Bob Hazard Michele Higgins wearing March Madness in Montecito “Joseph Ribkoff” Mr. Hazard is an Associate Editor of this paper and a former president of Birnam Wood Golf Club
Carrie Cooper wearing “Joseph Ribkoff”
T
1) The Surcharge may not be “temporary.” A temporary increase typically has a date-certain or condition-certain expiration. MWD’s proposed increase stipulates that “the surcharge is temporary and will be phased out once water conditions have returned to normal, and when the District has financially recovered the additional costs related to the water shortage emergency.” 2) The emergency shortage is of money, not water. MWD does not have a current shortage of water. Quite the contrary, MWD general manager Tom Mosby has secured a remarkably robust 6,689 acre-feet (AF) water supply for the 2014/15 water year to service projected sales of less than 3,000 AF. The water supply outlook for 2015/16 is also adequate, with a projected supply of 5,656 AF to service demand estimated at 4,500 AF. The problem today is that MWD does not sell enough water to cover its fixed and variable overhead costs, including pensions, healthcare, legal expenses, con1485 EAST VALLEY ROAD sultants, and joint power obligations. The DistrictMONTECITO, is looking at a $5 million annual CA 93108 • (805)969-6962 operating loss on less than $10 million a year in water sales. 3) The “Temporary Surcharge” is really a fee increase. The MWD board should have realized that rationing and its penalties would reduce water sales, leading to a budget shortfall that could only be ameliorated by increased water fees. The new surcharge doesn’t raise any new money to cover this year’s 17-percent increase in routine operating expenses, nor any of the expected future costs of developing water security. Montecito needs a plan and a proposed budget for possible desalination, wastewater recycling, or even dredging Cachuma and Jameson. Additional “surcharges” may be needed to fund these programs, which is not a pleasant thought, but somebody has to pay for them. Hearing Scheduled for March 24 MWD has scheduled a second public hearing for 6:30 pm, Tuesday, March 24, at Montecito Union School to again present the proposed surcharge, which will be followed that same evening by a vote of the MWD board. Under California State Proposition 218, MWD has the freedom to pass and implement the proposed surcharge unless 50 percent plus one of its customers deliver written letters of opposition (no emails allowed) to the District office on or before the date of the hearing.
hat: Giovannio clutch: Fena photographer: Joseph Souza
he Montecito Water District Board (MWD) presented a proposal for a “Temporary Water Shortage Emergency Surcharge” at a contentious public hearing held March 12 at Montecito Union School. The case for another rate increase was made by MWD consultant Bartle Wells Associates, whose representative opined: “We need to restore the financial stability of MWD. The District cannot continue to lose $5 million a year.” MWD first declared a water shortage emergency a year ago, a wake-up call traceable to a series of non-decisions over previous years. After the last multiyear drought, for example, the MWD board should probably have encouraged structuring of a strategic plan to recycle wastewater, embrace desalination, or take other significant measures to ensure long-term water security and independence. The proposed “Temporary Water Emergency Surcharge” seems to have at least three obvious flaws:
Lana Marmé Fine Apparel & Footwear 1485 EAST VALLEY ROAD
MONTECITO, CA 93108 • (805)969-6962
Building
Peace of
Mind
The Montecito Association in Action During the past week, the Montecito Association (MA), under the leadership of new president Cindy Feinberg, voted 15-0 to notify all its members of its concerns and to suggest they express their thoughts to the MWD Board, either in writing or by attending the public hearing on March 24. Sending a letter of concern will let MWD know that the community wants MWD to take a more thoughtful look at the overall water situation. Montecito residents deserve to see a full strategic plan of action for meeting its water needs, as well as the overall projected costs attached to such a project before being asked to spend any more money for water. Moving Forward Montecito, indeed all of California, must come up with a plan to secure new sources of water and to recycle what we do have. NASA scientist Jay Familglietti summed it up nicely in a recent op-ed about water in the Los Angeles Times: “This crisis belongs to all of us – not just a handful of decision-makers. Water is our most important resource, but the public remains detached from discussions and decisions. The process works just fine when water is in abundance. In times of crisis, however, we must demand that planning for California’s water security be an honest, transparent, and forward-looking process. Most important, we must make sure that there is, in fact, a plan.” •MJ 19 – 26 March 2015
GIFFIN & CRANE GENERAL CONTRACTORS, INC.
Visit Our Website GiffinAndCrane.com (805) 966-6401 > License 611341
Awar d Wi nni n g Bui l der s Si n ce 1 9 86.
The flower in the vase smiles but no longer laughs. – Malcolm de Chazal
MONTECITO JOURNAL
5