Spokane city staff outline water-conservation goals, data and policy options; board urges stronger pricing and outreach

City water staff presented a master water-conservation update to the Climate Resilience and Sustainability Board that reviewed the city’s Waterwise program, recent metering and rebate work, and scenarios the city will model to estimate how conservation could reduce future capital needs.

Marcia Davis, Integrated Capital Management Director, and James Caddy, a data/business-analyst on the utility team, told the board the master plan — first adopted by council resolution in July 2020 — focuses on demand-side measures such as rebate programs, turf removal incentives (SpokaneScape) and outreach. The plan’s high-level targets are to reduce gallons per capita per day (GPCD) by 5% ("shave the base") and to reduce seasonal peak demand by 15% ("shave the peak") by 2030. Staff cautioned the board that those targets will be difficult to meet without stepped-up measures.

Davis summarized recent activity: the Waterwise program offers SpokaneScape rebates for turf removal, low-flow fixture rebates and irrigation audits; the utility has begun installing more advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) radios (about 40% of the system currently fitted with the radios); and the city now meters many construction-hydrant uses to capture previously uncounted consumption. Davis noted the utility estimates that Waterwise measures to date have saved about 350 million gallons cumulatively; at the same time the city pumped roughly 22,700,000,000 gallons in 2024 and recorded an average GPCD of about 199 in 2024 versus a 2018 baseline of about 200.

James Caddy explained residential billing and consumption breakdowns: Spokane uses a five‑tier residential block rate and the highest tier (tier 5) begins at 45 units. Caddy said tier‑5 residential use accounts for roughly 14% of residential water use on an annual basis and that super users on a per‑square‑foot basis irrigate at rates several times higher than necessary. He summarized the modeling questions staff will ask consultants: what is the system‑wide effect of (1) a uniform 15% summer reduction; (2) targeted reductions in higher‑pressure service zones that are also areas of growth; (3) reducing consumption by super users; and (4) GIS‑based targeting linked to actual turf acreage.

Board members pressed staff on policy tools and implementation. Several members urged stronger price signals and clearer customer information. One board member noted that Spokane’s base price for ordinary use remains low compared with larger West Coast cities and said that stronger upper‑tier pricing and more proactive outreach to high users could change behavior; staff said the city added the fifth billing tier in 2020 and shifted more costs to tiers 4 and 5 in the most recent rate update and that AMI data will allow more targeted messaging. Staff said the utility has used direct outreach and on‑site audits for top users but does not perform repairs on private property — it identifies leaks and offers guidance.

Members also raised complementary policy areas: soil health and rainwater retention (including biochar and other soil‑amendment approaches) as low‑cost ways to hold more water in the landscape; the potential for gray‑water or recycled water ("purple pipe") in limited contexts; landscaping or irrigation standards for new development; and how parks and schools will be supported if private turf is reduced. Staff cautioned that reuse and purple‑pipe options can be constrained by existing water‑rights and discharge rules, and that changes to policy will require cross‑departmental coordination.

No ordinance, rate change or regulatory action was adopted at the meeting. Staff asked the board for policy guidance and help shaping public‑engagement messaging and said they will deliver modeled conservation scenarios to the board when consultant work is completed.