While I’ve advocated raising the price of water when supply tightens, local governments have focused on encouraging conservation and subsidizing the purchase of water-saving devices such as low-flow shower heads.

Turns out that conservation costs money. According to the N&O, it is an unfair paradox: “The more successfully a community conserves, the more likely it is that the utility will raise rates.”

It would not be a paradox if the conservation were solely in response to higher prices instead of moralistic guilt-mongering from city officials. As I stated in my paper, higher prices ensure the water utility has adequate funds to pay for maintenance and potentially offer subsidies to low-income water customers. Non-price conservation means less revenue and sometimes higher costs. And yet, local governments continue to miss the connection.