Raising water rates by 50 percent over five years is strong medicine for Santa Fe. But what is the illness we are trying to cure? Is it just about restoring financial health to the city's Water Division? As my spiritual friends never tire of saying: "It's all connected." Let's remember that principle when we consider the proposed rate hike. What is, or could be, connected to the water rate increase? What other illnesses might be cured from the same "rate-hike" medicine?

From my perspective as director of the Santa Fe Watershed Association, the illness I want to cure is our sick river; it is practically dead, though fortunately it still has the potential to be revived if we can find the right medicine (water!). An even higher-profile illness in Santa Fe is our economy. No one disputes that our local economy is dangerously ill. Is there any medicine that can help?

Surprising as it may sound, a sharp increase in water rates could be just the medicine we need for restoring our river while stimulating green-collar jobs. But the medicine of high water rates doesn't do much all by itself, other than keep the Water Division functioning. Yes, that is important, but in today's collapsing economy, taking more money from ratepayers just to preserve the status quo doesn't provide the change we need. Let's connect some dots and see how the strong medicine of a rate increase could help not just the Water Division, but the larger economy. And did I mention the Santa Fe River?

The water-rate hike needs to be part of a bigger package of water reforms that can save water and create jobs. There are dozens of practical, low-tech methods for saving water in our houses and gardens, capturing water on our roofs, infiltrating storm water into the aquifer, or using storm flows for irrigation. Every one of these solutions can create jobs for Santa Fe's green economy, and every drop of water that is saved, or reused or not needed, is another drop that can help revive our river.

Investing in water-wise technologies, creating jobs, and saving water for the river, is driven partly by money and partly by community values. Higher rates make water-saving investments more attractive, though not necessarily profitable. Subsidies are another "dot" that needs to be connected with the rate increase. Subsidies to encourage new water-saving investments can make the difference between a net cost and a net profit to the water-conserving homeowner.

Even higher water rates and subsidies might not be enough to compensate for the hassle of adopting new water-saving technologies: dealing with contractors, wading through conflicting information, etc. The biggest incentive might not be money (though that certainly helps) but knowing that the water we save will go to the river we love. This "dot" is the make-or-break piece of the whole picture in my view. A city commitment to restore flows to the river would provoke enthusiasm about water conservation because the saved water would be going to the river rather than to development. Imagine how many new conservation jobs could be stimulated by the simple, daring policy of allocating water to the Santa Fe River. And imagine our city with a river.

Water rates can be the spark that motivates us to invest in water-saving technologies, which in turn provide jobs for our young people and water for our river. The shock of a water rate increase can be a wake-up call to do things differently, or just another annoyance that we put up with so we don't have to change. Let's change!

David Groenfeldt is executive director of the Santa Fe Watershed Association.