Dubai Debt Issues Push Stocks Down
Family Gets Early Christmas Gift From Ellen DeGeneres
Photos of D Train Murder Depict Bloody Panic
Stuy Pyro Leaves Notes In Hieroglyphics
Mayor: Sex Trafficking Victims, Please Speak Up
The NYC Water Board is expected to vote today to approve a 12.9% water rate hike. But wait, didn't they raise the prices? It certainly feels that way—this is the third double-digit rate hike in a row; the rate last went up 11.5% in 2007. Of course, the DEP had orginally proposed a 14% rate hike—which would raise an average single-family home's fees from $799 to $911 a year—so maybe we're getting off easy? According to the Daily News, the DEP was able to trim the rate hike from 14% to 12.9% because fuel costs are falling, but officials say the increase is still necessary because of 5% budget cuts the city is forcing on agencies. Councilman David Weprin (D-Queens) says, "Enough is enough. These water rate hikes have amounted to nothing more than a backdoor property tax increase." And in a statement, city Comptroller William Thompson grouses, "A 12.9 percent water rate hike is still outrageous. This reduction is a drop in the bucket and simply too little, too late... As I’ve shown, these charges are gouging New York City families and small businesses precisely at a time when they can least afford it."
Double-Digit Water Rate Hike to Start July 1
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebookComments (15) [rss]
Post a comment (Comment Policy)
Tips
Newsmap
Contribute
Latest Tip:
Symphonic rock comes to Manhattan in December! Seann Branchfield and the Unnamed Band performing De
[more]
Gotta love the outrage.
If your family is using $800 worth of water, you can seriously cut back. Try! At my house we don't use half that, and my husband is a wasteful idiot.
But yes, this increase is very unfair. This article doesn't mention it but previously it was reported that they needed to hike the rate because people cut back on usage after the last hike. Um, does that suggest anything to anyone? The people running this thing are morons.
Or, it suggests that there are certain fixed costs that are not related to usage. You still have to pay people to monitor the system, regardless of the volume moved.
The reality is likely some combination of the two.
An individual may cut his or her water usage but that doesn't change by much what the city pays to provide that service and maintain the system. The water and sewer systems are pretty much entirely one big fixed cost.
We don't pay for the water itself -- the water falls from the sky. We pay for the reservoirs, dams, tunnels, aqueducts, valves, fire hydrants, water mains, manhole covers, watershed protection programs, etc. There's a small flexible cost for chemicals used to treat the water, but that's about it.
Conservation affects the sewage ends of things a bit more because it takes more energy and chemicals to treat sewage. But even on that end what we're really paying for are sewers, manhole covers, catch basins, valves, regulators, tide gates, sewage treatment plants, etc.
Typical Giants fan. Knows nothing about pay for performance and alot about shit.
And Superbowls.
I do not have a comeback.
Must be a Jets fan.
(ooooooooohhhh, piling on, defense, 15 yards)
water board the Water Board, anyone?
Water has always been overrated. Nobody needs to conserve water being that over 95% of the world is water.
What I love is they had a drop in usage, but need to raise rates to cover "fixed costs". How about firing some of those fixed costs or at least early retirement.
Great, this will give landlords another excuse to raise rents. At least oil prices are staying somewhat stable.
Water rates are still incredibly low compared to many other cities. If you buy a cup of coffee for $1 every day on your way to work, that's $2,600. $900/year is cheap.
Nice math
Maybe there's 2600 days in the year on JUPITER, but here on earth we've only got 365
No, it's just that Dahlia T. has 7 jobs. And thus needs a lot of coffee just to stay awake.