Dear Editor:
The desire to get the water meter rates right the first time is a noble one.
Reality is I suspect there will be some adjustments made after water meter billing is implemented.
A couple of things to consider, Water for the most part is free. What we pay for is the infrastructure to get it to where it is needed.
With the current system the local government uses, flat rate billing, it is easy to implement as the local government knows what the budget is to maintain the water infrastructure and that figure is more or less divided by the number of connections.
When the billing using water meters comes into effect, again the budget to maintain the water system is taken into account but to set an equatible metering rate is a tough one.
In Las Vegas, they found that after going to meters, the population reigned in their water consumption, a good thing, but then the revenue to maintain the system had shortfalls, a bad thing as pipes, pumps and valves do wear out.
Adjustments had to be made and there was some flack from the population, but now there is monies available to maintain the system.
The implementation of water meters is not a tax.
Is there a more equatible way for paying what you use say in a condo and not subsidize households that need or want to water their lawns?
In Las Vegas, I think it was more than 60 per cent of the water use was residential use, and believe it or not that statistic is similar to the Okanagan water basin.
A base rate for personal use, then paying for metered water after an allotted amount is considered the most equitable method to pay for water and help in the conserving the finite resource.
Chris Blann
Summerland
