The payments to the city are variable. There is no fixed "$40/citizen" payment being made. The utility company not charging individuals responsible for increased costs those increased costs leads to the utility returning less money to the city, which would ultimately lead to cost increases if the excess funds went negative.
I find it interesting that you're latching onto the "eat the cost" phrase(which may have been incorrectly used) but you aren't too interested in rectifying your gross ignorance of the actual details of the system you're making claims about.
