Utilities Rate Advisory Commission Meeting - March 25, 2026

The Utilities Rate Advisory Commission (URAC) met on Wednesday, March 25, 2026, at 5:30 PM at Sacramento City Hall. The meeting lasted approximately 75 minutes, adjourning at 6:45 PM. Commissioners present: Anthony Burdock, Jonathan Cook, Paul Gaspard, Soren Nelson, Ivan Rogers, Heru Oba Shambe, Lauren Steinbaum, Srirama Tanikella, Jill Zito, and Chair Tiffany Tran. Commissioners absent: Lara Johnson and Tim Olson. The primary agenda item was a discussion of the community outreach strategy and core messaging for the upcoming water/wastewater rate adjustment, presented by Department of Utilities staff and the consultant RAFTELUS.

Consent Calendar

• Approval of January 28, 2026 Minutes (File ID: 2026-00119): Passed unanimously on a voice vote (10-0-0) without discussion.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Viet Long Wynne (Sacramento resident) addressed the commission during the discussion item. He suggested tying infrastructure improvements to climate change adaptation, questioned why rate increases were not smoothed over previous years, and expressed concerns about fairness in how increases are distributed across income levels. He thanked staff for the transparent process.
• No public comments were made on matters not on the agenda.

Discussion Items

• Water/Wastewater Rate Adjustment – Community Outreach and Core Messaging (File ID: 2026-00744): Staff (David Levine, Long-Range Financial Planning Manager) and consultant Samantha Villeagis (RAFTELUS) presented the outreach plan and sought feedback on core rationale and messages. Key points:
  • Nearly 200 community groups have been identified for two-way conversations, including business chambers, property/business improvement districts, and neighborhood associations.
  • The communications challenge: residents face inflation and rate fatigue after eight years without a water/wastewater rate increase (last increase in 2020). The strong story includes protecting public health, fixing aging infrastructure, and noting that utility funds cannot be used for general city services.
  • Core rationale options presented: aging infrastructure (some pipes over 100 years old), cost of delay (planned upgrades cheaper than emergency repairs), rising costs (materials, chemicals, labor), stricter regulations, and resiliency (preparing for future needs like drought).
  • Draft core messages grouped into value/safety, need for action, accountability, and affordability. Language was kept simple (6th–8th grade reading level).
  • Commissioner feedback (summarized):
    • Commissioner Shambe supported “resiliency” and suggested adding “protecting future generations.” He recommended removing mention of “strict regulations” as it may sound like another tax.
    • Commissioner Steinbaum found “rising costs” and “aging infrastructure” relatable; she thought “cost of delay” less compelling. She also disliked the phrase “we delayed updates to keep costs low, but now those bills are due,” calling it passive-aggressive and potentially unfair to newer residents. She requested inclusion of average bill impacts and a focus on positive framing (economic growth, housing).
    • Commissioner Zito agreed regulations cause fatigue; she noted people care more about present costs than future promises, citing gas prices.
    • Commissioner Rogers suggested highlighting job creation for local tradespeople (union labor) as a silver lining.
    • Vice Chair Nelson noted a city-conducted FlashVote survey showed nearly 60% of respondents would support a rate increase if justified and backed by a third party. He saw an opportunity to educate the public about Proposition 218 (that utility funds are siloed).
    • Commissioner Eberle stressed that improvements will be universal across all neighborhoods, addressing skepticism that downtown/midtown gets preferential treatment.
    • Commissioner Tanikella and others requested seeing the actual rate increase numbers and a one-page fact sheet before engaging the public; staff confirmed this will be presented at the June URAC meeting.
    • Commissioner Gaspard cautioned about redundancy with the commission’s role to inform city council.
  • Staff and consultant responded: feedback will be used to refine messages. The rate study and materials for commissioners will be ready by June, with public outreach ramping up in summer 2026. In the meantime, staff is conducting stakeholder interviews and working on internal briefings.

Key Outcomes

• The commission received and commented on the community outreach plan and core messaging; no formal vote was taken on the item.
• Staff will incorporate feedback into refined messaging and prepare fact sheets, infographics, and rate details for the June URAC meeting.
• Commissioners agreed to use the intervening months to identify outreach venues (neighborhood associations, council member meetings, festivals) and a draft template letter for individual council member briefings was discussed (subject to legal guidance regarding meeting size limits).
• The commission will reconvene in June 2026 to receive final rate study results and outreach materials.