How an average Pasadena water user's new bill might look

In the story I wrote on Pasadena's new proposed water rates, I said that some people might have to cut their water usage by up to 30 percent in order to avoid having their monthly bill go up. I arrived at the claim using the city's online water bill calculator with a purely hypothetical customer scenario.

I set myself up as having the city's smallest meter, 5/8", meaning I would likely have a smaller lot. A majority of city users have either a 5/8" or 3/4" meter, and they have the same rates.

I set my monthly usage as 10 HCF, also known as 7,480 gallons. That would set me as a relatively low user of water (assuming I lived with at least one other person), and would put me in the lowest of three billing tiers, in the current rate structure.

Currently, my water rate is $23.25. Under the new plan, my monthly bill would jump to $30.85. The bad news, is that when additional charges are added next summer, part of the plan, the bill would go up further.

So, how much can I reduce my usage to cut that bill? Let's assume I'm fairly average- I water my lawn and landscaping more than they need and shower a little too long, and wash my car without using a bucket, but don't have an excess of landscaping, don't hose down my driveway, and generally don't otherwise waste water.

City staff reports on water usage assume that a person like me should be able to cut my usage by at least 10 percent primarily by watering really carefully, and less frequently, using a bucket to wash my car, and being more conscious about shower time. So I cut my usage by 10 percent. My new bill: $27.72. Plus, it will increase again in a year.

To get to 20 percent savings, I'd probably have to put in a drip irrigation system, and put in new landscaping that uses less water. My new bill would be closer to my old one: $24.59. I would have had to invest some time and money into my yard though.

For most users to reduce their usage 30 percent, most people would have to start reducing the size of their lawn, according to staff reports. That is not a likely course of action for most people, and the utility said in its reports it doesn't expect people to cut back at this level. Those who did would now pay a monthly bill of $23.06, meaning they would have savings, at least this year.

Opponents of the increase have charged that it doesn't incentivize cutting water use. Depends on your perspective: would you just through your hands up in the air and give up when you know you are facing a higher bill no matter what, or would you frantically try to minimize the increase as much as possible?

The other argument, of course, is that those who already don't waste water will be screwed because they have no way to reduce their usage. That is valid, and is the reason the city wants to eventually switch to the budget-based system that would allocate an expected water budget to each household. People who were watering efficiently would get lower rates, and those that weren't, higher. The question is how long should it take a city to set such a system up? Phyllis Currie, of PWP says it will take until next summer just to have the information needed to phase in such a system.