While I totally agree that an additional infrastructure charge should be added to our bimonthly water/sewer bill for the additional funding needed to upgrade Riverside’s water system, I strongly object to the proposed method of an added flat fee of $30 bimonthly.
Our water/sewer bills in 2017 totaled $608. This fee would represent 29.6 percent increase, while the typical Riverside customer pays $1,375, according to the article in the Landmark (Riverside imposes water/sewer infrastructure fee,” News, March 21). This increase applied to the typical user would represent a 13.1 percent increase.
This does not seem fair both from the standpoint of being a senior citizen and of one that’s trying to conserve water. For the past 10 years (2007-17) our water/sewer costs have been in the range of $331 as a low to $735 as a high. I am glad you did not decide to apply the surcharge in 2014, which was our low point.
I believe a more equitable application of the $30 surcharge would be to base it on the units used. Using the village’s 5-unit minimum, charge an additional $6 per unit over the 5-unit minimum, with a minimum of $6 and a maximum of $30. This should not be difficult to do in this age of computers.
Getting in my dig of not being politically correct, the current method of a flat charge reminds me of the current tax-rate changes, which benefit the top tier to a greater extent than those below them.
Please review your current methods of applying the $30 charge. I would also appreciate if my feelings were expressed to the other members of the board.
Paul Marhoul
Riverside
