If we all only had it as easy as the Santa Clara Valley Water
District. With what we believe is little control over salaries and
spending, the water district taps the pockets of its customers as
simply and as mindlessly as we turn on the taps for a drink of
water.
For six straight years the water district has sought a price hike
If we all only had it as easy as the Santa Clara Valley Water District. With what we believe is little control over salaries and spending, the water district taps the pockets of its customers as simply and as mindlessly as we turn on the taps for a drink of water.
For the sixth consecutive year the district is proposing a rate hike. If approved, it will once again boost the cost of water for everyone – consumers, businesses and South County farmers. The water district plays the role of wholesaler, arbiter and ultimate middleman in the water supply chain. It stores and buys water, then charges fees to municipal governments, other water retailers and farmers. Those fees pay the district for the water it uses to replenish the ground water supplies that provide drinking water to a thirsty populace and to irrigate the food destined for the dinner tables.
The water district proposes to increase its agricultural rates 6.4 percent, from $15.75 per acre foot to $16.50 per acre foot. For municipalities and other water retailing utilities, it wants a boost of 7.8 percent.
Enough with the ‘spoiled children’ reminders from SC directors
The Santa Clara County Farm Bureau – representing our local farmers – and the cities of Morgan Hill and Gilroy are protesting the suggested increase. But protesting water district increases has been like sticking the proverbial finger in the dike, though given the water district’s rapidly declining reputation that may be changing as more and more people are taking notice.
The directors, Sig Sanchez and Rosemary Kamei from South County, are more comfortable reminding South County residents that they are like spoiled children because we pay less for water than North County residents. True enough, but that was the promise when we voted to merge our Gavilan District in the late ’80s with SCVWD and the fact is that we store plenty of water here below the ground and above it with the reservoirs.
The water district needs to seriously and significantly tighten its belt instead of imposing increase after increase after increase.
Remember the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury report which revealed that been 2000 and 2006, annual salary costs in the district doubled – DOUBLED – to almost $100 million. Remember that former water district CEO Stan Williams resigned after a series of controversies last year, including the below-board hiring of a water district board member, Greg Zlotnick, to a $184,000 district job. (Zlotnick is the same official who charged taxpayers more than $70,000 in travel expenses in 2003.) And remember the news that 33 employees received more than $152,000 per year.
Full review of salaries welcome, but directors should demand cuts
Martin Steele, the district’s interim CEO, has promised a full review of staffing levels and salaries by early summer. Wonderful news, but it won’t be worth a pail of water if Sanchez and Kamei vote for yet another increase. There shouldn’t be any increase this year and the directors should demand that Steele plan to reduce current costs and hold the line on future costs so that the agency doesn’t have to keep going back to the public trough for another drink.
Act now
Don’t bother trying to find a direct e-mail address for Rosemary Kamei or Sig Sanchez on the district’s web site,
