Log in

Opinion

Unfair sewer fee charges in Scottsdale

Posted

Scottsdale homeowners who use irrigation for landscaping are probably receiving unfair sewer fee charges on their bills.

The fee is calculated based on a volumetric rate meant to cover water used indoors and discharged into the city's sewer system (POTW), using average water usage data from December through February. Unfortunately, this calculation also includes outdoor irrigation water, which never actually enters the sewer system, resulting in residents being overcharged.

In the past, residents could submit an online appeal each summer to adjust the fee. However, this process was opaque and likely resulted in only partial reductions. This questionable process has been used for years and now, to add insult to injury, letters sent out last fall announced that the city would no longer consider irrigation water usage in these appeals. This change was approved by the city council (City code Sec. 49-141 [m]) last May.

This revised policy is unjust since it penalizes those who irrigate their landscapes by imposing higher sewer charges for water that does not contribute to the sewer system. Essentially, residents are being billed for a service they are not receiving, suggesting that the city may be using this fee as a revenue-raising measure. This strikes me as something that should be illegal.

A more accurate method to determine the actual water entering the sewer system would be to review water usage on billing records from before irrigation began or to temporarily turn off irrigation for 24 hours and compare the water meter readings.

Despite reaching out for comments from the mayor and several council members regarding this issue, no responses have been received (i.e., I’ve been ignored). If you are affected by this situation, I strongly urge you to submit a complaint to challenge these excessive charges imposed by the City of Scottsdale water department.

Please send your comments to AzOpinions@iniusa.org. We are committed to publishing a wide variety of reader opinions, as long as they meet our Civility Guidelines.

Share with others