Facebook posts

Armidale Regional Council (ARC) is proposing unfair increases to water and sewer access charges. In this cost-of-living crisis, they want households to pay over $1,000 a year ($400 water + $625 sewer) before using any water.

HAVE YOUR SAY BEFORE 22 MAY!

Make a submission to Council suggesting alternative charges* to raise a similar amount of money by reducing the access charge and increasing usage charges.

Some points to consider in your submission

IPART (Sydney Regulator) set residential water access at $96/year—ARC wants over four times that amount!
We need to prepare for the next drought: The NSW Government says best practice charges should encourage wise use of water resources; high access fees and low usage charges do the opposite!
Low users are subsidising high users: 176 high users consume four times more water than the lowest 5,645 households, but will pay an average of $5.21 per kiliolitre (access+usage), compared $14.69 for those 5,645 households
High water users can afford to pay their fair share: NSW-government institutions, organisations that don't pay rates and profit-driven commercial enterprises are better off financially than single pensioners and low-income families.

Email a copy to all councillors. Better still, talk to one or more councillors in person asking them to support alternative charges such as those listed below to ensure high users pay their fair share.

* Alternative charges for FY26-27: access: $300, 3-tier charges for rateable properties: $3.90 per kilolitre (kL) up to 40 kL pa; $5.10 for 41-400 kL and $5.40 for higher consumption and a 60 cent per kL reduction for the 89 properties receiving untreated water from Puddledock Dam. Non-rateable properties would pay $5.10 for 0-400 kL and $5.40 for higher consumption. Consider even fairer charges for the next financial year as part of the willingness-to-pay consultation.

𝐖𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐚 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐰𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 176 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐦𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 40% 𝐨𝐟 𝐰𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐬𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐛𝐲 𝐀𝐫𝐦𝐢𝐝𝐚𝐥𝐞 𝐑𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐥 (𝐀𝐑𝐂). 𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐢𝐬𝐧'𝐭 𝐀𝐑𝐂 𝐚𝐬𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐚𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐫 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞?

Is it fair that ARC's 176 high water users, who consume almost 40% of the supply, pay just $5.21 per kilolitre (access + consumption)? Bills for the lowest 5,645 (out of 11,647) average $14.69 per kL.
We'd be in a much better position to avoid level 3 restrictions if we encouraged everyone to save water by raising the same amount of money by higher consumption but lower access fees.
Even a modest alternative to the proposed FY26/27 charges would help, e.g. adding 40 cents per kL to usage for high water users and lowering the access charge to $300 per year.
Fairer charges would help satisfy the NSW Government's requirement for water charges that encourage wise use of resources, increasing our chance of the 90% funding needed for a new water supply
Even with 90% external funding, a new supply costing $500 million will add $2 per kilolitre (kL) to the price of water.
Fairer charges are a win for our wallets, the environment, and for everyone who doesn't want to see level 3 water restrictions before the end of 2026.

HAVE YOUR SAY BEFORE 22 MAY!

Make a submission to Council suggesting alternative charges* to raise a similar amount of money by reducing the access charge and increasing usage charges.

* Alternative charges for FY26-27: access: $300, 3-tier charges for rateable properties: $3.90 per kilolitre (kL) up to 40 kL pa; $5.10 for 41-400 kL and $5.40 for higher consumption, with non-rateable properties paying $5.10 for 0-400 kL and $5.40 for higher consumption. Lower charges would apply to the 89 properties receiving untreated water from Puddledock Dam.

With the additional cost of $2 per kL to supply water from Oaky, even fairer charges need to be considered for the next FY as part of the willingness-to-pay consultation.

Page updated

Google Sites

Report abuse