintenance and capital improvements throughout the next 20 years.
The proposed $92,820 agreement with Provenance Engineering is on the council's consent agenda for Monday night's meeting. If approved, the consultant would review previous water utility studies, assess current and future maintenance needs and prioritize proposed capital improvement projects.
According to a council memo, the goal is to align those projects with the utility's strategic priorities while accounting for anticipated maintenance, operational needs and future expansion.
The work would include gathering and reviewing data, meeting with utility staff and developing a long-term maintenance and capital improvement plan. After a draft is completed, the city plans to hold public engagement opportunities to present the findings and gather feedback from customers.
The agreement would be paid for with Water Utility funds.
The proposed consultant agreement has drawn criticism from the Como Safe Water Coalition, which argues the city should be capable of developing its own long-term plan.
Coalition co-founder Julie Ryan said the study could help identify priorities, but questioned whether reviewing previous studies would provide useful information if some of them are outdated.
“This feels like a last ditch attempt to say we can't in house, create a plan for the next 20 years that addresses the capital improvement project needs and maintenance needs of the utility. So we're going to have somebody else do this for us,” Ryan said.
The proposal comes just one week after the city celebrated the completion of a $37 million upgrade to its water treatment plant. The project restored the facility's ability to treat 32 million gallons of water per day.
The final price tag was significantly higher than the $24 million estimate discussed in 2022. The project included approximately $4.7 million in engineering costs and $32.4 million in construction costs.
The rising cost of utility infrastructure has also affected customers. City Council approved a 10% water rate increase in August, with Utilities Director Erin Keys previously citing inflation as a contributing factor.
Ryan also questioned the value of relying on older reports to guide future decisions.
“The problem with that right now is that a lot of the studies that might be looked at, some of them have been sitting on the shelf for 10 years. So how valid is the information that we might still find in them?” Ryan told ABC 17 News.
The Como Safe Water Coalition also expressed concerns about the consultant's objectivity.
“It's my understanding that the individual who would be doing this work for the company they're contracting with is a prior city employee. And in our view, we really need somebody who has some objectivity. We don't need somebody who is a prior employee who might, be swayed, who might feel that they don't want to hurt somebody’s feelings who might not want to be negative about a certain initiative that's been undertaken,” Ryan said. “We really think that if the city we're going to do this, it really needs to be done objectively and not with somebody who has that history as a city and employee in the utilities.”
In a statement posted to Facebook, the Como Safe Water Coalition said the proposed agreement is another example of the city outsourcing significant utility responsibilities rather than handling them internally.
The coalition also sent an email to City Council, the city manager and the utilities director criticizing the proposal. In the letter, the group argued that spending nearly $93,000 to evaluate previous engineering reports, current projects and future maintenance needs shows city staff are not capable of developing and following a long-term plan.
The coalition compared the proposed agreement to a 2023 contract with Black & Veatch, which was not to exceed $249,546 for services related to compliance with federal Lead and Copper Rule revisions. It also pointed to the city's recent approval of $42 million in metering through special obligation bonds, which did not require a public vote.
The group said continued spending on utility projects, followed by higher rates for customers, raises questions about whether the city should continue operating the utility.
“If the City wants to continue to outsource these significant actions of the utility, then serious consideration needs to be given to privatizing the utility,” the coalition wrote.
Ryan said the coalition received a quick response from Keys, who explained that the consultant's role would be to develop a roadmap to guide the city's utility operations.
“It just feels like if the city is outsourcing every really important and significant evaluation and execution plan for the water utility, then it is a sign that this city should not be in the business of running the water utility. You can't outsource everything,” Ryan said.
Ryan said the group has asked to be included in conversations about utility decisions but feels opportunities for public input have not been meaningful.
“We have asked to be involved in different levels of conversations of things that are happening. Unfortunately, it feels like every time the city does offer a community input, it's done in a way that really isn't trying to get that input. It's trying to just check a box that it's been attempted,” Ryan said. “This isn't really meant to be that we're out to criticize everything the water utility does or everything that city staff does. But we want there to be some visibility of understanding that if you were looking at this from an outside perspective and you're trying to you have a business that is outsourcing everything that's doing. At some point you have to decide, is that business viable?”
City Council is scheduled to discuss the proposed agreement during its Monday night meeting.
Check back for updates.
