Are you being confused about water rates and recall facts?

The following are facts that should be read before reaching a decision whether or not to recall Water District Directors Jerry Wickham, Jay O'Brien and Mel Griffin.

RATE COMMITTEE

The Water District Board of Directors appointed a Citizen's Rate Committee.

The Rate Committee agrees that a rate increase is needed to keep the water flowing.

The committee was tasked to review the rate structure and make a recommendation to the Board for a final rate structure and amount. The Board expressed its support of this committee and is awaiting the Committee's recommendation.

The ratesetting committee consists of the following members of the community:

 
Mary Harris
Joe Gluvers
Bill Shepherd
Judee English
Don Logan
The ratesetting committee has met weekly since April, starting with instruction about the budget and rate setting process by the District's financial consultant, Bob Reed.

The ratesetting committee is now reviewing the rate structure and the draft budget for next year. The committee is expected to finish work by September 1, 2001.

The public is invited to attend Rate Committee meetings. Call 991-1000 to learn the schedule for the next meeting, or check the front door of the Water District office for a posted agenda.

RATE INCREASE HISTORY

At it's March 26 meeting, the Board chose between two alternative rate structures, intended to "stop the bleeding", while the Rate Committee did it's work. One alternative would have been an "Across the Board" 50% increase, applied to both the base rates and to the cost of additional water. The alternative that was approved,  a "Conservation" rate, will bring the same amount of money in to the District while leaving the base rates the same and increasing the cost of additional water.

The "Conservation" rate chosen puts more of the rate increase burden on the customers who use larger amounts of water.

Mary Harris of the Rate Committee and Darrell Nelson, now the Recall Facilitator, both strongly supported the "Across the Board" rate that was not approved. Both Harris and Nelson are now proponents of recalls of Directors Griffin, Wickham and O'Brien.

Directors voting for the "Conservation" rate: Griffin, Cater, Wickham.
Directors voting against the "Conservation" rate: Blanchard, O'Brien.

CONSERVATION RATE VS. ACROSS THE BOARD

Most of the customers (78%), are on residential lots and have 5/8" meters. The remaining customers (22%) have larger meters and generally use more water.

The "Across the Board" 50% increase would have placed the burden of most of the increase on the 78% with small meters, even though they individually consume less water.

The "Across the Board" alternative would have increased the base rate for 78% of the customers by $9.00, from $18.00 to $27.00. The $27.00 would pay for the first 2000 cubic feet of water per billing period, or 245 gallons per day.

The "Conservation" alternative that was enacted leaves the base rate at it's present $18.00, with less water included in the base rate. If enough water is used to bring the total bill up to the $27.00 of the "Across the Board" alternative's base rate, the customer would use 3467 cubic feet. That means that for the same $27.00 that would have been billed if the "Across the Board" alternative was chosen, 78% of the customers will receive an additional 180 gallons per day, for a total of 425 gallons per day.

The "Conservation" alternative that was chosen puts more of the rate increase burden on the 22% who are larger water users. The 78% who use less water have an advantage with the "Conservation" rate.

The "Conservation" rate may be replaced with a "final" rate, after the Rate Committee finishes its work and makes a recommendation to the Board. This is expected by September 1, 2001.

RATE INCREASE NOT IMPOSED

Even though the Board of Directors adopted the "Conservation" rate, it was not placed into effect when anticipated. This is because the computer billing program could not be updated in time for the bill mailed in May.

RECALL ELECTION COST

If enough signatures are obtained on the recall petitions, a special recall election will be held. The cost to the District will range from $48,973.00 to $55,754.50, based on a cost estimate from the Registrar of Voters. Each ratepayer's share of this cost will be about $13.00.
METERS ON WELLS
Some petition gatherers have been misled to believe that the Water District, and the Directors being recalled, wish to place meters on private wells. Nothing could be further from the truth. Sacramento County has considered such a charge, and the Rio Linda/Elverta Community Water District has consistently and firmly opposed such an action.