Hi, first time poster here. Just looking for some feedback / a sounding board. Or maybe I’m just here to whinge.
My partner and I are raising a family of five in WA, on a single salary. It probably goes without saying, but we’re pretty budget conscious. The kids are pretty young, so expecting at least a couple more years of this until everyone is in primary school.
That’s just a bit of context. I just want to whinge water corp. Two years ago we made the decision to move to one of the regional mining towns so that I could be home every night with the family (previously fifo mining). Despite being supplied by the mundaring weir/the same water supply base as Perth, this counts as a “class 5” town, meaning the cost per kL is significantly higher. If we’re profligate with our usage (say tier 2 or higher), it will cost us 4-5x more per kL than someone in Perth.
The problem (as I see it) is that the tier system is based on the residence as a whole as opposed to the number of individuals living at the residence. We try our hardest to be frugal (installed a rain tank right after buying the place to try to maintain a garden, kids take baths/showers together, actually try to avoid the evaporative system in summer)… but there’s only so much you can do with growing kids if you don’t want mold to start growing behind their ears.
So what gives? This system seems disproportionately in favour of singles or couples living in an apartment “residence”, while large (or multigenerational) families end up paying a premium and floating the smaller household. This is despite these families using the same or LESS water on a per person basis. As you can imagine, living in a class 5 town where, invariably we move into tier 2 and above… it’s frustrating knowing we’re then paying 2-5x more than a similar family in Perth.
Why is the billing approach based around a per residency rather than per resident metric? With the rising cost of living, it just feels like a remarkably unfair extra squeeze on our family. Are there any tricks around this? Am I missing something obvious about this billing approach, or is it as unfair as it feels? For the decade or so that I was a single fifo miner living in an apartment, I would have been more than happy to pay my ‘fair share’ to ensure some working family didn’t have to pay DOUBLE to wash nappies.
Sorry if that tipped over the edge into rant territory. Any advice is appreciated (or hell, tell me why I’m wrong and don’t understand the way things are set up )
My partner and I are raising a family of five in WA, on a single salary. It probably goes without saying, but we’re pretty budget conscious. The kids are pretty young, so expecting at least a couple more years of this until everyone is in primary school.
That’s just a bit of context. I just want to whinge water corp. Two years ago we made the decision to move to one of the regional mining towns so that I could be home every night with the family (previously fifo mining). Despite being supplied by the mundaring weir/the same water supply base as Perth, this counts as a “class 5” town, meaning the cost per kL is significantly higher. If we’re profligate with our usage (say tier 2 or higher), it will cost us 4-5x more per kL than someone in Perth.
The problem (as I see it) is that the tier system is based on the residence as a whole as opposed to the number of individuals living at the residence. We try our hardest to be frugal (installed a rain tank right after buying the place to try to maintain a garden, kids take baths/showers together, actually try to avoid the evaporative system in summer)… but there’s only so much you can do with growing kids if you don’t want mold to start growing behind their ears.
So what gives? This system seems disproportionately in favour of singles or couples living in an apartment “residence”, while large (or multigenerational) families end up paying a premium and floating the smaller household. This is despite these families using the same or LESS water on a per person basis. As you can imagine, living in a class 5 town where, invariably we move into tier 2 and above… it’s frustrating knowing we’re then paying 2-5x more than a similar family in Perth.
Why is the billing approach based around a per residency rather than per resident metric? With the rising cost of living, it just feels like a remarkably unfair extra squeeze on our family. Are there any tricks around this? Am I missing something obvious about this billing approach, or is it as unfair as it feels? For the decade or so that I was a single fifo miner living in an apartment, I would have been more than happy to pay my ‘fair share’ to ensure some working family didn’t have to pay DOUBLE to wash nappies.
Sorry if that tipped over the edge into rant territory. Any advice is appreciated (or hell, tell me why I’m wrong and don’t understand the way things are set up )