Calif. Supreme Court won’t budge on water rates
By Dale Kasler, Sacramento Bee
In a setback to California water regulators’ conservation efforts, the state Supreme Court has kept intact a ruling that makes it harder for municipalities to impose tiered pricing to discourage heavy water use.
The state’s high court upheld a closely watched ruling involving the Orange County city of San Juan Capistrano, rejecting pleas from California water regulators. Gov. Jerry Brown, who has ordered a 25 percent cutback in urban water use, had said the ruling represents a potential “straitjacket” for regulators.
In April, the 4th District Court of Appeal struck down a water-pricing system used by San Juan Capistrano that charged customers considerably more per-gallon for heavier water use. The court said the structure violated Proposition 218, a 1996 statewide ballot measure that said municipalities can’t charge fees that exceed the cost of providing a service.
Reading this article it seems to me that the first gallon of water should be the most expensive in a tiered charging system. It would bear the most cost while the last gallon would be the cheapest to provide.
Water Municipalities have been reverse engineering the water rates to cover the ludicrous pay and benefit packages for their employees. STPUD says they are in line with Prop 218…..are we to just take their word for it? As the meters go in, likely on state or federal grants, people that actually live here and use water year round will be paying through the nose. This, after STPUD claimed rate payers would see little difference in their bills. Talk to anyone with a meter lately? To the person they are outraged and feeling ripped off.
What is the mechanism for auditing/investigating STPUD ? Will it take a lawsuit in every town to get to the bottom of this? And how about a refund of all that money unjustly charged?
I don’t trust STPUD . Class action anyone?
They say they are separating the cost of the water from all the other costs.
The water is free to them. The costs of delivering the water should be the electricity to pump it and the labor costs and wear and tear on machinery associated with pumping the water. All other costs should be equally born by all even if they use no water.
The cost of water seems to be very high, but how can we tell if the costs are being equitably divided?
Atomic. Could you define “ludicrous pay and benefits” for us?
rock, please.
I was recently told by a nice lady on the phone at STPUD that ANY home in the district with at least 2 bedrooms is charged for 3 sewer connections on their monthly bill. I own a few homes here and was wondering if sewer units were transferable as I was being charged for 3 sewer units in a few homes that the assessor says only has a kitchen and a bathroom, or exactly 2 sewer units.
In other words, I am paying for 3 sewer units even though I only have 2 ! She politely asked me if I wanted to be directed to the ordinance that allows them to do this……..come on guys, you are like insurance companies, heads you win, tails you win. And no, I don’t want to see the ‘ordinance’………written for their benefit with some pretzel logic that only serves their interests. PLUS, IF YOU WANT TO REMOVE THE THIRD UNIT IN A ONE BEDROOM HOME, THERE IS A FEE, PLUS INSPECTION PLUS LOW FLOW APPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS blah blah blah. So they can overcharge me as long as they want but to stop the nonsense I have to jump through a bunch of hoops and, unbelievably, must pay for it to happen!!!
The whole charade is a ripoff and should cause everyone to be outraged and look closely at their bills. Plus, the answer was ‘no’, you cannot transfer sewer units….but you will be charged for however many they see fit.
I don’t trust STPUD and they don’t deserve my trust with policies like this.
Atomic. So now you want to rant about sewer hookup rates/policies instead of pay and benefits?
$46 per month or non-metered water and $35 per month for 3 hookups seem about average to me.
This article is about Prop 218. Every California water provider is required to charge according to their actual COSTS for the product. While tiered rates are not automatically considered illegal according to the Supreme Court, they are certainly worth scrutinizing on a local level. How does one gallon over the first tier cost so much more than all the gallons under the first tier. Again, it has to be based on costs, not punishment. My experience with STPUD has generally been good. Good jobs, good people. My beef is with what’s behind the curtain and my recent experience with the ‘ordinances’ certainly gives me pause.