Water stories on tap
Our coverage of water districts will increase. The public -- and the Tribune -- generally doesn't pay attention to the large number of water districts in the San Gabriel Valley and in Los Angeles County, and what I am finding is that we should. Each district has a lot of power and money -- more money than is found in many of our cities operating budgets.
What stories are out there that should be looked into?
I would suggest looking into the commissions paid for water rights, consulting fees paid, travel/expenses paid. Particular importance should be paid to firms being paid commissions and/or consulting fees and there relationship with various board members.
Additionally, expenses listed as "water expenses" when in reality they are being used to operate some other city business.
I completely disagree with the notion of consolidating water districts. How is the individual ratepayer better served by a single, larger, and more remote entity?
For example, offically merging West/Central Basins would create (from two already large agencies) a huge district, running from La Habra Heights to the South Bay and points even further north. I'm not sure that re-creating a bureaucratic giant like the City of Los Angeles at another level of government is very wise.
Not all the local water agencies are public, over here in San Marino we are at the mercy of Cal-Am, which is a subsidiary of American Water, a "big water" holding company. Our rates are double those of adjacent suppliers like Sunnyslope. There is an equal lack of accountability in this situation, and water rate increases cost the City in legal fees to fight this.