Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies
WILL VAN SANTThe measure would have stepped up rates as customers increased consumption.
BROOKSVILLE - The County Commission went against the recommendation of its professional staff Tuesday and voted not to implement inclining block rates for water use in Spring Hill.
Under the proposed rate structure, customers would have been charged more for water as their consumption increased. Utilities Department officials supported block rates as a conservation mechanism that would promote responsible water use.
"I'm disappointed," department director Kay Adams said after the vote. "It's unfortunate."
About 10 Spring Hill residents spoke out against the proposal, which was put forward at a time when the Utilities Department is suffering something of a public relations disaster.
On April 1, rates for Spring Hill customers were returned to 1992 levels. Those rates had been artificially lowered to make up for overcharges by Florida Water Services, the utility's former owner.The county purchased the Spring Hill utility from Florida Water Services last October, but the private company continued to handle all billing until April 22, when the county took over the responsibility.
The rate alteration and changeover has led to confusion and billing glitches. Some customers have seen two rate structures on their bills; others have been billed twice. The foulups, which officials are trying to resolve, did little to create sympathy for the inclining block rate idea.
"We don't have our house in order," said County Commissioner Diane Rowden, who made the motion that defeated the proposal. "How can we ask other people to get their house in order?"
Rowden's comments resonated with a crowd that expressed deep skepticism about block rates. Many residents questioned how the county could continue to approve water-devouring developments while promoting a conservation-minded billing structure for residents. Others said the county should reach out and educate people on how to save water, rather than approve block rates.
"If you want people to conserve water, then tell them," said Spring Hill resident John Murphy. "Explain to them how to do it."
Under the inclining rate structure that was proposed for Spring Hill and is in effect throughout the rest of the county, the base fee of $4.85 a month would have remained the same, as would the $1.12 charge per 1,000 gallons of use - but only up to 8,000 gallons.
Between 8,001 and 15,000 gallons, the rate would be $1.25 per 1,000 gallons. Between 15,001 and 25,000 gallons, the rate would be $1.50 per 1,000 gallons, rising to $1.95 during the critical dry months of March, April, May and June. Between 25,001 and 50,000 gallons, the usage rate would be $1.75 per 1,000 gallons, rising to $2.28 during the dry season.
Adams said the majority of Spring Hill residents would have seen little or no increase in their monthly bills. Fifty-five percent of county utility customers, she said, use fewer than 8,000 gallons of water each month.
When the county implemented block rates for its utility in 1991, Adams said there was an initial revenue spike as people became familiar with the fee structure. They soon began to use water more sparingly, however, and both revenue and consumption then dipped, Adams said.
In lobbying for approval, Adams also pointed to the terms of the consumptive use permit that the county was issued by the Southwest Florida Water Management District, commonly called Swiftmud.
Under the conditions of the permit, which allows the county to take water from ground supplies, Hernando must have a plan for implementing block rates in Spring Hill to Swiftmud by Oct. 1 of this year and have them in place by Oct. 1, 2005, Adams told the board.
Swiftmud spokesman Michael Molligan said that is not totally accurate. All the permit requires, Molligan said, is that the Utilities Department come up with a plan and ask the county to implement block rates by Oct. 1, 2005. His agency does not have the authority, Molligan said, to compel county commissioners to approve the rate structure should they reject it.
But he hopes that they will review the issue again and vote differently.
"We highly recommend it," Molligan said of inclining block rates. "It is a proven conservation measure."
While no firm date was set, there was some talk among board members of hearing the matter once the billing foulup furor had died down. Adams was asked to come before the board again, with Swiftmud officials, to discuss how failure to approve block rates might affect the county's use permit.
Of the five board members, County Commissioner Mary Aiken, supporting approval of block rates, was the lone dissenting vote.
- Will Van Sant can be reached at 754-6127. Send e-mail to vansant@sptimes.com