Vernonia's voice. (Vernonia, OR) 2007-current, March 13, 2012, Page 6, Image 6

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    6
march13
in other words
2012
Vernonia’s Impending Water Rate Decision: A Personal Perspective
By Jim Tierney
households  with  different  economic  and  personal 
circumstance. Differing use patterns and sensitivity to 
 
As  described  in  a  previous  article,  Vernonia  cost inform each owner’s price sensitivity.   This creates 
has not systematically set aside funding to repair and  a zero-sum rate setting game between household types; 
replace its very valuable water and sewer infrastructure.  that is a better deal for one household type is likely to 
In addition, our water system has been relying on funds  be worse for another.
carried  over  from  previous  years  to  meet  operating   
Like many things in life, a middle ground for 
costs; all without a rate increase. Both the Public Works  utility rates makes the most sense. In this case, there are 
Committee  and  the  City  Council  have  acknowledged  two good reasons, one ethical and the other practical. 
that a significant rate increase must be imposed to keep  First,  public  utilities  are  virtually  impossible  to  live 
the  system  solvent.  Both  groups  also  believe  that  the  without.      This  fact  makes  the  health  club  model  an 
rate increase should include reconsideration of how our  unreasonable burden for low income households, large 
current charges are calculated. 
families  and  seniors  struggling  to  maintain  a  budget.  
 
Within both the Public Works Committee and  The  other  reason  to  adopt  the  middle  ground  is  that 
the City Council there is disagreement about how our  utility  systems  are  an  enterprise  and  can  lose  money. 
water  rates  should  be  structured.  The  disagreement  It is possible to structure rates to encourage too much 
falls  along  opposite  views  of  how  we  should  pay  conservation (reduction in use), making the pure price 
for  public  utility  services.  In  order  to  understand  the  per  unit  (gasoline  model)  too  risky  for  the  city.    If 
disagreement,  consider  two  other  common  household  too  much  conservation  is  triggered  it  hurts  the  utility 
expenditures  as  models  for  the  two  perspectives  systems bottom line. 
involved. The first model would be gasoline. You pay   
The  City  of  Vernonia  hired  the  Oregon 
the same price per gallon at the pump as everyone else.  Association  of  Water  Utilities  (OAWU)  to  help  us 
Now, imagine a health club membership. With health  develop our rate system. These experts informed us that 
clubs  you  pay  a  monthly  or  annual  fee  and  use  that  the water rate “sweet spot” is collecting 60 to 75% of 
club as often or as little as you care to with no change  system income as a base rate. In their experience, base 
in  cost. In a nutshell,  essential utility systems  (water,  rates in this range do not trigger excessive conservation.
electric and sewer) attempt to navigate a middle ground   
The  “health  club”  model  I  will  label  here  as 
between these two extremes.
the “Fixed Cost” view.  This idea suggests 
 
The capital-intensive nature of public utilities  that every user who connects to the system 
has  two  significant  real  world  impacts  which  policy  should pay an equal amount for the privilege 
makers  must  consider.  First,  it  leaves  utility  systems  of having the first drop of water or the first 
that  build  too  much  of  their  costs  into  the  per-unit  kilowatt  of  electricity  provided  to  their 
rate  making  them  vulnerable  to  a  downward  spiral  home or business. The essential assumption 
of  conservation  (reducing  the  units  used.)    Secondly,  here  is  that  all  users  benefit  equally  from 
communities  are  made  up  of  a  wide  variety  of  being  connected  and  should  therefore  pay 
the same for that privilege. In this 
view,  after  the  base  rate,  a  user 
Why not pay off your mortgage before
should pay the actual “wholesale” 
he heads off to college?
cost  to  produce  or  provide  that 
service, excluding that base rate which covers 
the shared “fixed costs”. This is essentially the 
model we use for our current water rates.
 
In  the  “gasoline”  model  all  users 
pay  strictly  on  a  “Consumption  Basis.”  For 
example, any homeowner using 4,000 gallons 
of water each month should pay twice as much 
as a homeowner using 2,000 gallons. You can 
substitute kilowatts of electricity or wastewater 
flowing  into  the  sewer.  The  concept  is  the 
same.
 
As  noted  above,  there  is  a 
corresponding,  but  different  practical 
U.S. BANK
problem  with  the  strict  adherence 
SMART REFINANCE
Pay off your home faster with a U.S. Bank Smart Refinance.
to  a  consumption  rate.  This  is  the 
the smart solution to being mortgage freeB A Smart Refinance from U.S. Bank.
% What’s
Refinance into a 15-year mortgage and you’ll save big on interest, build equity faster
potential  for  a  rate  “death  spiral.” At 
APR
and be mortgage free before you know it. With a U.S. Bank Smart Refinance, you’ll enjoy:
Fixed Rate up to 15 years
• No closing costs
• No points or fees
a  time  of  rate  increases,  consumers 
• Easy application process
• Free setup of bi-weekly payments
might  unexpectedly  make  dramatic 
Smart Refinance is only one of many mortgage refinance options that U.S. Bank offers.
Make a smart move and contact your local branch, usbank.com, or call 888-444-BANK
reductions  in  their  consumption,  as  a 
to discuss all of your refinancing options.
way  of  keeping  their  personal  costs 
Vernonia Branch
905 Bridge Street
constant.    This  leaves  even  fewer 
503-429-6271
consumers to share the increased cost 
usbank.com | 888-444-BANK (2265)
burden that triggered the rate increase 
in  the  first  place,  requiring  further 
4.25
rate increases.  As you can imagine, this can lead to an 
economic death spiral for the utility.
 
In most cases, cities balance these tensions by 
selecting base rates in the 60 to 75% range mentioned 
above.  This is considered safe because it protects the 
community system from the death spiral effect discussed 
earlier.  For  many  communities  this  safe  harbor  does 
not provide sufficient incentives for conservation and 
means that the rates have a “regressive” quality that is 
seen as hurting households occupied by elderly and low 
income  families.    Sometimes  these  communities  set 
rates using a “tiered” system which increases the cost 
per gallon as households use larger and larger quantities 
of  water.  These  tiered  systems  are  often  modified  to 
account  for  extra  water  usage  for  lawns  and  gardens. 
Sometimes  this  modification  reduces  the  charges  for 
such  summertime  usage.  Other  times  communities 
actually increase charges for the summertime in order 
to  create  a  disincentive.  This  is  often  done  in  drier 
climates where water shortages are chronic. The City 
Council has already rejected the idea of a tiered rate, a 
decision that I support.
 
Within  the  Public  Works  Committee  the  two 
poles  would  make  two  different  arguments  (among 
others.)  First,  one  side  would  say  that  users  who  use 
less than 2,000 gallons a month are getting “hosed,” to 
paraphrase one of the Committee’s members.  I fall into 
this camp.  The other perspective is concerned that the 
increased revenues needed to balance our budget will 
be  disproportionately  shouldered  by  the  larger  users 
of the system.  I fall into this camp as well – both in 
what I believe and in what I will have to pay. I have 
included  two  charts  with  this  article  that  prove  both 
of these points. The line graph shows that the average 
household using less than 2,000 gallons pays more than 
twice as much per gallon as the highest use households. 
At the same time, as shown by the bar graph, even the 
highest suggested base rate ($40), the 20% of users who 
continued on page 19
*
*4.25% fixed Annual Percentage Rate (APR) is available for 15-year first position home equity installment loans $40,000 to $250,000 with loan-to-value of 70% or less or 80% or less depending on market. U.S. Bank Package required. Higher
rates apply for higher LTV or other loan amount. Automatic payments required. Loan payment example: on a $40,000 loan for 180 months at 4.25% interest rate, monthly payments would be $300.91. No customer paid closing costs,
APR is 4.25%. Payment example does not include amounts for taxes and insurance premiums. The monthly payment obligation will be greater if taxes and insurance are included and an initial customer deposit may be required if an
escrow account for these items is established. Offer is subject to normal credit qualifications. Rates are subject to change. Property insurance is required. Consult your tax advisor regarding the deductibility of interest. Home Equity
loans and lines of credit are offered through U.S. Bank National Association ND. ©2011 U.S. Bancorp, U.S. Bank. Member FDIC
STOP
THE DROP
The Vernonia Senior
Center womld like yomr
donations... BUT they
mmst be left dmring
bmsiness homrs ONLY
Mon-Fri 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM
Please DO NOT leave
items omtside
For after hours drop-off please
contact Pauline 503-429-5810
VERNONIA
E
C
I
V
SER PAIR
& RE
Warranty on all parts and labor
Now offering
2 and 4 wheel 
alignments
58605 NEHALEM HWY. S.
Next to Storage, Too
503/706/9409