COLUMBIA – Residents in Columbia are voicing their concerns about new increases in electric rates that go into effect July 1.
Columbia City Council voted to approve a 6.9% increase in electric rates at its meeting Tuesday night. Council members Nick Foster, Nick Knoth, Betsy Peters, Don Waterman and Mayor Barbara Buffaloe all voted in favor of the increase, while Roy Lovelady and Andrea Waner voted against it.
According to the city, the raise is necessary in order to ensure the Utility’s department’s long-term financial stability. At Tuesday’s meeting, the department said its goal is to improve its debt coverage ratio and see positive bond ratings.
This increase in electricity rates marks the first in nearly five years. The city says over that time, costs to provide electricity have gone up.
Under the new plan, increases will be based on usage. Those who use more electricity will be charged more, though the rate increase is not as severe at higher levels of usage.
However, at the end of the day, officials said everyone will ultimately pay more.
Many residents expressed concerns with the plan during public comment on Tuesday. Jay Hasheider, a Columbia resident and former Energy Services superintendent, said residents are against it for a variety of reasons.
“Forty people came and talked about a whole wide range of issues, climate change, equity, the actual amount of money that’s needed,” Hasheider said.
Hasheider claimed low-usage customers will face increases that are proportionately higher than higher-usage customers.
“People on the low-end are saddled with the necessity of a refrigerator, and they’re paying more because they’re using less,” he said. “But none of those had any effect on the council because they had the staff and a consultant that was telling them that they got to do it, and they got to do it now.”
He worries what this will mean for low-income households.
Success! An email has been sent to with a link to confirm list signup.
Error! There was an error processing your request.
“They can’t reduce their costs,” Hasheider said. “They can’t unplug a refrigerator. You know, you can only get down so low in your consumption before you’re basically at the bone and you don’t have any other way to conserve.”
Carolyn Amparan, chair of the Sierra Club Mid-Missouri group, also expressed concerns with the plan. She spoke on behalf of the group at Tuesday’s meeting and said they are against the rate increase, primarily because of its structure.
“We felt that the too much focus in developing the design of the rate structure had gone into, just worry about the financial objectives of the city, and not taking into effect considerations like social equity, how it’s going to effect low-income customers as well as low-usage customers,” Amparan said.
Amparan said the group fears it could particularly impact low-usage customers. Amparan stated she herself is on a fixed income that doesn’t adjust to inflation, as she receives a pension.
“We felt that increase was too high and that’s a particular hardship on fixed-income people, as well as those that are low-usage,” Amparan said.
“People who are already struggling, you know we’ve had increased rates in other areas as a community,” Amparan said. “Plus with inflation of late, I’m sure people’s wages and salaries haven’t kept up with the most recent inflation.”
Amparan said the community will not let this issue rest. She said they will go back to city council to ask for further action to be taken.
“You know, this is going to go into effect July 1, but that doesn’t mean that we can’t redo it again later,” Amparan said. “Better to change it sooner rather than wait another two or three years.”
Moving forward, Amparan said she hopes the city will take into account all of the city’s goals, not just the financial ones.
Lovelady, who voted no to the proposed increase, acknowledged the challenges the plan poses for both residents and the department.
“I kind just feel like we’re in a lose, lose situation,” Lovelady said at the meeting. “If we pass it, we lose. If we don’t pass it, we lose.”