Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
A barge that serves as the working platform for a Vegas Tunnel Constructors crew is shown during construction of the the Southern Nevada Water Authority’s “third straw” at Lake Mead Tuesday, May 10, 2011. The crew is blasting a 60-foot shaft for the third straw intake tower.
Tuesday, Dec. 6, 2011 | 2 a.m.
Related
Sun Archives
Map of Lake Mead National Recreation Area
Lake Mead National Recreation Area
601 Nevada Way, Boulder City
Next spring, water bills will rise to help pay the Southern Nevada Water Authority’s mounting debt used to fund some $3.3 billion in pumps, pipes and intakes installed over the past several years.
The fee, which comes on top of other recent increases, is needed because the old way of paying off water utility debt — connection fees paid by developers — has dried up in the recession. Consider that in fiscal year 2005-06, the Water Authority collected about $188 million in connection fees. This year, connection fees will total $11 million.
Given those numbers, few dispute the need for the increase. The debate will instead focus on the shape the fee increase takes.
Three proposals are being dissected by financial consultants Hobbs, Ong & Associates. The models worked up by the firm are dizzying in their complexity and numerous variables — including categories of water meters (there are 29); properties’ yearly and/or average monthly water usage; the impact of fee increases on business and homeowners; and how large an increase should be allowed.
Guy Hobbs, of the consulting firm, said the three fee options could be:
• a flat rate paid by all water users based on meter sizes — some homes, for instance, are connected to the water system with 5/8ths-inch pipes while others have 1-inch pipes;
• a variable rate-based water use;
• or a combination of the two.
No matter which fee is selected, there are bound to be unhappy ratepayers.
Here’s one potential issue: Assume a flat-rate increase of, say, $5 for like-metered homes. A residence that pays $150 a month for water would see only a 3 percent increase in its bill, while a residence that pays $12 a month would see a 42 percent increase.
A variable rate might be fairer to customers, but wouldn’t be as reliable a source of revenue for the Water Authority.
Here’s why: If, for example, the new fee is a certain amount per 1,000 gallons of water, a household using 10,000 gallons a month could cut back its water use to 9,000 gallons a month and lower its monthly bill, yielding less money for the Water Authority’s debt payments.
For the Water Authority, the flat rate — likely to be called a “reliability” charge — seems to be the better option because, fair or not, it is less likely to fluctuate.
The need for revenue is quickly growing. Early next year, the authority is expected to take on another $330 million in debt to finish a $700 million third “straw” — a deep intake tunnel into Lake Mead — begun a few years ago because of fears the current drought would lower lake levels to the point that the current intakes would stop functioning.
Meanwhile, the Water Authority’s annual debt payments keep increasing. They are expected to rise from $70 million in 2012 to $150 million in 2016.
Clark County Commissioner Steve Sisolak
When the fee increase takes effect, it will come on top of other rate increases homeowners and businesses have seen over the past three years. Southern Nevada’s various water districts — such as the Las Vegas Valley Water District, Henderson’s water utility or North Las Vegas’ — have raised rates a few times. In some instances, the increases were to pass along higher costs from the Water Authority, which acts as Southern Nevada’s water wholesaler. The individual districts and municipalities purchase that wholesale water, then charge customers for its use.
Steve Sisolak, Clark County commissioner and Water Authority board member, said he thinks the fee increase will either be the flat rate or variable rate, not a combination.
“It’s a ... huge potential problem,” he said. “And it has to be done fast.”
Sisolak, one of three county commissioners on the Water Authority board, demanded a fee study be done months ago. He said he wanted residents to be forewarned about upcoming increases because of the Water Authority’s request to finance more debt for the third straw.
Commissioner Tom Collins, also a Water Authority board member, said it’s too early to decide which of the fee proposals is best. In January, consultants will present payment models that will make the options clearer.
“You can’t do something until you have the tools on the table, and all the tools haven’t been presented yet,” he said. “We’ll be a little more concrete in January.”
What is the current level of Lake Meade and Powell these days?
http://lakemead.water-data.com/
The bosses at the Water District, which levies the charges, are pushing to have a general fee increase that everyone will pay, regardless of income or how much water people actually use. They are afraid that increasing charges for high-volume users will lead to conservation. Horrors!
We can spur both conservation (making hugely expensive projects unnecessary and saving public dollars) and protect people on limited and fixed incomes by increasing the charges for high-volume users. Unfortunately, that would include the bosses at the Water District.
Water is the most precious commodity in a desert community and for way too long it has been underpriced in the LV Valley. That said, any price increases should not penalize those who conserve or have low water use. Let the rates impact the most those who use the most water.
Also, the SNWA should immediately be told by its governing board to suspend pursuing the fiscally disasterous $15.5 BILLION pipeline and in-state groundwater development project and instead to study and report back to the board and the public the costs of other more enduring and less expensive in the long term options.
The money currently being spent on the pipeline would go a long way in paying for the needed third straw.
Surprise! Can't say you weren't warned... And they'll be plenty more fee increases, tax increases, and inflation. Matter of fact for the next decade that's all you'll see!
Just another reason why I don't work... I'm going to play, have fun working class. Please keep this system going though as without this system, I would have to work.
I'm disappointed to read that a flat rate fee might be considered a better option for residents of Southern Nevada based on the fact that otherwise residents would conserve their water usage even more, which would make it difficult to pay down debt. The more conservation of water, the better--no matter what SNWA's debt is. I hope that the variable based fee on usage will be selected over a flat rate because it will help promote conservation.
Perhaps put a cap on how much low income households need to pay if the added cost will higher than what they can afford...
What's neat is that Las Vegans have curbed their water use **dramatically** over the past several years, despite the population going up hundreds of thousands of people. The USGS was commenting how much progress has been made and sort of listed the numbers in Vegas as a model for other regions in drought. So it's not all doom and gloom!
Here in California, a lot of homes built from the 1960's to the 1990's have a flat water rate (no meter), based on lot size. Regardless of use, a typical residence pays about $70+ a month. I did a little research and put in a request to California Water Service (similar to Vegas Valley Water District) and had a meter installed. In the 3 years since, my highest water bill was $34, and they average $20-$22 a month. Yes, we do conserve where we can, my lawn is decent, but will never be mistaken for pebble beach, since most shower water goes straight down the drain, we turn it on at less than full blast, etc. The dirty little secret here is getting out. The flat rate is very expensive for the average household. I imagine as more people switch, rates will rise to cover costs, but in the meantime, I'm saving over $500 a year. Are there any "flat rate" areas in Las Vegas?
Global warming looks to be refilling the lake quite nicely.
Instead of raising rates on one of the hardest hit areas in the country not to mention one of the smallest users of the Colorado River water "Las Vegas" they should be raising rates on the biggest and most wasteful users "California."
Just wait until they start the pipeline. Hopefully the courts will never allow it to be built.
Gee, I wonder how many salary raises officers at SNWA have had in the last ten years?
Citizens are forever directed to focus myopically, when it truly behooves us to view the whole BIG picture of SNWA's finances. This public utility monopoly is holding residents hostage.
Blessings and Peace,
Star
The problem in Las Vegas has and always will be the well to do passing down to the lower class all fee increases. Water & Elect etc. Large comp, casinos have all been but exempt to these fees. With the foreclosures the way they are, the lower class who are not working and the hardest hit cannot afford any more rate increases. It's time to balance the usage fees like other communities.
What If casino's were to put a water fee of $2 per room per night.
It's time for SNWA to release and appropriately charge for water used by Casinos and Companies.
How many more millions would be saved if the water authority skipped the corporate bonus payouts of their employees for a year.
How many more millions would be saved by construction and service companies that pull up to a hydrant and fill their trucks, with no enforcement from SNWA or the local police.
It's time to clean up these and other SNWA blind eye's and stop going after the local residence as the easy way out. If everyone was paying their fair share then I would have no problem paying my fair share. Politicians are in bed with all the above issues so in the end it will fall onto the Residential rate payers to pay.
SNWA has no long term plan to bring in water from the endless supply of the Ocean. This stabilization of the water supply would work against SNWA by not being able to claim emergency drought water issues. Thus would not be able get future rate increases.
It's time for a civilian oversight of the SNWA that do not take orders from SNWA or Politicians or casinos. The stabilization of the water supply is critical and yet you do not hear any plans to fix it. Oh I forgot about the pipeline from Northern Nevada which is also based on an unstable water supply. So if that goes bad they can claim another water emergency.
Desalination plants based at the Ocean can feed into Lake Mead and stabilize the water supply. Once stabilized LVWA can sell the excess water to Utah, Southern California, Arizona or Mexico to reduce the Rate Payers costs. All you hear is the same need for emergency rate increases that never go away and become part of the current structure so they can continue extracting money from the rate payers without any end in sight. SNWA needs to get a reality check asap.