Philip Mcleod

The McLeod Report - London, Ontario

A regular commentary on civic affairs in London, Canada by journalist Philip McLeod.

Subscribe, It's Free

Anti-Spam Q: Is fire hot or cold?
Name:
Email:

Local Weather

London, Canada

Current Conditions:
Clear
13oC
Clear
Wind Direction Degree: 20
Precip: 0.0 mm

Recent Entries

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 19, 2013

Follow Me On

What is clean water worth?

BLOG #720: At a town hall meeting in early October city officials will be asking Londoners this question: What value do you place on our water? The answers will help design a new funding model to ensure our water and sewer utilities are able to achieve and maintain fully-funded operation.

Monday, Sept. 10, 2012 – London

What value do you place on London’s water?

That’s the question city officials will be asking in early October, in part to help sell you on the idea of a new funding model for the fresh, clean ‘essence of life’ delivered to the taps in your home 24 hours day.

London is currently trying to balance competing interests against the long-term requirement to put the municipal water and sewer utilities on a fully-funded basis – in other words, organizations that can pay all of their costs including expansion, repair and replacement.

The list of those competing interests, from a report prepared for this afternoon’s civic works committee meeting, will give you some idea of the complexity of the problem. They include “the single parent receiving social assistance and raising three kids in a rented apartment; the retired couple spending four months in sunny Florida; the homeowner with pool and a hot tub; the business community; health care organizations, universities and colleges; large industries such as those in the business of producing food and beverages; and future companies that will set up shop in London.

They all have two things in common: One, all are at the other end of the city’s network of 4,300 km. of pipes that pump water from Lake Huron or Lake Erie; and two, all want fresh water to be available whenever they turn on the taps.

There are big differences, of course. An industrial customer such as Labatt Brewery uses millions of litres but operates in a business where a penny plus on the rate can be the difference between jobs here or somewhere else. The Snowbirds use nothing for four months but insist the water be waiting whenever they return.

“Customers must be prepared to pay the appropriate price for the value and the delivery of (water) services,” says the report, prepared by Roland Welker, manager of water engineering. “A properly designed funding model will balance the objectives and principles across all customer groups and ensure that everyone pays their fair share.”

Ah, there’s the rub – pay a fair share.

Of late, water and sewer customers en masse have been disinclined to pay, period. As the city pushes water and rates every higher in order to reach the fully-funded basis ordered by the provincial government users at all levels have been reducing consumption, wrecking the financial models.

Water and sewer utilities are a big business, with total annual revenues of $130 million. The current rate structure for water was established 22 years ago, that for sewer 15 years ago.

The current rate structure is a single change based on the amount of water you use. Use less, pay less – proportionately anyway. Over the past 24 years consumption has fallen almost 50 per cent while the population has grown by 20 per cent.

So the answer, at least say city officials, is a rate structure with two separate components. Every residence would pay a fixed charge to cover hardware costs. The second component would be a variable rate based on per cubic metre consumption of water.

Within the model are some tweaks and alternatives – such as subsidies for the less fortunate or the large users – that will be the subject of a town hall meeting Oct. 2.

“Introducing and implementing a new funding model for water and sewer services will require a new understanding of the value of water,” the report says. “It is not about cost, it is not about price, it is about value – health and safety is maintained through constant monitoring and testing of the system, quality of life is enhanced by providing service on demand to residents and businesses, promoting economic development through a robust and reliable system, and fire protection that keeps insurance rates low for all customers.”

So, what’s that worth to you? As much, say, as your telephone or your cellphone or your cable system or your internet?

TOWN HALL MEETING

A town hall meeting to discuss a new funding model for London’s water and sewer systems will be held Tuesday, Oct. 2, 4 – 6 p.m., Wolf Performance Hall, Central Library, 251 Dundas St. Guest speaker Bob McDonald, host of CBC’s Quirks and Quarks. Free admission. Information This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or phone Paula 519-661-2500 (ex. 7028).

Comments   

 
#11 Tis a JokeFed Up 2012-09-28 00:18
Hey folks, you need to open your eyes and look beyond London. Last year the London Free Press ran a large article about the many types of polution enjoyed by Londoners. Did you miss it, seems that on most days the air pollution in London is much Greater than that big city to the East - that would be Toronto. Now did youu read about the ground pollution, the water pollution. How about the largest garbage dump opening up just east of Ingersoll, did you think about the probles that will cause, what about the sources of pollution - ground, air and water from the Chemical Valley? Open your eyes and get the **** out of London and S.W. Ontario.
Quote
 
 
#10 Sorry about extra wordKallie Miller 2012-09-10 21:48
delete "along" in second last line in previous emai.
Quote
 
 
#9 How about clean and safe water firstKallie Miller 2012-09-10 21:45
The city doesn’t need to waste our money on a Town Hall and on what I think is an expensive speaker whose goal is to sweet talk us into valuing our water so much that we won’t mind paying more for it. The city lies about safe water for Julian’s children. It isn’t even safe for him. According to a July, 2012 Harvard study, the fluoridated water is lowering his IQ as he drinks it and will do the same for his children if London is still fluoridating with a toxic waste which has no toxicology studies or safety tests in tap water. Besides that the toxic waste,HFSA, used to fluoridate is far from clean with its contaminants of arsenic, lead, mercury, radio nuclides and more. We cannot trust this city council to act in our best interests. Ten council members voted to keep the toxic waste in the water even though Councillor Baechler told them she could not find toxicology studies along as did Safe Water London. London’s water is far from safe and clean.
Quote
 
 
+1 #8 RE: What is clean water worth?derrick mcburney 2012-09-10 20:33
the city conntacted some of us citzens and other groups to work on this. people will be shocked by how litte some ici's and apartment complexes over a 100 units pay.
Quote
 
 
#7 RE: What is clean water worth?Gord Drimmie 2012-09-10 15:30
It's not rocket science to know that excessive price increases result in less usage.....which reduces overall revenue....nece ssitating more price increases....wh ich reduces usage? It's simple economics. There should be a higher "fixed" price....which would cover the ongoing costs that would be incurred with zero usage; and a variable charge for water that covers the costs of usage. And let's not try and rebuild the entire sewer system in a ten year period - it's not practical, it's not affordable, and it's not reasonable. It's an admirable objective but an objective that only Government, with its "unlimited" tax and rate authority, would undertake. A public meeting is just anoter waste of everyone's time. And besides, if our elected officials can't make a decision without another public meeting, maybe we need some different elected officials.
Quote
 
 
+2 #6 An EmbarrassmentThom McClenaghan 2012-09-10 14:11
At last count The City of London is the second largest polluter of the Great Lakes Basin in the Province of Ontario through discharges of untreated sewage from our pollution control plants. This results from the neglect of previous councils to properly maintain the infrastructure of this city. Will this problem ever be solved? We need solutions not prevarication and excuses.
Quote
 
 
+1 #5 Water and Sewer discharge costsBarbara Cornish 2012-09-10 13:26
My beef with the current sewer charges is this. I have a deep lot, 150 feet, and over time I have put in gardens. My last bill, because of the hot summer, I used $40.00 in water. I don't mind paying that, I used it, but what gripes me with a concurrent charge of the same amount for sewer discharge when this watter went into my back yard gardens, not the sewer. I believe this sewer discharge charge should be examined and a new way of watering in the summer set in place. One can see my water rates through the winter and spring and pretty consistent, however, because of hotter summers my water usage bumps up in the summer. As a senior I am finding my water and hydro bills to be a constant worry. I guess the only recourse will soon be to ripe out all my gardens. What quality of life is that without Mother Nature's beautifying effect after a long cold winter?
Quote
 
 
+1 #4 Use LessUnder the Weather 2012-09-10 13:10
My billing records are evidence that the less I use the more I pay. I'M CONFUSED. I'm a social assistance recipient. I receive a set amount of money to cover shelter costs, which includes rent or mortgage, taxes, insurance and necessary utilities. After my bills are paid there's not much left for groceries, transportation and clothing. I have never had a vacation, and if weren't for the free festivals I wouldn't even be able to enjoy a stay-cation. Places like Storybook Gardens and EastPark are beyond my means, the good will thrift shop charges more money for a 2nd-hand t-shirt then some department stores do for new ones. If I'm to continue a meaningful existence participating in my community I need a raise in my vacation pay.
Quote
 
 
+2 #3 Really?Bonni Dennison 2012-09-10 12:09
I understand the need (or maybe desire) to look at water pricing...but asking people how much they value their water is a waste of time. If people think that you will charge more if they value it more, then many will say they don't value...just to avoid cost increases. Most people know that water is critical to life --- does that mean it should cost more? Maybe that means it should be free to everyone except businesses who make money from using it. Interesting that these same city officials waste money on fluoride and the expensive maintenance of a system that is poisoning residents who can't afford to take it out of their water. Definitely time for some new city officials.
Quote
 
 
+1 #2 future citizenShirley 2012-09-10 04:08
A reminder that statistically, it can be shown that there are more single person dwellings than previously. Perhaps this skews the numbers the water people would like to see. Is there not more income from 4 separate single person billings, as against one dwelling of 4 persons? Perhaps not. As a single dwelling person, I can correct my water wastage. Perhaps too, since there is less industry than in the past, this could be another reason for less water consumption--a major reason. But....never let the water system be owned by private industry, which by its nature has to be profit driven, large profits driven. There are many examples in the world of the disastrous results of this choice.
Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh