GILROY
– The Santa Clara Valley Water District is raising groundwater
rates again for municipal and agricultural customers in South
County – but some San Martin residents are wondering why they
should pay more for a product in some places contaminated by
perchlorate.
Water district officials say they understand the concerns, but
it’s not quite that simple.
Citing the perchlorate issue, at least two San Martin residents
have written the water district urging it to reconsider plans to
increase the so-called
”
pump tax
”
that well users pay for the right to tap South County’s
groundwater basin.
GILROY – The Santa Clara Valley Water District is raising groundwater rates again for municipal and agricultural customers in South County – but some San Martin residents are wondering why they should pay more for a product in some places contaminated by perchlorate.
Water district officials say they understand the concerns, but it’s not quite that simple.
Citing the perchlorate issue, at least two San Martin residents have written the water district urging it to reconsider plans to increase the so-called “pump tax” that well users pay for the right to tap South County’s groundwater basin.
“We respectfully request that you reconsider the proposed rate increase,” wrote Center Avenue residents Kurt and JoAnn Brittain in April. The couple – who say they are seniors on a fixed income – are using bottled water after their well tested positive for perchlorate in February.
“We are already paying for something your staff advised us not to use,” they said.
Several more have expressed a desire for the district to actually lower rates because of the chemical’s presence, said Bob Cerruti, a San Martin resident who is vice chairman of a special community committee overseeing perchlorate cleanup.
Cerruti – who already has seen rates rise steadily in 16 years in San Martin and whose own well has tested positive for the chemical – shares the opposition to the increase.
“Who would be willing to pay for polluted water? The answer is nobody,” Cerruti said. “So why are we being forced to pay for this water and on top of that a rate increase?
“There’s no justification. This is the wrong time for the water district to be proposing a rate increase.”
In a draft response letter to the Brittains, district officials said they understand residents’ health concerns and are working with other agencies to restore the groundwater quality as quickly as possible.
However, even when perchlorate is detected, the water remains suitable for most household and outdoor uses, they wrote. They noted the district has paid to provide bottled water for affected residents.
And whether the water is useable at this very moment ignores the fact that the groundwater basin cannot replenish itself, district spokesman Mike DiMarco said in an interview. Demand has grown dramatically over past decades along with the valley’s population and industry, he said.
“I understand that feeling – I really do,” DiMarco said of the residents’ concerns. “But it’s not such a cut-and-dried argument.”
If approved, the increases could eventually mean jumps of pennies a month on municipal residential bills, up to a $20 yearly jump for many private well users and increases of as much as several hundred dollars a year for South County farmers.
Under the current proposal, the cost for South County cities to buy groundwater for their treatment plants would jump from $140 to $160 per acre-foot. That’s a roughly 80 cent monthly increase for an average household that uses about 1,500 cubic feet a month, DiMarco said.
The charge for private well owners is based on the size of their lot. If a property owner has a 2.5 acre lot, they’re probably charged for half an acre-foot a year, Di Marco said. Larger 5- to 10-acre lots likely ring in at a full acre-foot. Meanwhile, the cost to buy subsidized agricultural water would rise from $14 an acre-foot to $16 an acre-foot, although farmers can qualify for up to $3.50 per acre-foot in discounts by participating in water quality programs.
The proposed increases come in the fifth year of a 10-year program to raise rates instituted by the district in 1998. Last year the so-called “municipal and industrial” rates rose from $130 to $140 an acre-foot, while ag rates rose from $13 to $14 an acre-foot.
District officials say there are several factors driving the increase, mainly increased costs for recharging the underground aquifer with local water, purchasing additional water outside the county to augment local supplies, capital projects and security.
For example, negotiations over the costs to pipe water in from the San Luis Reservoir suggest that rates for that supply – which can make up as much as half of the county’s total supply – are likely to double.
The hikes also help cover increased costs linked with the eventual doubling in capacity of the South County wastewater authority’s recycled water system, which distributes highly treated Morgan Hill and Gilroy wastewater to irrigate selected farms, golf courses and parks.
The district also has faced increased security costs since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks that have continued based on national intelligence suggestions.
“The costs of doing business continue to grow,” Di Marco said.
Projections given to the Gilroy City Council last week showed residential rates rising between 5 and 10 percent a year over the course of the next five years as the city officials pass through the increased costs of the groundwater rates to the consumer.
Mayor Tom Springer and Councilman Roland Velasco have asked for a more detailed accounting of the changes from a water district representative.
Gilroy water rates could rise more if perchlorate is eventually found in its municipal supply, officials said. All of Gilroy’s municipal wells have tested “non-detect” to date. A Leavesley Avenue monitoring well that lies within a half-mile of one city well has tested positive, however.
The Santa Clara Valley Farm Bureau hopes the ag rate will stay at its current $11.50 an acre foot for farmers participating in the lab programs.
A public hearing on the rate increases is scheduled for Tuesday’s water district board meeting, slated to begin at 8:30 a.m. at 5700 Almaden Expressway in San Jose.
