Roseville staff present FY27 utility budgets; electric eyes new positions, bond-funded capital projects

City utility staff told the council that Roseville Electric and the Environmental Utilities department are proposing budgets for fiscal year 2026–27 that emphasize capital investments, compliance and new staffing to support growing infrastructure demands.

Dan Bean, CEO of Roseville Electric, said the utility is requesting several new positions tied to electric-vehicle charging infrastructure and power-generation work and is presenting a balanced budget when bond proceeds are included. Matt Nelson, electric finance manager, told the council the utility issued $80 million in bonds earlier this year and plans to use roughly $48 million of proceeds for capital projects, including an $11 million Holt Substation and multiple generation upgrades. Staff also highlighted operating metrics: roughly 1.2 gigawatt-hours sold in the most recent audited year, about 1,000 miles of lines, and a typical residential rate of about $0.19/kWh.

Environmental Utilities Director Sean Bigley and business-services administrator Archana Wagner outlined EU priorities: securing outside funding (a $5.3 million federal appropriation for regional water infrastructure and a $31.2 million clean-energy investment tax credit), expanded recycled-water capacity (including a planned 30‑inch pipeline and other reliability upgrades), phase-2 downtown water-main rehabilitation, and continued work on aquifer storage and recovery wells. Bigley warned that regulatory compliance, commodity price exposure (power and natural gas), workforce constraints and project backlog present ongoing budget risks.

Council members questioned whether proposed energy-sales figures assumed deliveries outside Roseville (staff said they did not) and asked where one-time nonoperating revenues had come from (insurance reimbursements and development/CDWR payments). On compliance, staff said the utility expects to meet CP5 renewable procurement requirements due to recent contracts.

No action was required—both items were informational presentations—and staff said they would return with budget adoption materials at a future meeting.