Category Archives: water

Breaking Down The Water Bill

Posted on by
2

From press release:

Better Government Richmond, a citizen advocacy organization, is pleased to announce the release of a new video about the City of Richmond Water Utility Charges and Rates. Better Government members produced this video in order to inform the public about the Mayor’s proposed plan that is under review by City Council. Better Government mentioned a study of the water utility by paid consultants as one of its top issues in its first press release in February.

The 9-minute video includes information regarding the consultants’ study as well as an explanation of charges on a sample City of Richmond utility bill. It has been made available online at Vimeo.com as well as on Better Government Richmond’s website and Facebook page. Supporters are asked to share with their neighbors and contacts.

The Vimeo.com url is http://vimeo.com/64618134

See also:

www.bg-us.org
www.facebook.com/BetterGovernmentRichmond

Facts About the Mayor’s Proposed Water Rate Change

Posted on by
5

Please consider and share the following as City Council goes over the budget.

FACT SHEET: Richmond’s proposed $26.11 monthly water/sewer service charge

At $26.11, Richmond’s minimum monthly water/sewer service charge would still be one of the highest in the nation. It is a burden for every senior citizen getting by on Social Security and every other low income resident of the city to pay $313 annually just to be connected to the water supply.

1450 persons have signed a petition asking that Richmond reduce the minimum monthly service charge to $15 per month, which is line with other localities.

The city is using the utilities as a “cash cow” for the city’s general fund. Of the $12 million annually paid by the water and sewer utilities into the city’s general fund, $3 million is paid in lieu of FEDERAL INCOME TAXES, which no business pays to the city. Every customer’s monthly service charge could be reduced $4 each month if the payment in lieu of FEDERAL INCOME TAXES was removed.

Henrico’s service charge is about half of Richmond’s and Henrico gives a discount to those who use 3 or less units of water volume.

Water is a necessity that no one can do without. This is the most regressive means possible to fund the city through an outrageous service charge on this necessity. The city residents own the utility, which should provide an affordable base price for water service to those willing to conserve water.

The city’s water rate structure provides little financial incentive to conserve water because the large service charge is the same even if the customer uses little water.

In Norfolk, the minimum monthly service charge is $1; everyone’s bill is in proportion to the amount of water used.

The minimum water/sewer service charges are not even shown on the bill, so most residents are not aware that they are paying a high monthly service charge — even if they use no water.

If Richmond had fair water rates that provided a financial incentive to conserve water, there would be less need for more chemicals and water treatment facilities. Fewer pollutants would be released downstream. The city would be better prepared for periodic drought conditions.

By the way you can see from our list that the city’s proposed $26.11 base water/sewer service charge is still higher than most cities:

Henrico: $16.27
Chesterfield: $22.16
Norfolk: $1.00
Charlottesville: $8.00
Petersburg: $13.90
Hopewell: $25.39
Alexandria: $18.20
Roanoke: $20.75
Washington DC: $3.86
Charlotte: $4.92
Greensboro: $3.04
Raleigh: $5.81
Columbia,SC: $11.01
Macon,GA $15.75
Tallahassee,FL $24.86
Pittsburg: $16.59 (includes first 1000 gallons)
Knoxville: $24.75 (includes first 1,500 gallons)
Memphis: $10.82
Louisville Ky: $21.27
Little Rock AR: $20.72
Oklahoma City: $13.03
Kansas City Mo: $22.30
Milwaukee: $9.65
Lincoln Ne: $4.92
Bismarck ND: $12.20
Helena,MT: $6.97
New York City: $12.90 (includes 4 ccf)
New Orleans: $15.65
Phoenix: $5.36
Albuquerque: $15.32
Dallas: $8.30
San Francisco: $7.90
Atlanta: $13.12
Seattle: $23.93

“The last public bath in the city”

Posted on by
3

From a neighbor:

There is an interesting photo in the Times Dispatch today of the Grace Arents public baths on the 500 block of Belvidere.

Click here for photo.

Caption: In May 1952, the Richmond City Council ended a longtime city service: the Grace Arents public baths, in the 500 block of South Belvidere Street. As a Times-Dispatch story noted: “The last public bath in the city … finally bowed to old age and the home bathtub and shower.” Arents, who lived from 1848 to 1926, was a local philanthropist and niece of Lewis Ginter.

New Start Up: RVA Water Services

Posted on by
1

Oregon Hill resident Nolen Blackwood has started a new venture called RVA Water Services.

RVA Water Services is a water based energy efficiency company focused on providing a water and sewer usage reduction program for multi-family properties by analyzing current usage and installing effective and efficient fixtures. These fixtures will be installed at no cost to the current owners with water and sewer charge savings split between owner and RVA Water Services over a fixed term. This model allows the owner to see positive cash flow from the beginning of the project and not requiring any capital outlay. Current technology allows for efficient fixtures to greatly outperform older products.
RVA Water Services is a member of Energy Star Portfolio Manager Program.

One of the catalysts is the proposal by the Mayor for Richmond’s water utility to switch to a conservation rate structure.

Blackwood has also asked neighborhood residents to help RVA Water Works win the 2013 i.e.* Start-Up Competition. Voting began yesterday and people can vote once per day for the next two days. RVA Water Works is listed under the Energy and Green Tech or you can follow the link to vote:

http://www.ie-rva.org/contest/start-up-competition-2013/rva-water-services/

Sierra Club Responds To Water Rate Budget Debate

Posted on by
6

Today the Sierra Club Falls of the James group released the following statement in response to Mayor Jones’ announcement earlier this month:

Sierra Club Declares Only “A Partial Victory” On Richmond Water Rates and Calls For More Reform

The Sierra Club Falls of the James group’s Executive Committee listened to Mayor Dwight C. Jones’ budget announcement from last week that calls for reducing the City of Richmond’s water service fee. We were pleased to hear the Mayor refer to it as an important conservation issue that deserves immediate attention. By almost halving the residential base charge from $49 a month to $26 a month, and making sure that higher users pay more for their use, water utility reformers can declare a partial victory as the City moves to a ‘conservation rate’ structure. We do appreciate this step forward.

At the same time, the creation of a fund for helping low income residents with water bills needs more examination. While the Sierra Club is not against assistance for low-income residents, there is concern that this measure will complicate the overall rate structure and add more bureaucracy to the public water utility. Instead of financial assistance for water customers, the DPU would be wiser to offer a substantial discounted volume rate like Henrico for those customers who use 3 ccf or less of water/month. This would have a twin aim of setting a conservation goal for its customers and providing an affordable water bill for those willing to conserve water.

If the City were going to create this additional assistance program, then it would be wise to consider additional conservation measures. For example, the Sierra Club notes and agrees with Councilperson Parker Agelasto’s suggestion to use a portion of the assistance program’s funds for a new appliance rebate program, low flow adaption kits, as well as other conservation incentives. Other cities fund programs like this to help their citizens modernize and conserve their water resources and make them more self-resilient.

At this juncture, we urge Richmond citizens to listen and follow the budget debate carefully. It has been noted already that, despite the proposed reduction in the base rate, the rise in volumetric rates may mean increased overall bills for residents in the future and more revenue from the sale of a basic necessity. We do not believe that the water utility has shown justification for the relatively high base rate. The Mayor’s proposal is not revenue neutral: with the proposed higher volume rate, the base rate could be reduced to $20/month and, even a 10% drop in water use, still be revenue neutral. The DPU’s Payment-In-Lieu-Of-Taxes (PILOT) demands scrutiny because the base service charge could be reduced further if the DPU is not paying more than required into the general fund. There still exists the glaring differences in residential water prices between the City and the surrounding counties, which may in effect be encouraging suburban sprawl.

In short, despite the Mayor’s positive step, we expect that water rate reformers may have some very good reasons for calling for further reform. Again, Mayor Jones deserves credit for his conservation record, which includes the establishment of RVA Green, the City’s first sustainability plan. That said, we would be remiss on this subject if we did not call for further action.

What’s That Number, Part 2

Posted on by
6

Well, the number did not come forward this month, but thankfully, reporter Robert Zullo is following the issue. From the Times Dispatch:

Advocates for lower Richmond water and sewer charges have thus far been stonewalled by the city administration in attempts to obtain a consultant’s study that will be central to the utility rates the mayor will propose this month as part of the city budget.
The city’s Public Utilities Department has denied a Freedom of Information Act request from Charles Pool, an Oregon Hill resident who is among a chorus of city utility customers calling for lower base charges for water and wastewater, for the report by Raftelis Financial Consultants.
….
Before drinking a single drop of water or flushing a toilet, Richmond’s water and wastewater customers pay $49.40 a month, the highest base charge in the area and, some argue, higher than most municipalities in the country. The water, wastewater and gas utilities, after covering their own operating expenses, will contribute an estimated $21.5 million this year to the city’s general fund in the form of a payment-in-lieu-of-taxes, a provision of the city charter that critics say subsidizes city government on the backs of utility customers.
….
The study’s recommendations will be included in the budget the mayor is scheduled to present to the council March 12. And though the council won’t vote on the final budget until May, Bedell argued that once the rates make it into the mayor’s budget, they’ll be more difficult for council members to alter. The rate discussion, he said, should be conducted with the council and public.
“It’s like all the proposals the city tries to push through,” Bedell said, citing the new city jail and Washington Redskins training camp now under construction. “I think their whole philosophy is … hold back as much as you can and spring it on them on the last minute.”

Oregon Hill resident Charles Pool has been bringing this issue for over five years now. Will 2013 mark a turning point?

What’s That Number?

Posted on by
9

Soon the City’s Dept. of Utilities will most likely announce recommendations towards a reduction in the $49 minimum monthly charge to ratepayers for water and wastewater service. The big question is what will that number be?

The expectation is that the planned reduction will be a little less than 20% of the total monthly minimum charge and there will be a new charity rate created for poorer residents who have trouble for paying their utility bills.

It would be easy for the citizens who have petitioned for water rate reform to declare victory and enjoy the hope that bills might be slightly less in the future for all Richmond households.

But, when the history and big picture are considered, they would be wise to not do that and stand behind their stated request- that Mayor Jones and Richmond City Council take immediate steps to lower the minimum monthly charge for water and sewer service to $15 per month, while raising the cost per CCF of water in line with the neighboring counties. There needs to be a change in the volume rate structure change to reward conservation with the first 5 ccf of water/sewer service at a lower rate, and with a premium volume rate for water/sewer over 5 ccf of volume.

My best guess is that City officials will propose a token drop in the service charge along with a large increase in the volume charge that more than makes up for the token decrease in the service charge. They quietly claim that lowering charges too much will create “a hole in their budget”. The reality is that the City can receive the same total revenue from its water works by slashing the minimum monthly service charge to equal that of Henrico’s (which it sells water to!) and instead charging a premium for customers who use more. In other words, make it progressive instead of regressive.

Also, keep in mind that the city paid $200,000 to hire a consultant to examine Richmond’s outrageous water/sewer rates (although reformers said that was not necessary). Despite requests, the consultants have not met with reform activists. In addition, there has been difficulty with getting access to the information given to the utility rate study consultant. The DPU office recently told a citizen that the information will not be put on the city’s web server unless the city receives $287.17 from the citizen.

The utility rates and service charges affect almost all residents and businesses in the city. It is sure to be an important issue during the budget review process (which looks to be extra rushed this year). It would help the Mayor and City Council if the public feels confident that all important information is being freely shared. This speaks to many of the open government concerns raised by activists. In other words, if Richmond citizens want to be treated fairly by the government and utilities that they own, they need to keep the big picture in mind.