Rate increase proposed: Part III
The Los Angeles Times today reported that there is a proposed rate increase by the Metropolitan Water District. Why should you care? Because if you live in one of the cities represented by the 26 districts that are part of the MWD, than that means more money out of your pocket. The increase is proposed at 14.3 percent, but Water Replinishment District of Southern California Director Willard Murray is suggesting that cost go up to 20 percent.
MWD board to vote on rate hike
By Deborah Schoch, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
March 11, 2008
Some Southern California households would pay up to 14% more per month for water in 2009 under a plan unanimously approved Monday by a key regional water panel.
The water rate increase, driven by shortages in supplies, would vary widely depending on how much water cities and local water agencies buy from the MWD, which serves 18 million consumers in six counties.
The controversial rate hike goes before the entire Metropolitan Water District board today, with some members saying an even larger increase might be needed.
Although the 14.3% increase unanimously passed the MWD's budget committee Monday, some members voiced concern that the hike does not cover the full cost of bringing water to the region and will force them to take $117 million from shrinking reserves. Rates would have to go up 20% next year to cover expenses, said Brian G. Thomas, the agency's chief financial officer.
Board member Willard H. Murray Jr. said he plans to propose a 20% increase when the full 37-member board meets at noon today at MWD headquarters in Los Angeles.
"We should collect enough to pay for the services we provide," said Murray, who represents the Carson-based West Basin Municipal Water District. He failed in a Monday motion to force a vote on a 20% increase. Read more
Comments
I think Willard Murray wants to have those monies dedicated for the placement along the 91 Freeway of more signs honoring him.
Posted by: Dog Spot | March 11, 2008 10:56 PM
Personally, I think the actual water charge is too low. Right now, I pay about $50 every two months to my water provider. About $45 of those dollars are for various "connection" and "reservoir" fees. That's what I'd pay if my actual water usage were zero gallons over two months.
So I'm only paying about $2.50 a month for my actual water usage. If they doubled the water charge, I'd be paying $5/month.
As I said: Big deal.
If we raise the actual water charge, maybe people in southern California will remember that they live in a semi-arid environment, and stop wasting so much of their water.
Posted by: Anonymous | March 12, 2008 10:45 AM