We've been following the drought by the numbers for more than a year here and here. Some of the historical and political nuances of how water is allocated are here and the last round of restrictions proposed by Gov. Brown are here. Now courtesy of this Daily Journal article, we start to get to the meat of the issue -- fines --and we read of yet another bureaucracy that is involved; sort of
Gov. Jerry Brown’s landmark mandatory orders requiring the biggest users to conserve more will impact communities differently. Yet many San Mateo County residents must brace for water rate increases as the area’s main supplier, the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, announced a 28 percent rate increase slated for July.
On Friday, the State Water Resources Control Board is poised to release more details on how it plans to implement Brown’s orders to cut statewide consumption 25 percent through tiered conservation standards ranging from 10 percent to 35 percent.
While some water officials expressed concern with the preliminary framework that bases a residents’ reduction target on September 2014 consumption — a time of year where people typically use more water — all utilities and cities will be required to cut back further or potentially face fines of up to $10,000 a day.
“I think now the issue is going to be there’s fines, this is real. What we’ve been in is a voluntary situation, we all have no choice, we’re in a mandatory situation now,” said Nicole Sandkulla, CEO of the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency. “Everybody has to get serious about it to a level that’s different from where we were last year. I think as residents, we all have to take a look again and say ‘OK, what’s the next thing I can do? I can’t just do what I did last year.’ Because for most of us, that’s not going to cut it.”
Based on the preliminary framework and September data, most San Mateo County residents consume between 55 gallons and 110 gallons of water each day and would be ordered to conserve 20 percent compared to their 2013 usage.
Sandkulla said BAWSCA, which represents the interests of local suppliers who purchase wholesale water from the SFPUC, submitted comments and concerns it hopes will be incorporated in the state’s draft regulations anticipated for release on Friday, a vote in May and adoption in June.
I had never heard of BAWSCA, but their website notes that back in 2003:
BAWSCA was enabled by AB 2058 (Authors: Assembly members Louis Papan, John Dutra and Joe Simitian). The Legislature’s overwhelming support for the bill demonstrated the state’s recognition of the need for local government to protect the health, safety and economic well being of 1.7 million people, businesses and community organizations in the three counties.
You have to wonder if their website is up to date or if their mission and oversight are out of date because the B'game member of their Board of Directors is listed as Rosalie O'Mahony who has been out of office for almost five and a half years! And I hate to think of how well run any board with 26 members can possibly be. Even the Policy Committee has ten members. Are any of them calling ABAG and Planning Departments to see how many new water hook-ups are in queue in the Bay Area?
The drought is a very serious issue. Without water what will we do? But I find it very hypocritical for our Governor and our cities to ask us to cut back our water usage while they continue to build like there is no tomorrow!
Now is the time to take this drought serious and consider a moratorium on building permits.
No new water hookups we obviously cannot sustain at this time.
I am sick and tired of our state and cities talking from both sides of their mouth!
Posted by: Joanne | April 17, 2015 at 09:49 AM
Big amen.
Posted by: Peter Garrison | April 17, 2015 at 12:53 PM
If the city wants to do something constructive about water they can stop requiring the special double-flush toilets. Most people are doing the "if it's yellow, let it mellow" thing already but the double-flush toilets aka low-flow are not saving anything.
Posted by: Just wondering | April 27, 2015 at 10:06 AM
Here is an OpEd by the Foster City council member who heads the BAWSCA
http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articles/opinions/2015-04-29/op-ed-water-water-everywhere/1776425142438.html
I particularly liked this comment:
"It would seem to me that a fair solution would be to say that each household gets so much water and everyone needs to reduce to that level. Thus, prior conservation efforts are not penalized and prior abuse is no longer tolerated. Unfortunately, there is no one making decisions listening to me so that is not what is going to happen."
Posted by: Joe | April 29, 2015 at 11:53 AM
Joe,
Thanks for posting this very important information regarding the current drought conditions. Just wanted to clarify that the City of Burlingame is member of a 26 members agencies called BAWSCA (Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency) since its formation in 2003. The Burlingame City Council has recently re-appointed former Mayor and Councilmember Rosalie O'Mahony to the BAWSCA Board to represent Burlingame. Rosalie with her vast knowledge in the area of water supply and infrastructure, continues to well represent Burlingame and the Peninsula region on water issues through BAWSCA.
Again, I want to thank everyone for your efforts to conserve water in Burlingame and raise awareness of the issues in the light of the current drought conditions.
Posted by: Syed | May 04, 2015 at 10:11 AM
Thanks, Syed. It would be of interest to a few people to know what direction the Council has provided to Rosalie regarding seeking out new supply and storage vs just telling everyone to conserve.
This problem is not going away.
Today's Wall Street Journal has an article about East Bay building. Lennar is already committed to a major build on Treasure Island and at a former shipyard, but the article notes that last week it purchased 111 acres at the old General Motors/Toyota plant in Fremont where "it plans a dense mix of 2,200 apartments and houses, R&D space, and offices, all centered around a new station for the commuter rail that leads to San Francisco." All with Fremont's city "planners" endorsement.
Has the BAWSCA written to every city in the Bay Area suggesting that they revisit old and new approvals? Is there an intent to increase the cost of new hook-ups? This feels like bureacracy adrift (no pun intended).
Posted by: Joe | May 06, 2015 at 02:29 PM
what is the latest with residential water service in Burlingame? we will see a rate hike? I heard that Burlingame is below the usage average and the rates will remain as they are? anyone else hear this or something different?
Posted by: lisa t | May 09, 2015 at 08:04 PM
Good question. I have not heard anything but so far the trend seems to be on the voluntary conservation push rather than on the rate or fines ideas.
Posted by: Joe | May 10, 2015 at 02:40 PM