Metered water users flood STPUD rate increase hearing
By Kathryn Reed
A four-hour meeting Thursday night about potential South Tahoe Public Utility District rate increases ended with metered water customers’ voices being heard and no one opposing the likely 3 percent sewer rate increase.
The latter will definitely be on the May 19 agenda (meeting time 2pm) for a board vote. It would increase the average customer’s rate by less than $1 a month starting July 1.
Nearly 40 people turned out May 5 for the public hearing about STPUD's proposed rate increases. Photo/Kathryn Reed
The water meter rate, though, is a bit more convoluted process. Although staff will be meeting with the board’s finance committee comprised of Chris Cefalu and Eric Schafer next week, it’s likely a new proposal will not be crafted before the next meeting. (Agendas are posted on the district’s website which can be accessed by clicking on the ad to the right of this story.)
Part of the issue is the state is mandating water districts install meters by 2025. And the customers with meters as of 2011 must be charged based on consumption, per state mandates.
Until now South Tahoe Public Utility District residential customers have all been billed a flat rate. The 3,000-plus customers with meters are about to have a fluctuating bill based in part on the amount of water they use.
Most of the approximately 40 people at the meeting May 5 were there to talk about their metered rates. What many of them are concerned about is the summer irrigation season could cause their quarterly bill to hit four figures.
For people in the Angora burn area, where growing anything is exasperatingly difficult, they fear for what their next bill will be.
Tony Colombo, who lost his house in the 2007 fire, said he and his wife have spent nearly $50,000 on landscaping because of the 50 percent attrition rate on plants. The soil, even though he has rototilled twice and added amendments, is not fostering plant growth.
He watches the high water table that wasn’t there pre-fire, because conifers absorbed the moisture, send water oozing off his land and into the street, while at the same time he knows he’ll soon need to turn the sprinklers on for the young vegetation.
Exasperation fills his voice as he addresses the five-member board.
The post-Angora Fire area is not the only place within STPUD’s jurisdiction with a high water table.
Lake Tahoe News has approached STPUD, South Lake Tahoe and Tahoe Regional Planning Agency officials with the idea that locations with high water tables ought to be looked at as areas to capture water that could be reused for irrigation. A city employee told LTN because water is not scarce here that is not likely to happen. And with rules in place that aren’t friendly to using gray water, they say, what’s the point?
Why metered water?
The impetus for the state legislation was based on the desire to decrease consumption. For most of the state, the country and the world water is a scarce resource. As much as it is renewable, it cannot be manufactured.
The theory is if people pay for what they use, they will use less – at least initially.
But for districts like STPUD that is easing into meters instead of installing them all at once, it means varied rates for customers. California mandates the district not charge more than it needs to operate.
Although that figure is not a moving target, changing the rate structure to get to the needed operating dollar amount makes rates a moving target for metered customers. It’s balancing fixed costs against consumption.
About 87 percent of what South Tahoe PUD charges water customers is based on fixed costs, while the remaining 13 percent is consumption.
Looking at options
Consultant Shawn Koorn of HDR Engineering Inc. is tasked with revisiting his numbers that led him to come up with the metered rate plan.
What people in the audience spoke to was a desire to have a higher fixed rate and lower consumption rate. This would allow them have a more predictable bill and to ease into this whole metered rate plan.
“We have to let our landscaping go or it will cost us $1,000 (in water),” Linda Thompson told the board.
She was articulate and forceful in her frustration with the proposed rates.
Harold Singer, speaking as a citizen and one who lost his home in the 2007 fire, said with the district close to meeting its 2015 consumption goals as of today, why not restructure the rate for metered customers to make it a more gradual transition.
Plus, he said, “You may have more stable revenue if you have a higher fixed rate.”
Singer also suggested the district educate people to read their meters so they don’t face sticker shock when the bill arrives.
Raising the flat fee undermines of the spirit of the law.
I am very sorry that people suffer with post-fire conditions. However, the entire cost structure should not be changed to accommodate the tragedy of a relative few.
If people want to change a fundamentally dry place into a wet place, then that is a luxury. The point is to limit and educate about water use by raising the costs of it.
The reason that no one spoke in opposition to the 3% sewer rate increase was because STPUD Board President Dale Rise decided to concentrate on water meter rates, putting off rising sewer rates until a vocal group had spoken on water meter rates. The last of the ratepayers who wanted to speak in opposition to the sewer rate increase left after 9 pm after waiting to speak since 6 pm.
This happens to often in our community, where meetings are called to discuss matters and the powers that be outlast the opposition by agendizing or dragging out other issues until no time remains or the opposition has left due to health, family, or business constraints on their time.
Everyones view deserves to be heard and all boards, councils, etc. need to insure this practice does not continue.
It is not our representative government functioning at its best.
STPUD uses only one-quarter of the available water to supply its customers.
There is an incredible surplus of water as three-quarters of the available water is never used plus none of that excess water can be transported to other areas of California. So what’s is the problem. Simple, a morally bankrupt and corrupt legislature that mandated a one size fits all law with absolutely no exceptions.
Our system worked very well with a flat rate system.
Taking away our roads (Lake Tahoe Blvd.), taking away our water(by making it artificially expensive) will definitely (not) make SLT a better place to live.
Mr. Rise likes to control, just ask SLTPD Ofc Kingman & Ofc Wilson. Again STPUD does not want to talk about how much money goes to salary & benefits. What percent of every dollar received by STPUD goes for employee bene’s.
Bruce … You should have been at the meeting. They went over the salaries/benies. All of that is public information. Stop being so ignorant.
Mr Informed, I know the numbers, I just wish they would publish it with their info memo’s so everyone will know….
Bruce,
Get informed was correct. It’s all available on the state controller’s website … here is the link to the STPUD stats: http://lgcr.sco.ca.gov/CompensationDetail.aspx?entity=SpecialDistrict&id=12400902400.
Everyone can know what a pubic employees makes. It doesn’t take that much effort to find these things.
Kathryn Reed, LTN publisher
Informed / Admin, yes your correct and I have been on that web page. However, what I,m trying to get at is what percent of money they receive for sewer/water service’s goes for bene’s. Recently the city stated 78% of their general fund goes for salary/benefits….
Bruce, if you would have been at the meeting you would know the information as they put it out. Don’t be stupid and try and throw personal feelings against Mr. Rise in your rants, it’s childish and very STPUD union like. One point that was brought up at the meeting and I commended the board on was the 4.15% budgeted rise in salaries and benefits in the last 3 years. In the worst economic downturn this country has seen, with virtually every public and private agency asking or forcing employee cuts in salary and benefits upwards of 15%, they managed to only INCREASE their salary by 4.15%. Btw, the 3% increase to the sewer rates is going to a state mandated cola package for the employees. STPUD cannot use grant money for employees only through a rate increase can they do it. You won’t see that editorial anywhere on any of the news sights or newspapers as STPUD advertises with them at about $1,000.00 a month. Can’t bite the hand that feeds you, look what happed to Taylor and the clubs advertising.
You are incorrect Skib there is no such “state mandated cola package” the state can not require or mandate or order a public agency to give raises to employees. You can call is a cost of living increase, but its still a raise, and the state does not and can not require another agency to give employees a raise. STPUD board may have a contract with its employees that includes a raise, but that the only binding contract with their employess. The rest of your point is well taken when every other organization is cutting back why would STPUD committ to giving a raise. We are not helpless here, no need to throw up our hands and declare there’s nothing we can do, we can protest, send in letters and demand they stop agreeing to raises for public employees.
Kenny,
I wish STPUD and any advertiser were paying Lake Tahoe News $1,000 per month. Please, stop making false statements.
This is not the first time you have said LTN will not print facts based on who is advertising. That is a lie and insulting. We do not blur the line between advertising and editorial. The editorial space on LTN is not for sale. When I made that comment to a publisher at another publication I worked for I was subsequently fired because that publisher did blur the lines and favored the advertiser.
At the last South Tahoe PUD meeting the PowerPoint from it says, “There are no staff COLA’s built into the proposed budget. Year end 2011/12 will represent 2.5 years without wage adjustments.”
Salaries and benefits represent 29.98 percent of the proposed $49.42 million 2011-12 budget. That, too, is from the meeting — stated publicly and put in print.
As for grants paying for salaries, the organization supplying the cash can put stipulations on how the money is spent.
Kathryn Reed, LTN publisher
Kae and Lake Tahoe News, You are correct that I mispoke about the advertising rates paid would have been influenced, I apologize to you. I get frustrated when I see a lack of editorials that are for the consumer and public. As far as eveything else I said I do not. My figures and information came straight from the board and their Grant Thornton annual audit. Grant money cannot be used for salaries and benefits. What they failed to tell us at the meeting is that some of the money from the sewer rate increase is actually going to a cola match from the state not from STPUD. They also failed to mention that the upcoming budget at first failed to include “projected income” from 4 projects to a tune of about $750,000.00. They did add one just before the meeting but the money coming in would have covered the approx $238,000.00 sewer rate increase. They also cannot keep comparing our rates to Nevada water companies and other companies who do not have water meters. That meeting was a total snow job and was glossed over for the public. Everytime I bring out the other side, the other information we never seem to get, I get crucified by the employees all over town, or at least the 44% who actually live in the state. They whine and tell everyone what a &*#*@$# I am. They have a kingdom over there and I can’t really blame them, I blame the Board for letting it happen. The board has always been for the employees and not the public whom they are supposed to be serving. I do apologize to you Kae for suggesting that in your web site.
I chose to let the public speak on the water meter rates first. The HDR consultant had just finished his presentation – I believed that the information presented by HDR would be fresh on everyone’s mind – and would help with any questions they may have. Also, the HDR consultant paid by the hour by the district to attend the meeting with the public. I think people at the meeting had a chance to address the water meter issue, as long as it did not become redundant.Kay from LTN was at the meeting Thursday night and has attended many meetings in the past years, and can verify that I always give the public ample time to discuss concerns reguarding the District. This is the reason that we did not get into the sewer rate study untill approximately 10pm. I believe another meeting will be on the agenda soon to give the public more time reguarding the water meters, sewer rate and budget.
NOTE: If I would have cut off the public early on the water rate study, several who were in atendance – would be saying what Mr. Runnels is saying – that I did not allow the public to speak
Dale Rise
admin, Kae the state info. on comp and bennies is for 2009. Info. is not fresh, 4 mo. into 2010 and no info. yet? Would you post when 2010 info. is available for all gov. boards and councils, and when is the deadline for the info.?
into 2011
Yes, I am disappointed in Board President Dale Rise’s handling of the STPUD’s meeting of Water and Sewer rates. Many came to speak on the Sewer rate rise, signing up to speak as requested by Mr. Rise, and patiently waiting to speak for over three hours.
I had expected President Rise after almost 4 years on the Board and two years as President to do a better job of allowing all that had given up their uncompensated time to speak. Instead he encouraged one segment composed of less than 20% of ratepayers (metered customers) to monopolize the discussion for three hours, then calling for discussion of the Sewer rate increase at 10pm after all those wishing to speak had left.
According to Mr. Rise wishing to discuss items after their portion of the presentation when it “would be fresh on everyone’s mind” shouldn’t he have discussed the sewer rate increase after it was presented before moving on to the water rate presentation?
He also brings up the point of the payment of the HDR consultant but fails to add that the Board members and staff are paid for their attendance.
If he had cut off the debate on water meter rates after an hour or an hour and a half to allow discussion on sewer rates, some might have complained but at least both issues would have been discussed.
As to the attendance at additional meetings I can only hope that President Rise determines to handle them in a more democratic fashion. Perhaps time limits on comments, not allowing speakers to speak repetitively until all have been heard at least once, and an equitable division of time, if more than one topic is to be discussed.
The majority of STPUD ratepayers will not be affected by water meters until 2020 or later as per current District plans. While this is an important topic, the 3% sewer rate increase affects all of us, NOW!
If you feel that this increase is unfair, unneeded, or should be modified, please turn in your protest votes to the District. For information call Dennis Cocking STPUD Public Information Officer @ 530 543-6208
I don’t believe the 3% increase is unfair. What is unfair is I have a meter and I will conserve, which I don’t mind, but the people with no meters can let the water run into to street if they want. That is unfair. We should all be on meters at the same time or not at all.