Editor: So Nancy Campbell wants to impose a flat fee on every water meter in town. That means that an elderly couple living in a 1400 sq. ft. house would pay the same for water service as a younger couple with two or three kids or someone lives in a 4000 sq. ft. golf course house or someone who owns a vacation rental that rents it out to a mob of people a couple of times a month.

Jerry Pockrandt

Lake Havasu City

2
0
0
1
4

(12) comments

janaplum

$20 bucks a month sounds reasonable. The need to pay will not go away on its own. I think the city in on the hunt for additional revenue that is much less necessary. I think we made a mistake when we voted to unleash city spending from the caps that were in place. The brokers of the change promised taxes would not increase, well.......! Watch out!

janaplum

I always enjoy the short version!

Objective Dialectic

Every water meter in this town already has a flat service fee; Campbell's suggestion would essentially only raise that flat fee.

bbbob

if there is a flat fee on water why the meters and why the paid meter readers, seems kind of STPID to say the least, The water dept here has made a fortune on water bills, when i moved here in 1992 the water bills were 20 to 30 dollars a month with a pool................do the math same house 130.00 a month

janaplum

I link the meters are read to determine water usage which is then applied to your sewer fee.

Objective Dialectic

Residential sewer fees are determined by your water consumption during the winter months of late November/early December through late March/early April (the time frame depends on when your meter is read each month). The water dept. calls this the "winter quarter average." Basically, between the months of November through the end of March, the water dept. looks at the 4 months of usage during that time frame, they take off your highest month's usage, and average the remaining 3 months. This average is what determines your locked in sewer rate for the next year. You as the consumer want to conserve water during this time (turn down your irrigation is a big one people forget), as you want your average to be 562 cubic feet of water or less. This will get you locked in to the minimum sewer rate of $41 for the upcoming year (starting around May). For every 100 cubic feet of water above the 562 minimum, this will add an additional $7.30 to that $41 minimum. I'll provide an example:

Let's say you used the following amounts of water between December and March.

Date: 12/24/19 Consumption: 867 cubic feet of water

Date: 1/28/20 Consumption: 1118 cubic feet of water

Date: 2/25/20 Consumption: 918 cubic feet of water

Date: 3/26/20 Consumption: 924 cubic feet of water

The first thing the water dept does is they subtract the highest usage month off (this is in favor of us as consumers in case we have a major leak or something that causes a huge jump in water consumption), so in this case, January's consumption of 1118 would be eliminated out. This would leave us with the 3 months of 901, 918, and 924 cubic feet of water to average. The average would be (901+918+924)/3 = 914.3 or with rounding, 914. With this average of 914, 562 would be subtracted out to establish the $41.00 minimum sewer charge. The remainder (914-562=352) of 352 is then divided by 100 cubic feet (remember $7.30 is added for ever 100 cubic feet of usage ABOVE the 562 minimum) and we get (352/100=3.52). This 3.52 is then multiplied by $7.30 to acquire the additional sewer charge and we get (3.52*$7.30=25.696). Rounding up we get an additional charge of $25.70 ON TOP of the $41.00 minimum charge. So in this example, on your bill you would see a line that reads "SW Cons.. 562 ... 41.00" and a line directly below that reads "SW Con2 .... 352.... 25.70." In total, the locked in sewer rate would be $41.00 + $25.70 = $61.70.

So be smart during the winter months and conserve water so your sewer rate for the upcoming year is the lowest it can be, $41.00!

If Campbell's plan was to pass, it would not affect sewer rates or any rates based off of consumption. It would be a flat charge added to every water meter, and would probably be added to the "base charge" that we all already pay for. The current base charge for most meters is $5.16 (I believe meters of larger sizes [for example meters at commercial properties] have a higher charge), so I assume that $5.16 would just be raised.

Objective Dialectic

I'm sorry, in the example I gave above, I listed the 12/24 consumption as 867, but it should be 901 with the math I provided below.

eeyo

Good info, except you neglected to mention the winter quarter average is not applicable if you already have a separate meter for irrigation. In this case they use your actual water readings all year long. With my irrigation meter I never come close to using the amount equivalent the base amount of $41.00, however I still have to pay the base amount.

Objective Dialectic

Eeyo, that is correct. If you have an irrigation meter, then the winter quarter average does not apply to you.

Azul@Havasu

The fees are explained in this document:

https://www.lhcaz.gov/docs/default-source/department-documents/wqasamplestatement.pdf?sfvrsn=3ed5337c_14

Waters rates are base on CF used and sewer is based on water usage.

I believe Nancy Campbell wants add an additional fee to replace IDD:

“But I have a better solution to that, especially with the state of covid,” Campbell said. “We cannot keep pushing our water infrastructure issues down the road. We need to address them now. The way I propose to do that is if we were going to do a flat fee, it would be a flat 65 cents a day per water meter. By doing that not only would we recoup the whole IDD money lost, but we would also gain an additional $1 million right now for infrastructure upon the sunset of the IDD.”

See:

https://www.havasunews.com/news/lake-havasu-city-council-candidates-detail-how-they-would-replace-idd-funding/article_feca98e4-ccaa-11ea-9784-3beba334ae80.html

No matter what her idea is it still means increased cost for all, not just the fixed income people who can't afford it.

I also wonder about her 29,000 statement be correct.

Objective Dialectic

Yeah $0.65 a day doesn't sound like much, but that's close to $20 per month in additional fees....

Objective Dialectic

Also Azul, her statement about 29,000 meters is absolutely incorrect. There are more than that (The City's Water Conservation Plan states as of April of 2019, there were 32,155 meters)

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.