The Board of Water Supply has postponed a vote on a plan to raise water rates 70 percent by 2015.
The move came after a public hearing this afternoon in which testimony was heavily against the idea.
Costs would jump twice next year by nearly 10 percent each time, and continue annually through summer 2015 – bringing the water portion of the bill from just under $40 a month to more than $66.
"That will unjustifiably burden hotels, hospitals, farmers, large families and the elderly," says Milton Imada, a retired Board of Water Supply employee.
One state water official had a different perspective.
"It’s about $2 per thousand gallons over five years. That’s less than the cost of a latte. That’s less than the cost of a half a gallon of gas," says William Tam of the Commission on Water Resource Management.
But besides that testimony in support of a hike the rest of the public pled for relief.
"What you dictate here, it changes lives financially," says Kennaie Hicks, a farmer.
"Who would have ever thought that water and sewer would have surpassed insurance, electricity, personnel cost and all others," says Emory Bush of Hawaiiana Management Company.
Any hike would come on top of an already steep sewer charge increases to fix Oahu’s aging wastewater system.
The Board of Water Supply says they have the same infrastructure issue, responding to about a break a day on Oahu.
For instance, the fiscal year 2012 started on July 1, and in the first month, there were 21 breaks.
Last fiscal year, there were 331 and fiscal year 2001 there were 401 breaks.}
The board says pay to fix it now or pay more later
"The long-term ramification of not adopting the proposed rate adjustment is that rates in the future are most likely to be even higher than they are for ratepayers," says Dean Nakano of the Board of Water Supply.
Critics of the rate hike say money from the course of operations and previous rate hikes should have been keeping pace with capital needs all along
"The deputy is exaggerating the urgency and monies needed for repairing water infrastructure and maintaining water pumps which is the normal nature of the water business and should have been allotted for in the short and longterm budget," Imada says.
There were no rate hikes from about the mid 1990s until around 2005, then rates rose about 60 percent over the past 5 years.
"12% a year seemed like an astronomical sum to pay for operating expenses. Why wasn’t some of that money put into reserves or to pay for capital improvements?" Bush says.
Others testifying took issue with the hundreds of permit-holders that maintain private water distribution systems but don’t have to pay the state or county anything for the water itself.
"The time for free lunches with respect to water is over. We need an independent commission to investigate the Board of Water Supply," says water rights activist Dr. James Anthony.
After the testimony there was no "second" on a motion to move forward. It will likely be discussed again at the September 26 meeting.
See the original article at: KHON2 Local News
