What the City Council did

On May 27, 2026, the Bakersfield City Council voted 6–1 to adopt Resolution No. 064-2026, raising the annual single-family sewer charge from $247 to $475 in FY 2026-27 and by another $100 each year until it reaches $875 in FY 2030-31. The increase took effect July 1, 2026. It is now on your July bill.

Source: City of Bakersfield Resolution No. 064-2026; SEIU 521 government claim, Aug. 4, 2026.

Why we say it's unfair

Over $400 million of the increase funds an expansion of Wastewater Treatment Plant 3 — from 32 million gallons per day (MGD) to 40 MGD — that would primarily serve new residential development in southwest Bakersfield and the expansion of California Dairies' Bakersfield plant (rising from 116,000 gallons per day to 600,000 gallons per day). Existing ratepayers are being asked to pre-fund capacity that will primarily benefit those new users.

The new southwest Bakersfield developments driving that Plant 3 expansion include luxury communities like Mahogany at Belcourt Seven Oaks, where new homes are listed from $839,000 to more than $1.1 million — roughly two to three times the Kern County median home price of about $400,000. The rate hike shifts the cost of connecting those million-dollar homes onto every existing Bakersfield ratepayer.

The faucet keeps dripping money from your household every month — into a pool that pays for infrastructure a dairy plant and new luxury developments should be paying for themselves.

Sources: City of Bakersfield 2026-2030 Sewer Rates and Fees Report, p. 20 and Appendix C 10-year financial plan; California Dairies grand opening announcement; Mahogany at Belcourt Seven Oaks pricing (Zillow / Woodbridge Pacific Group); Kern County median home price (Redfin, June 2026).

Why we say it's unlawful

Article XIII D, Section 6 of the California Constitution (Proposition 218) says a fee imposed as an incident of property ownership must not exceed the cost required to provide the service, must not exceed the proportional cost of the service attributable to the parcel, must not be imposed for a service unless that service is actually used by, or immediately available to, the owner of the property in question, and may not be based on future or potential use. Our attorneys' analysis of the City's own cost-of-service study shows the rate violates that requirement on multiple grounds:

1. Disproportionate allocation of growth costs to existing ratepayers.
2. An impermissible "pay-as-you-go" model that forces today's residents to pre-fund infrastructure for next decade's users.
3. Improper inclusion of stormwater costs in a sewer charge (Bakersfield's stormwater system is a separate MS4 system, separately regulated).
4. A non-proportional rate structure overall.

The proper way to fund growth costs is through connection fees and impact fees paid by the new development that creates the demand — not through higher bills for existing residents.

Source: California Constitution Article XIII D, § 6(b); SEIU 521 Complaint-in-Intervention, filed August 2026 in Kern County Superior Court.

Where the case stands

• June 15, 2026 — County of Kern sued the City over the rate increase.
• July 28, 2026 — Kern County Board of Supervisors voted down a parallel county-side sewer rate increase, citing the pending litigation.
• August 4, 2026 — SEIU 521 filed a formal Government Claim against the City.
• August 10, 2026 — SEIU 521 filed a Complaint-in-Intervention in the reverse-validation action.

Who's on our side

• Fix Kern — the movement fighting for local government transparency, accountability, and results.
• SEIU Local 521 — the union representing more than 3,000 city and county workers who live in Bakersfield.
• The County of Kern — plaintiff in the reverse-validation action.
• The UC ANR affordability analysis — found the $875 rate would push roughly 33,700 Bakersfield households (24%) over the EPA's affordability threshold for wastewater services.
• Bakersfield residents — thousands who submitted written protests during the 2025 first attempt at a similar hike, and thousands more expected to sign this letter.

The ask

Rescind Resolution No. 064-2026. Sit down with SEIU 521 and the County of Kern. Build a plan that:

1. Funds the improvements Bakersfield actually needs — including renovation of Plant 2 — but not future-capacity expansion of Plant 3 through general ratepayers.
2. Recovers growth costs from the parcels that create them through connection and impact fees, as Proposition 218 requires.
3. Excludes stormwater costs from the sanitary sewer charge.
4. Phases increases over an appropriate period so the burden doesn't fall on working families all at once.