COMMENTARY Mayor Jason Burnett’s Support of “NO ON O’ A Betrayal of Ordinance No. 96

Establishing Ordinance

THE CITY OF CARMEL-BY-THE-SEA is hereby determined to be primarily, a residential City wherein business and commerce have in the past, are now, and are proposed to be in the future subordinated to its residential character; and that said determination is made having in mind the history and the development of said city, its growth and the causes thereof; and also its geographical and topographical aspects, together with its near proximity to the cities of Pacific Grove and Monterey and the businesses, industries, trades,  callings and professions in existence and permissible therein.

Adopted by Ordinance No. 96 passed on this 5th day of June 1929.

In supporting “NO ON O,” Mayor Jason Burnett is betraying the letter and the spirit of Ordinance No. 96, the Establishing Ordinance of the City of Carmel-by-the-Sea.

WaterPlus President Ron Weitzman’s insightful analysis of why mayors, including Carmel Mayor Jason Burnett, “have chosen to support their business constituents instead of their residential ones” regarding Measure O:

“Different from Cal Am's residential customers, its business customers are well organized into groups like the Monterey County Association of Realtors and the Monterey County Hospitality Association. These commercial groups have made a pact with Cal Am: They would support its water-supply project if it would persuade the Public Utilities Commission to eliminate tiered rates based on usage for commercial customers. Both sides have kept their part of the bargain. Though good for them, it is far from good for Cal Am's unorganized residential customers, who are now substantially subsidizing commercial and other customers. That is what a graph in a filing by the Office of Ratepayer Advocates of the PUC (March 28, 2014, p. 2-22, pertaining to Application 13-07-002) clearly shows. The only recourse residential customers have is to support Measure O.”

“In doing so, they would be going against the mayors they elected. That is because the mayors have chosen to support their business constituents instead of their residential ones. The mayors are rightfully concerned about the economic well-being of their cities. So, politically, we residents are on our own, not only without political power behind us, but even with it against us. All the television ads and mailers featuring the mayors and financially supported by Cal Am amply testify to that.”

Source: Residential ratepayers will bear brunt of fine if O fails
By Ron Weitzman Guest commentary, 05/17/2014

In support of Ron Weitzman’s analysis and cited by him from the OFFICE OF RATEPAYER ADVOCATES CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION ORA Analysis and Recommendations on OPERATING REVENUES, RATE DESIGN and SPECIAL REQUESTS: 5, 6, 8, 9, 21, 24, 25 of California American Water Company Application 13-07-002, March 28, 2014, as follows:

2012 Revenue/Consumption vs. 2015 Revenue/Consumption
ORA concluded from this analysis that although Cal Am’s testimony states rates are designed so that the proportion of revenue from each class approximates the proportion of consumption in the class,121 the proportionality seems to be diverging, rather than converging, between present and proposed rate designs. In the majority of Districts, Residential customers will be contributing more revenue proportional to the quantity of water consumed.

…it is clear that a greater proportion of total revenues relative to total consumption will be collected from the residential customer class for all Districts in 2015. This also means that the Residential customers are subsidizing other water customer classes. A dramatic example of this is shown in the chart below is of the revenue versus consumption proportionality in Monterey in 2015, where clearly the Residential customers are responsible for a greater percentage of the total revenues not proportional to the amount of water they consume at 115%. This does not validate Cal Am’s testimony that rates are designed so that the proportion of revenue from each class approximates the proportion of consumption in the class.

In closing, Cal Am’s “pact” with commercial groups, the fact that residential water customers are subsidizing all other water customers and because that fact “does not validate Cal Am’s testimony that rates are designed so that the proportion of revenue from each class approximates the proportion of consumption in the class” mean that residents should recognize that the Peninsula mayors, including Carmel Mayor Jason Burnett, are not acting in the best interest of residential ratepayers. Ergo, Carmel-by-the-Sea residential ratepayers/ voters should vote Yes on Measure O.