Ottawa's new water rate structure has a few leaks

on .

Erwin Dreessen, Ottawa Citizen

Four things stand out after the City of Ottawa’s environment committee unanimously approved a new water, wastewater and stormwater fee structure last Tuesday.

1. The very low water user will get shafted. “Kim, from Westboro,” as she is named in the staff documents, who uses just five cubic metres of water a month (compared to an average of 16 c/m per household), will see her bill go up from $20 a month to $33.

She may live in a tiny house, be away often, be rich or poor, but she cannot be happy with that change. If low water usage was a lifestyle choice, she no longer has an incentive to save water. The proposed rate structure includes some measures to attenuate the effect on low users of introducing a fixed charge; without them the impact would be even worse. But the harsh impact remains, and not just for Kim.

The staff report admits that “single detached homes that consume less than 12 cubic metres per month will see an increase in their water bill of between $3 to $13 per month due to the impact of the fixed charge.”

This should be corrected. Making the first six c/m free for everybody and recalibrating the rates should do it.

2. It now appears widely recognized that, back in 2001, city council made a mistake when it removed the cost of maintaining rural road ditches and culverts from the property tax side and had it funded by the water rate-supported budget. It would seem straightforward to correct that error but ho! – without actually increasing the tax-based budget, that would come at the expense of the current rural road maintenance budget, which is already under duress.

This is a vivid illustration of why an inflexible cap of a two-per-cent property-tax increase is bad policy. There should be exceptions.  Errors should be corrected. We’re talking about $2.6 million that now must be funnelled to the roads budget through the back door.

Ottawa's low-volume water users surprisingly quiet over rate change

on .

Under proposed water rate change, light users are facing a heavy increase

By Joanne Chianello, CBC News

Joanne Chianello is a journalist with CBC Ottawa. She came to the CBC after a 20-year career at the Ottawa Citizen, where she was city hall bureau chief, city affairs columnist and the city editor. But not all at the same time. You can email her at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or tweet her at @jchianello.

Of the 10 members of the public to speak at Tuesday's environment committee on the revamped water and sewer bill, only Doug Poulter was — in his words — "one of those low-volume users."

"Under this proposal, I'll be looking at four times what I'm currently paying now," Poulter told councillors. ​

It was somewhat surprising not to hear more from the 28,000 customers who use less than 6,000 litres of water a month: these are the so-called low-volume users and, despite being the most frugal consumers, they would be hit hardest by the changes to how we're billed for water.

And now, they're about to get walloped.

For example, someone who uses just 2,000 litres of water a month would go from spending $8 a month to about $30.

Someone who uses 5,000 litres? The new monthly bill would be $33, instead of $20. (For comparison, the "average" use is about 16,000 litres.)

Focus has been on rural complaints

Instead, we've heard mostly from upset rural residents who aren't on the city's water system, but are now being asked to pay as much as $4.44 for stormwater services.

A homogenous group living in just a few wards, the concentration of these voices can really pump up the volume of your argument.

They packed seven public meetings and flooded their rural councillors' office phones with complaints.

Even Glenn Brooks, the former councillor for the Rideau-Goulbourn ward, showed up at committee to protest the stormwater charge (although the current councillor, Scott Moffatt, more than held his own defending the new changes).

And yet, rural residents have a lot less (if anything) to complain about than low-volume users.

Changes could be coming to water bills

on .

CTV Ottawa

Changes could be coming to the way the city charges for drinking water, sewer removal and water removal after rain storms.

On Tuesday, the city's environment committee approved a plan to introduce a new rate structure, which includes a fixed cost for water and wastewater maintenance and operations.

City Staff in favour of the new fixed fee said there is a cost to maintaining a water system regardless of how much water is used.

"It's the bare minimum cost of making sure you've got safe, healthy, reliable water any time you turn on your tap, even if you've been away for six months," said Environment Committee Chair David Chernushenko.

The city said more than 85 per cent of households in Ottawa would see a fixed cost of roughly $17 on their monthly bill.

The changes would also see rural homeowners charged a new stormwater fee that will be phased in over four years, starting next year. The fee would come out to about $27 to $54 a year.

It angered many residents who currently have wells and septic tanks and said they should not pay for a service they do not use.

“The water comes across by neighbours property and encroaches onto mine in a heavy spring runoff… so we’re having to soak up water, so we shouldn’t pay anything,” Westley said.

Council must still approve the changes.

City releases draft report on new water billing system

on .

Chernushenko says first proposal too ‘conceptual’

Jennifer McIntosh, Ottawa Community News

Changes to the way the city bills residents for drinking water, taking away sewage and stormwater won’t be a big drain on the average homeowner's finances, says the city's deputy treasurer Isabelle Jasmin.

The city released its draft report on a new water rate structure on Oct. 3.

For 85 per cent of residents, the new billing system will mean a $2 difference on their monthly bill, according to the city.

The report is the second wave of numbers in an effort to deal with flagging revenues and increasing costs in providing water and sewer services in the city.

The city's environment committee chair Coun. David Chernushenko said more than 800 people provided input on an initial report released back in the spring.

“We promised to take the feedback seriously and come up with a better report,” he said, adding the problem with the first effort was that it was too conceptual.

The sticking point for many of the city's rural residents is being charged despite being on their own well and septic systems. Ultimately they would be on the hook for $2 million under the rate structure change.

At a consultation meeting last spring, Chernushenko said there had to be a balance between a flat rate for everyone, and getting out to every property with a watering can and a metre to see how permeable their property is.

Rural homeowners flooded the consultations, with complaints about the proposal, asking for a more sophisticated system that took into account the different nature of their properties.