• Punished for conservation
    December 05,2012
    • Email Article
    •  
    •  Print Article
     
    On Nov. 27 city officials reported that since less water is being used, rates have to go up or the budget has to come down. Now wait a minute. If we install water-saving devices in our homes, take shorter showers, fix leaky faucets, resist sprinkling the lawn three times a week, shouldn’t we not only save water, but also save money? If we turn down the thermostat, we expect to use less heating oil and save money, right? If we trade in our SUVs for compacts, we expect to help the planet and our pocketbooks, right? The government certainly wouldn’t raise the per-gallon tax so that its take remains the same.

    So how can the city of Rutland propose to raise the rate for water usage because we’ve been good citizens and conserved water? We should be rewarded, thereby encouraged to conserve water. If we conserve, our water bills should go down. The city water budget should not be an immovable object. It makes sense that it should go down if we use less water. What are they thinking?

    LINDA WIGMORE

    Rutland
    • Email Article
    •  
    •  Print Article
    2 Comments
    MORE IN Letters
    This is in response to George Wilson’s letter published Aug. Full Story
    I have known Deb Bucknam for over 10 years. Full Story
    Just finished reading your editorial concerning extremely high drug prices in America. Full Story
    More Articles