THIS IS AN ARCHIVE OF LAKE TAHOE NEWS, WHICH WAS OPERATIONAL FROM 2009-2018. IT IS FREELY AVAILABLE FOR RESEARCH. THE WEBSITE IS NO LONGER UPDATED WITH NEW ARTICLES.

Reward for water conservation is higher utility bills


image_pdfimage_print

By Sharon Bernstein, Reuters

Their lawns dry and their trees on the verge of dying, Californians have dramatically cut water use during the state’s relentless drought, only to learn that many local utilities are hiking rates to make up for the lost revenue.

Water providers in Los Angeles, the San Francisco Bay Area and other parts of the state have recently told customers that rates will go up at least temporarily, as utilities struggle to pay for building and repairing pipes, buying water and other costs, even as customers cut back.

“Droughts are costly for water agencies,” said Lisa Lien Mager, spokeswoman for the Association of California Water Agencies. “Revenues are being affected by the mandatory conservation but at the same time costs are going up.”

Read the whole story

image_pdfimage_print

About author

This article was written by admin

Comments

Comments (6)
  1. Robin Smith says - Posted: October 27, 2015

    These ‘agencies’ should have mandatory ‘saving’ accounts when they have a surplus.so when the going gets tough they have something to fall back on instead of always dinging the taxpayers for MORE.

    As we know the number of taxpayers decrease as the number of homeless,unemployed, illegal immigrants increases.

  2. dan wilvers says - Posted: October 27, 2015

    Though I hate fees, this is an apples and oranges analogy.

    There is a big difference between water delivery fees and water consumption fees.

    With mandatory meters in the state we’ve attached the idea of cost to consumption, but it’s more about the infrastructure and paying those that are hired to keep it working.

    Now unions and other issues about cost are always open for debate in the public discourse, but it’s not all about consumption.

  3. Robin Smith says - Posted: October 27, 2015

    How long before we start paying for the air we’re breathing? Will that also be about comsumption vs delivery…just cut it off! That’s what they’re doing with the water!

  4. TeaTotal says - Posted: October 27, 2015

    I think we should finally start taxing church businesses and repeal the ridiculous Prop. 13 giveaways to the real estate scammers-
    this $$$$ could be used to update our water infrastructures-the key to real conservation

  5. Carl Ribaudo says - Posted: October 27, 2015

    I think the challenge is nobody (government, business, consumers) wants to pay the true cost for what they use or the impacts they cause. Everyone is interested in cost shifting or looking for other people’s money to pay for something. I think if people really knew what their trudge costs are there would be some surprises.

  6. reloman says - Posted: October 27, 2015

    Water districts are selling a commodity, much like electricity, or maybe even gas for cars. The cost for you to get water to your home should be paid by you and tax dollars from another source should not be diverted to pay for your water. I do get a little confused though. I think we get charged for the infastrinfrastructure and then a separate charge for the cost to purcure the water