Connect with us

San Diego, CA

The Truth About the Cost of Water: Dismantling the Water Authority Would Harm All San Diegans

Published

on

The Truth About the Cost of Water: Dismantling the Water Authority Would Harm All San Diegans


This commentary was submitted by Madaffer and nine other former chairs of the San Diego County Water Authority Board of Directors.

Joni Mitchell may have said it best: “You don’t know what you’ve got ‘til it’s gone.”

In the case of water, those lyrics couldn’t be more true.

As former San Diego County Water Authority Board Chairs, we heard and responded to demands from the region’s working families, civic and business leaders in the 1990s when our only major water source dried up.

Advertisement

Collectively, with our member agencies, we then spent three decades relentlessly securing new water supplies and investing in multi-billion-dollar upgrades that will last for generations.  We remained steadfast in making the necessary and difficult decisions to support the entire San Diego region.

Addressing the San Diego region’s water cost challenges requires honest, fact-based conversations and meaningful actions. Unfortunately, some recent public comments fall far short of this standard.

We all want safe and reliable water at the lowest possible cost. The water we enjoy in San Diego County comes at a higher cost – but having no water at all or having no regional decision-making body looking out for San Diegans is even more costly. That approach would truly be turning the clock back decades and jeopardizing our economy and quality of life.

San Diego gets less annual rain than Tucson, Arizona. Yet, today, our region enjoys independent, locally controlled, safe and reliable water supplies despite having few natural water supplies. That means it’s easy to forget what a drought is like because over the past two decades, our economy, businesses, families and way of life have been uninterrupted by water shortages.

Because of investments, the Water Authority has executed this strategy with the lowest possible cost in mind. But  in recent years, we have seen to slower than expected population growth in San Diego. That plus a successful water conservation program added to our financial pressures.

Advertisement

We may have abundance now, but we must never lose sight of potential water shortages which will continue to cycle through our region, exacerbated by a changing climate. 

For more than 80 years, the San Diego region has worked through their differences at the Water Authority to make sure high-quality water always comes out of our faucets even during California’s famously severe droughts.

Today, we must come together again without sacrificing San Diego County’s water security or hurting hardworking residents and businesses. We all deserve the truth about water rates and how the Water Authority delivers water to all of us. In the spirit of restarting the dialogue, we want to address some fact-based responses to a few of the recent false or misleading statements.

Claim 1: “It is no longer acceptable for the residents and businesses of the City to carry the burden of ever-increasing water costs imposed by the (the Water Authority),”from San Diego City Councilmember Sean Elo-Rivera’s letter to the general manager of the Water Authority April 22.

FACT: This is not true. The Water Authority charges the city of San Diego, its largest customer, the same as everyone else.  Today, we are all paying for exactly what the city and other regional leaders demanded decades ago: to never again experience the crippling impacts of drought.

Advertisement

Claim 2: “The Water Authority has ignored calls for more realistic (water sales) projections, streamlined operations, and smarter debt management,” from the Elo-Rivera letter.

FACT: This also is not true. Water sales projections are provided directly to the Water Authority by the city of San Diego and other member agencies. The largest variations in sales are typically the result of a disconnect between what the city of San Diego predicts and what actually happens – variations that have a disruptive effect on every other agency in the region because they impact collective regional water rate calculations. As for debt management and streamlining, an array of prudent financial strategies at the Water Authority have produced $500 million in rate savings in recent years. 

Claim 3: “(E)very structural and institutional option must be on the table,” from the Elo-Rivera letter.

FACT: This echoes a small number of insiders and appears to be a call to dissolve an agency that has served the entire San Diego region successfully for more than 80 years. Dissolution of the Water Authority would simply shift the costs from the Water Authority to local agencies like the city of San Diego, which is already facing its own fiscal challenges. Dismantling the Water Authority would harm and disenfranchise all San Diegans and create enormous operational and financial risks that would only drive rates higher for the region’s 3.3 million residents who are in need of the water the Water Authority provides.

Claim 4: “For too long, the SDCWA has operated at arm’s length from the public, from the City’s customers…,” from the Elo-Rivera letter.

Advertisement

FACT: Again, we respectfully disagree. The strategy that has delivered water security to the region over the past 30 years was a direct response to the region’s residents, civic and business leaders demanding that the Water Authority provide greater water resilience to protect our economy and quality of life. At every step, the city of San Diego has been leading or supporting the investments which has more than 40 percent of the vote on the Water Authority Board of Directors. In any case, the Water Authority remains committed to operating in the most transparent manner to ensure the public has the most up-to-date information on our region’s water supplies, cost of service and rates.

Claim 5: “The increased operating cost is a result of the increasing costs to purchase water from SDCWA…,” wrote Matt Vespi, the city’s chief financial officer, in a letter to the Water Authority April 18.

FACT: This is partially true but omits important facts. Water Authority rates have been rising along with everything else over the past decade due to a variety of factors outside of the control of the Water Authority. That said, the agency has worked to reduce rates in a variety of ways from creating a rate stabilization fund, managing and offloading supplies, resolving litigation and reducing operational expenses. As the city of San Diego completes Phase 1 of a recycled water plant, it too will experience increased operating costs.  

Although the city’s Public Utility Department has not yet disclosed the anticipated financial impact to its ratepayers this year, it’s likely well above the cost of Water Authority supplies. If so, one would assume city residents will see increases in their water and wastewater bills. The bottom line is water security unfortunately comes at a higher cost than any of us would like, which is why it is imperative for the region to continue to work collaboratively. 

Claim 6: “If we have water that is not being used by our member agencies, then we should sell it and use that revenue to ease the burden for working San Diegans ,” from the Elo-Rivera letter.

Advertisement

FACT: This is true in part but avoids the reality that our region may very well need more water in the future so our planning must also encompass that possibility. The Water Authority has been leading efforts for the past two years to monetize its water supplies and share the benefits of its hard work with other water suppliers throughout the Southwest on a temporary or permanent basis to protect our future. This work is complex due to a long history of legal cases, state laws and century old federal regulations. It doesn’t happen overnight — even though we all wish it did – but it remains the highest priority of the Water Authority.

Looking forward, the Water Authority will remain focused on addressing rate stability, providing drought-proof water supplies, as well as leading the region and the industry in innovative ways to move water where it is needed for the benefit of all San Diego County ratepayers. Reassigning the responsibility for maintaining critical regional water infrastructure to multiple self-interested parties would be a true disservice to all San Diegans.

Our goal has been and continues to be safe and reliable water at the lowest cost. Dissolving the regional water agency would do nothing to achieve this. Instead, it would set us back decades and put our future at risk.

Voice of San Diego confirmed this letter was signed by the following former chairs of the San Diego County Water Authority:

  • Mike Madigan – 1990-1992
  • Mark Watton – 1995-1996
  • Chris Frahm – 1997-1998
  • Bernie Rhinerson – 2003-2004
  • Michael Hogan – 2010-2012
  • Mark Weston – 2014-2016
  • Mark Muir – 2016-2018
  • Jim Madaffer – 2018-2020
  • Gary Croucher – 2020-2022
  • Mel Katz – 2022-2024



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

San Diego, CA

Mayor Gloria defends Balboa Park paid parking, blames council for rocky rollout

Published

on

Mayor Gloria defends Balboa Park paid parking, blames council for rocky rollout


San Diego will put off issuing citations for paid parking in Balboa Park for about one month while improvements are made, but Mayor Todd Gloria says the new system is functioning well and being “actively adopted.”

In a long and harshly worded memo released Thursday, Gloria said recent calls by City Council members to suspend the program were politically motivated and examples of bad governance and erratic decision-making.

Gloria also deflected blame for the chaotic way enforcement began Monday, when city officials raced to put stickers about resident discounts on parking kiosks and lobbied a vendor to deliver crucial missing signs.

The mayor said the council had “shaped, amended and approved” paid parking in Balboa Park and contended an accelerated timeline chosen by the council made it hard for his administration to implement it flawlessly.

Advertisement

The mayor’s memo came in response to a Tuesday memo from Councilmembers Kent Lee and Sean Elo-Rivera in which they called implementation of paid parking “haphazard” and “not ready for prime time.”

Lee and Elo-Rivera said the process for city residents to get approved for discounts was so complex, cumbersome and confusing that Gloria should waive fees for residents until they have had time to adapt and learn.

While Gloria rejected that suggestion in part of his memo, he later said “enforcement remains focused on education, not punishment, during this early phase, to ensure park users are aware of the new parking fees.”

Dave Rolland, a spokesperson for Gloria, said Thursday that no specific date had been set for when the city would shift from education to enforcement. But he added that “about a month” would be an accurate timeline.

City officials have already corrected one key mistake: Signs that were missing Monday — alerting drivers that the 951-space lower Inspiration Point lot is free for three hours — have since been installed.

Advertisement

Lee and Elo-Rivera in their memo decried “an inadequate effort to educate the public on how to use this new system.”

They said San Diegans had not been clearly informed about when a portal for city resident discounts would go live or how to use it.

And they complained that residents weren’t told they couldn’t buy discounted parking passes in person, or when enforcement with citations would actually begin.

City residents must apply for discounts online, pay $5 to have their residency verified, then wait two days for that verification and choose the day they will visit in advance.

Lee and Elo-Rivera called the city’s efforts “a haphazard rollout that will surely lead to San Diegans missing out on their resident discount and paying higher parking rates than they have to.”

Advertisement

Gloria said the city collected $23,000 in parking fees on Monday and Tuesday and another $106,000 in daily, monthly and quarterly passes — mostly from residents who get discounts on such passes.

“Early data shows that the program is functioning and being used,” he said. “These are not the metrics of a system that is failing to function. They are the metrics of a system that is new, actively being adopted, and continuing to improve as public familiarity increases.”

While Gloria conceded that some improvements are still necessary, he rejected calls from Lee and Elo-Rivera for a suspension, citing his concerns it would jeopardize city finances and confuse the public.

“Your proposal to suspend paid parking for residents two days into the new program would have immediate and serious fiscal consequences,” Gloria said. “This reversal could introduce confusion among park users and would disregard investments already made to establish the system, potentially compromising the program’s effectiveness.”

Paid parking in Balboa Park is expected to generate about $3.7 million during the fiscal year that ends June 30, but revenue is expected to rise substantially when the fees are in place for a full fiscal year.

Advertisement

Gloria said the money is a small part of the city’s overall solution to recurring deficits it faces of more than $100 million per year.

“What we will not do is reverse course days into implementation in a way that undermines fiscal stability, creates uncertainty, and sends the message that addressing a decades-old structural budget deficit that has plagued our city is optional because it is politically uncomfortable,” he said. “That kind of erratic decision-making is not good governance, and San Diegans deserve better.”

Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the San Diego Zoo said Thursday that paid parking there has continued to go smoothly since it began on Monday.

The zoo, which is using Ace Parking for enforcement, opted for immediate citations instead of an educational grace period.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

San Diego, CA

Barricaded individual in custody following police response in Mission Valley

Published

on

Barricaded individual in custody following police response in Mission Valley


SAN DIEGO (FOX 5/KUSI) — San Diego Police responded to a barricaded individual in the Mission Valley area Thursday afternoon, prompting a heavy law enforcement presence.

  • The Nexstar Media video above details resources for crime victims

The department confirmed around 1 p.m. that officers were on scene in the 1400 block of Hotel Circle North, and are working to safely resolve the situation. Authorities asked the public to avoid the area and allow officers the space needed to conduct their operations.

Police described the incident as a domestic violence restraining order violation. At this time, it’s unknown if the person is armed.

No injuries have been reported.

The suspect was taken into custody within an hour.

Advertisement

Further details about the barricaded person were not immediately released. Police say updates will be shared as more information becomes available.

This is a developing story. Check back for updates.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

San Diego, CA

Padres roster review: Luis Campusano

Published

on

Padres roster review: Luis Campusano





Padres roster review: Luis Campusano – San Diego Union-Tribune


















Advertisement




Skip to content

LUIS CAMPUSANO

  • Position(s): Catcher
  • Bats / Throws: Right / Right
  • 2026 opening day age: 27
  • Height / Weight: 5-foot-10 / 232 pounds
  • How acquired: Second round of the draft in 2017 (Cross Creek HS, Ga.)
  • Contract status: Will make $900,000 after agreeing to a one-year deal to avoid arbitration; Will not be a free agent until 2029.
  • fWAR in 2025: Minus-0.4
  • Key 2025 stats: .000 AVG, .222 OBP, .000 SLG, 0 HRs, 0 RBIs, 0 runs, 6 walks, 11 strikeouts, 0 steals (10 games, 27 plate appearances)

 

STAT TO NOTE

  • 1 — The number of plate appearances for Campusano while in the majors between June 1 and June 13 and the one at-bat resulted in a weak, pinch-hit groundout against a position player (Kike Hernandez) on the mound in mop-up duty. Campusano was recalled to the majors four times in 2025 but did not get a real opportunity get settled after he went 0-for-6 with four walks and a strikeout in three straight starts as a DH in early May. Of course, hitting .227/.281/.361 with eight homers over 299 plate appearances after getting the first real chance to start in 2024 likely informed how the Padres viewed his opportunity in 2025.

RevContent Feed

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending