Five Myths About Water Rate Hikes

Recently I have heard a number of arguments against and misconceptions about water rate increases. I want to use this platform to debunk these myths using published research and past conversations that I’ve had with various water experts and rate payers.

Without further adieu, let’s get started…

Myth 1: People hate them

The truth is, most people do not quite know how they feel about the impact of increased rates, mostly because they don’t understand how the hike might affect their monthly bill.¹ The scary thing about undecided minds is that they can be easily turned into antagonists, especially if fed misinformation. Sounds like a plot from a horror movie? If you’re a water utility this is your reality.

Water rates design and structure are not easy to explain and it’s important not to overcomplicate the story. Highlighting processes of inclusiveness, transparency, thoroughness and objectivity can provide evidence that the public and governing bodies use and accept to acknowledge rate hike justification. Also, using simple and interactive tools such infographics and online bill calculators help people visualize where they fall in a new structure; this can help them mentally and fiscally prepare for the change.

Myth 2: Conservation means a lower bill

Saving water can reduce water bills, but the cost of delivery doesn’t change in tandem. Water is conveyed through expensive and aging infrastructure that needs to be repaired and replaced over time, staff need to be paid and basic operations and maintenance need to continue. It’s important to highlight messages about the difficulty and importance of maintaining a safe delivery infrastructure while also encouraging behavior of conservation.

The advantage of successful water conservation programs is that may in some circumstances have helped delay large project costs associated with new water supply and treatment. This is another valuable message to communicate when confronted with questions from customers who are upset their bills are going up, even though they perceive themselves as conservers.

Myth 3: You can use the same messages for all types of customers

Just like people come in all shapes and sizes, so do their opinions. A single mother of two is not going to think about her water bill the same as a retiree. It is important to know your customer, the issues they care about most, and to communicate accordingly. Gathering data on behaviors, habits and perceptions can really help determine customers’ baseline knowledge and opinions on various water related issues.

The goal for this type of persona-building exercise is to shape more precise messages that can educate a community on the value of water.

Myth 4: Opponents of hikes are always right

Messages attacking the reputation of a utility are quite common during rates cases. Opposing messages are emotionally charged and highly opinionated, which make them very effective in getting media and public attention.

“The utility company hates poor people…”

“The utility is asking for way more than it needs…”

“There’s no reason for utility bills to increase — aren’t they making enough money from us already?”

One of the most effective approaches to address claims by opponents is to develop messaging capable of neutralizing emotional attacks. Inoculation messaging can help. Like a vaccine in the body, this technique works by co-opting counter-arguments and refuting them before they become infectious. For example, “Some might say we have not been very transparent in communicating the allocation of funds for projects, but we have had over 40 community meetings to share this information and have detailed discussions with customers on the matters that concern them with regards to spending and budgets.” Acknowledge and refute; that’s the inoculation two-step. Well-crafted messages based on inoculation theory usually blunt follow-up attacks and end virulent arguments quickly.

Myth 5: Rate increases do not take affordability into consideration

A robust rate-design embodies values of affordability. Statements such as, “I’m very scared that if I cannot afford my water, I cannot afford my health…,” or “I can barely afford rent…” are legitimate. Concerns regarding the impact rate increases have on the livelihood of customers should not be overlooked.

Implementing affordability programs that subsidize water bills for low-income households is incorporated in the budgets of many utilities. Programs encouraging households to replace inefficient fixtures to conserve water and prevent leaks can be quite successful in addressing affordability as well. Smart eligibility requirements make these programs more effective reaching those who truly need the help, and provide excellent arguments to offset rate case increase objections.

Read more about Hahn Public’s research on Rate Case Messaging by downloading our free white paper here.

¹Brooke Groggans, Ryan Orendorf and Mike Clark-Madison, Rate Case Messaging: The Character/Competency Conundrum, Hahn Public Communications, 2016, www.hahnpublic.com/utilities.