$10 Gets 1,000 Gallons of Water At Fill Station

Homes in Area Without Supply

Water from a bulk fill station on the western outskirts of Rio Rancho will soon be available at $10 per 1,000 gallons.

The city staff expect the fill station to open on Aug. 20.

The city spent $192,000 to install the station at 21st Street and Northern, outside the city limits, to provide a water source for folks who don’t have wells and aren’t connected to a municipal water system. Water theft from fire hydrants has been a problem in the area.

City staff will analyze the usage pattern over a sixmonth period to determine whether the $10 rate is sufficient to cover the cost of installing the facility.

City Councilors approved the rate this week after two lengthy debates. Councilors Mark Scott and Tim Crum supported a $6 rate proposed by Councilor Chuck Wilkins while Councilors Lonnie Clayton, Tamara Gutierrez and Patty Thomas voted for the higher rate.

Mayor Tom Swisstack cast tie-breaking votes in favor of the $10 rate.

Public Works Director Scott Sensan baugher recommended the $10 rate based on rates charged by other local communities with similar facilities.

“We thought it was fair,” Sensan baugher said at the council meeting this week.

The fill station is in an area where many households are not connected to the city water system and do not have wells.

Wilkins thought that Sensan baugher’s recommended rate was too high, compared with the city utility rate of $3.62 per 1,000 gallons. City staff say the average utility customer household uses about 6,000 gallons a month.

Sensan baugher pointed out

that utility customers also pay a service charge, tax and other fees which would not apply to fill station customers. There would also be no requirement to prove residency in Rio Rancho or Sandoval County.

Swisstack was concerned that at $6, city utility customers would be subsidizing water costs for households outside Rio Rancho.

At one point, Crum suggested adding a $1 surcharge to the $6 bulk rate to cover the construction cost, a suggestion Wilkins indicated he could support.

Clayton ventured that households that had to haul water used less than homes that had piped water. He proposed the amendment which passed that kept the $10 rate and added the requirement for the six-month evaluation. Clayton said he would rather the city charged a higher rate to ensure it covered construction costs in a reasonable time frame than set a lower rate that took longer to recoup the outlay.