This post draws a comparison between charging for parking on city streets versus charging for water through city pipes. The thought process is that people willingly pay to have potable water at the turn of the tap but object to renting a spot on a city road to leave their car.
It really comes down to ownership issues. It’s clear who owns the water system infrastructure. The cities maintain the lines in the street to the hook-ups. The property owners maintain the pipes through their front yards and their properties. Water is delivered and metered so that people pay based on their usage. But no one owns the water. People pay for the maintenance of the public system and the purification process.
On the other hand, city roads are publically owned. They are free to use by everyone. They are paid for by residents. So to exclude people from use by imposing a payment signals a change in ownership structure.
People often gather together to share on-going utilties. That’s the idea behind home owners associations. Individuals who no longer wish to mow their lawn and look for a roofer when the time comes, enjoy sharing those expenses and management with others. Whether to pay for clean water, garbage pickup or electric bills, the monthly useage payments is the sensible means of pecuniary support.
When it comes to the use of shared land like public parks, trails and streets, it is difficult to determine a proper amount to meter out on a monthly bases, and it is abrasive to be exclusionary.
Home Economics 