Department of Water Resources
A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment
April 24, 2009
5. Agencies, Programs, People –
Judge rules Silicon Valley water fee illegal; customers could get refunds
The
Fresno
The
Livingston puts off vote on water fee increase
Judge rules Silicon Valley water fee illegal; customers could get refunds
The San Jose
By Paul Rogers
In a decision that could force Silicon Valley's largest water provider to refund millions — or perhaps tens of millions — of dollars to its customers, a judge on Thursday ruled that one of the Santa Clara Valley Water District's primary fees is illegal.
Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Kevin Murphy found that the district's "groundwater extraction fee" requires voter approval under Proposition 218, a state law passed in 1996.
If the judge's ruling is upheld, the consequences for the agency could be substantial. Last year, the district made about $72 million from the fee, roughly 20 percent of its $358 million total budget.
Whether a refund, or how much of a refund, will be required, is unclear. The judge is scheduled to decide next month.
"We're disappointed, obviously," said Debra Cauble, attorney for the water district, a wholesale water supplier to 1.8 million county residents. "It was a very complex case and we thought that we had made a good presentation to the judge based on the law and the facts."
Cauble said the district will appeal.
The lawsuit was filed in 2005 by Great Oaks Water Company, a privately held retail firm that provides drinking water to about 100,000 people who live in
Great Oaks said the water district overcharged it in 2005 and 2006 to pump water from the natural aquifers that lie underneath Santa Clara County, and that the fees, which critics have derisively called the "pump tax," are illegal.
The judge agreed, calling it "uncontroverted" that the district requires voter approval to collect the fee under Proposition 218, which mandates voter approval for fees and other government charges.
Further, the judge said the water district violated its own regulations, which require the agency to spend money collected from the groundwater fee on water supply, rather than areas like flood control.
"We see this decision as an opportunity for people in this county to stop paying too much for the water they get. It shows that public officials can be held accountable," said John Roeder, CEO of Great Oaks.
Great Oaks paid $5 million in groundwater fees in 2005. Tim Gustman, general counsel for Great Oaks, said the ruling means that all of the groundwater fees the district has collected from all customers since 2005 must be refunded.
Districtwide, that could total more than $250 million.
If the district is required to hold an election to make the fee legal in the future, he said, Proposition 218 mandates it obtain approval from either two-thirds of all
Roughly 4,000 customers in
The groundwater basin is vital to Silicon Valley's water supply, providing roughly half of all the region's drinking water, with the other half coming from
The groundwater fee helps the district pay to pump water back underground every winter through percolation ponds and networks of pipes and reservoirs. Overpumping in the 1920s and 1930s caused widespread water shortages then and caused the ground to sink up to 10 feet in some parts of the county.
The fee also funds cleanup of chemicals, such as perchlorate and MTBE, that have contaminated some groundwater over the years. The district charges $275 an acre foot to pump groundwater in
The judge ruled in Great Oaks' favor that the water district mixed money between accounts; improperly subsidized some users, such as farmers, with low rates; and "overbudgeted for employees, cost of equipment, and water contract purchases" by placing excess money in its reserve accounts.
Emily Cote, a water district attorney, said money in the reserve accounts was saved to spend on water-related matters, making the district in compliance with its regulations.#
http://www.mercurynews.com/breakingnews/ci_12213738?source=rss
Fresno
The Fresno
The drought strikes home for
With the city facing reduced supplies from the federal Bureau of Reclamation, the council unanimously voted to bar all daytime outdoor irrigation. At present, outdoor watering is allowed between 8 and 11 a.m. on designated days, based on address.
The newly revised rules also require that a bucket be used for car-washing, although a hose with a shut-off nozzle can be used for what the rules term a "quick rinse."
The restrictions are mandatory and take effect immediately. There are fines for noncompliance, but first-time violators receive just a warning, officials said.
Strict as they might be, the restrictions are nowhere near as severe as those contemplated in February, before a series of winter storms boosted the likely federal water allocations, said Lon Martin, assistant public utilities director.
At that time, the Bureau of Reclamation was warning that the city might get only 25% of what its contract calls for. Now, the projection is for an 85% allotment. Those ups and downs led Martin to call the current drought "the most volatile water year on record."
The city gets much of its drinking water from wells. But it relies on federal water, typically delivered from
The goal of the rule changes is to reduce water use by 20%. That is in line with Gov. Schwarzenegger's Feb. 27 drought declaration asking cities to step up water conservation by enough to cut water use by 20%.
Under the new rules, residents can water only between 7 p.m. and 6 a.m. In addition, homes with odd-numbered addresses may water only on Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays. Homes with even-numbered addresses may water only on Sundays, Wednesdays and Fridays.
There was one piece of good news. Martin said that the city's federal water supply may yet increase but is unlikely to drop, at least for the coming summer.
"I think it's a low probability we're going to have a reduction in our water supply for the rest of this year," he said.
In other action, the City Council:
* Authorized $1.3 million in repairs to two failed gas turbine engines, which generate electricity at the Fresno-Clovis sewage treatment plant.
* Agreed to apply for federal stimulus money to build two sewer systems. One application for $897,167 would serve the old Herndon town in northwest
* Tentatively agreed to buy 3.6 acres on the west side of
* Took no action from its closed-session discussion of the
http://www.fresnobee.com/local/story/1354077.html
Livingston puts off vote on water fee increase
In the face of opposition at the Tuesday night meeting, the council voted to extend the public comment period for the two items until their next meeting on May 5, even though there had already been notice of the fee increases.
Only 22 protest votes were turned in against the increase out of a total of roughly 3,000 households.
The last time the water rate was increased was 1995. The city has been dipping into its general fund since then to pay for the cost of providing water.
A similar situation exists with sewer and garbage fees. This has created growing deficits on all of the three services.
"There hasn't been a council yet that has voted to do what we have to do," said Mayor Pro Tem Frank Vierra, as the council deliberated on whether to take action on any of the items or wait for more public input.
City Manager Richard Warne urged the council to finally make the hard choice to increase fees so the city can fix its infrastructure and stay financially healthy.
Opponents of the fee increases included townsfolk who said few could afford paying 175 percent more on their water bills. James Marnatti, director of environmental affairs for Foster Farms, said that the city's projected fees were based on infrastructure costs that he said were way overpriced.
He said Foster Farms does not contest the need for an increase, just the way in which the city has gone about the process.
The council did pass a garbage rate increase in a 4-1 vote. The rate increase will start at $ 23.25 a month in June and increase to $32.09 by February 2013.#
http://www.mercedsunstar.com/livingston/story/804249.html
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DWR’s California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff, for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader’s services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost2.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news . DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of
No comments:
Post a Comment