Arrow-right Camera
The Spokesman-Review Newspaper
Spokane, Washington  Est. May 19, 1883

Customers must pay Spokane water service charge, whether they’re using it or not

As the sun sets in downtown Spokane, Washington, a pedestrian walks by the entrance of the City Hall building, Monday, Oct 11, 2021.   (COLIN MULVANY/THE SPOKESMAN-REVIEW)

As of Wednesday, everyone must pay a basic service charge if they have access to the City of Spokane’s water, whether they’re currently using it or not.

Previously, residents were able to have their water service charges suspended, including if they were moving south for the winter, undergoing repairs or for other reasons.

But on Monday, the Spokane City Council voted 6-1 in favor of requiring the service rate for any utility customer whose property is being supplied by the water.

The change was spurred by a new utility billing system that launched in November, according to a staff report. While the old system allowed for temporary suspensions of the fees, the new system is designed to charge the basic rate regardless.

The 2023 monthly charge for residential customers living inside the city is $18.76, and $28.14 for residential customers outside the city who receive city water services. Approximately 765 customers will be affected by the change, according to a staff report.

Councilman Michael Cathcart was the sole vote against the change.

“I don’t like government monopolies, and we have a de facto one here,” Cathcart said. “Because we have one, I think we need some protections in place, and one would be that you could choose to not have service.”

Councilman Jonathan Bingle, who usually votes similarly to conservative Council colleague Cathcart, argued that customers still had a choice to avoid the fee: have the water shut off.

“People can still have their water shut off if they like, but you have to actually shut it off at the source,” Bingle said.

If the city is still maintaining a property’s access to water, then it also carries the liability if something were to go wrong with the utility, Bingle added.

“As long as we’re supplying water to that area, I think that they should pay for it,” he continued.