City officials, councilors approve $7.3M loan to bail our water-sewer deficit

IMMACULATE DECEPTION? Rochester resident Ray Burnett wanted to know who is responsible for the water-sewer deficit debacle. No one raised their hand. (City of Rochester screenshot)

ROCHESTER - After a lengthy public comment period that pilloried city leadership for failing to responsibly raise city water-sewer rates for five years leading to a $7.3 million dollar funding gap, the City Council unanimously voted to approve an installment loan to wipe out the deficit.
A 10-year loan would cost the city some four or five million dollars in interest, but Rochester Finance Director Mark Sullivan said during Tuesday's City Council meeting that he hoped to have the loan paid off in three years, which would save the city millions.
However, to do that water-sewer users will likely see steep increases in the services, likely around a 15 percent hike.
Sullivan added that there would likely be multiple tiers of rate hikes determined by the volume of water and sewer usage among households.
Much of the discussion centered around making sure that water-sewer bills, not taxpayer money, will be funding the loan expense.
Rochester Mayor Chuck Grassie has said all along that taxpayers should not be bearing that expense.
Residents who spoke against the loan option including Chris Rice, Tom Kaczynski and Ray Burnett blasted city leaders like Sullivan and City Manager Katie Ambrose for not raising the red flags higher while the water-sewer enterprise fund went further and further into the red.
Kaczynski, a state rep from District 5, chastised city leaders and the City Council for the current situation.
"Here were politicians more worried more about the next election than the water-sewer deficit, and city officials were more interested in creating multiple slush funds to fund their real estate adventures."
Burnett chided Ambrose and Sullivan over their laxness and ineptitude.
"How did we get here," he railed. The city's known about this for years. "What did you do when the debt was piling up. You did nothing. That's a dereliction of duty."