The County Council will consider a proposed water rate increase at the August 8th Council meeting. Do you have any feedback for the Council?

LA County Utility is putting it to us again. An 8% increase is being requested for potable water on top of the 16% increase in both Meter and Water usage over the past 5 years. Not only that, but the County is giving itself and businesses a break on the rates by applying usage tiers to residential users. The County and businesses will pay a flat rate, no matter how much they use. The residential customer will pay a higher rate for water usage over the 9000 gallon threshold and then more at the 15,000 gallon threshold. To give you an idea how much water you use with low flow equipment, 30 showers per month is about 750 gallons. A bath is about 50% more water than a 10 minute shower. Flushing a toilet twice per day is about 100 gallons per month. That doesn't account for watering the lawn, washing the dishes, etc.

Plus, the Utility folks like to use the $100,000 household income figure to minimize the impact of the rate increase. They say it amounts to 9% of the household income. Well, 9% of $100,000 is a big difference from 9% of a $50,000.

I think the County and businesses can share the water conservation efforts by sharing the tiered rates that the residential folks have to endure. They can also tie the increases to specific components of their work and not just 'We need a larger cash reserve'. With that logic, they can spend all the money they want for anything. No accountability.

My front yard is already gravel, I use a rain barrel, and I use water conservatively. I would like to keep my tress alive but an increase in the water rates would not help. Maybe the size of the golf course could be cut back and the savings on maintenance expenditures could go towards the Water Works project. Possibly the water rate increase could then be less.

There is an added extra cost when excess water is needed during summer months and pumps must be run during peak electricity demand periods in order to keep up with the water demand. These extra costs were the reason a tiered water rate was put in place several years ago. Tiered rates also encourage conserving precious water sources. Any increase that DPU requests are to pay for increased costs of operating and maintaining the system and either need to be approved or have county residents suffer outages if maintenance suffers do to budget issues.

I'm okay with a rate increase. We have got to stop using so much more water than our neighbors. Billing rates seem to be the best (maybe only) tool we have to steer behavior.

By living in high desert it is our duty to save water. Human being need reward and sometimes stick to follow the rules.
Why not to reward our citizen by diverting part of the rate increase for rebates for water efficient toilets and grass removal. This system work in other communities, it should work here as well.
Regards,
Walter Tuzel

Basing income for needed infrastructure on how much water is used, and then telling people to stop using so much water, makes no sense. The DPU needs to come up with a real world billing system and stop talking out both sides of their mouths.

As a single parent living on a fixed income, an increase in water rates will impact me substantially. I use portable swamp coolers to cool our home in the summer and I use humidifiers to replace moisture in the air in the winter to compensate the effects of the forced air heat.

All around Los Alamos and White Rock dead trees and vegetation are prevalent. Increasing water rates will only worsen the amount of dead trees, as residents are unable to afford to water them.

Please reconsider the water rate increase. Also, consider adding a water station near each Library where residents and tourists can fill up on clean drinking water.

Given that the County cannot afford it's own water rates, the idea of raising them seems irresponsible. LAC left the cemetery looking terrible for the month of June due to little water and no mowing. When questioned LAC responded it was end of FY and they were over budget. Some of our schools have playgrounds unsuitable for animals due to water issues. Since LAC apparently charges itself for water the rate increase seems questionable. Also Los Alamos has historically been a beautiful and lush community with nice lawns and green trees. I suspect this disincentive to water will result in front yards of rocks and dead trees. I am opposed to this increase.