DEAR EDITOR:
I think that the Santa Clara Valley Water District should not
raise the water rates on those well owners that have been impacted
by their perchlorate levels of 4.0 PPB or higher.
DEAR EDITOR:
I think that the Santa Clara Valley Water District should not raise the water rates on those well owners that have been impacted by their perchlorate levels of 4.0 PPB or higher. After reviewing the water district’s notice of hearings on ground water changes for fiscal 2003-2004 and their response to the editorial written in The Dispatch, I have changed my mind that every well owner in the South County (zone W-5) should have their rates reduced.
First, the water district lists four types of benefits that well owners pay for. One of which is recharge or replenishment of the groundwater basin. This year, we have had 20 inches of rainfall in San Martin, which is greater than the average rainfall for this area. We have had more natural recharge than the water district says it provides to us. The groundwater cleanup oversite program, as well as programs to detect and protect groundwater from nitrates, is not working. The third benefit is a water efficiency program that could help farmers to water their crops in a more efficient manner. The last benefit is the development of recycled water to boost water supply reliability. I do not know of any private well owner that is currently using recycled water that is being provided by the water district in the South Valley.
The water district is going to raise our rates to $160 per acre foot, that is a 14.3 percent increase in one year.
Since I have lived in San Martin, (16 years plus) the water district has raised our water rates at an average of 39 percent per year. Where else have you been so impacted by these out of site increases for a utility service?
There are many retired senior residents in San Martin that are on a fixed income who cannot continue to be hit with these huge increases. The water district states that in the current budget year, they expect to see a $1.8 million gap between costs and revenue. I would say that it is time for the water district to bring their costs in line with the revenue received. The residents in the South Valley cannot keep paying these out-of-line increases for services that are not being supplied.
In the mid ’80s, Sig Sanchez wrote a letter to the Mercury News, titled Consolidation will reduce South County Water Costs. What he said is that “South County voters have a golden opportunity Nov. 3 to reduce water taxes and provide better water management in their area by voting yes on Measure G.” This measure would merge the Gavilan Water Conservation District with the Santa Clara Valley Water District. He also said that, “However, if Measure G fails, the rates will more than double.” Well, we all know now how much our water rates have increased since Measure G was passed by the voters.
The water district states that with the new rates, there will still be a deficit next year of $2 million. But rather than make up the shortfall now, we’ve chosen to avoid “rate shock” by slowly raising rates over the next decade. I call 14.3 percent increase in one year a rate shock. The water district has to slow down their growth and get their expenses under control.
Robert J. Cerruti, San Martin
Submitted Wednesday, June 18 to ed****@****ic.com
