Document: Material sent to Cal-Am regarding certain claims made about the District
NO ON O “It’s A Risk We Cannot Afford” “FACT” Claim
DAVID J. STOLDT, GENERAL MANAGER, MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT:
NO ON O “It’s A Risk We Cannot Afford” “FACT” Claim
DAVID J. STOLDT, GENERAL MANAGER, MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT:
NO ON O “It’s A Risk We Cannot Afford” “FACT” Claim
REFERENCE:
SUMMARY
“NO ON O” “FACT” CLAIMS & REBUTTAL RESPONSES FROM GENERAL MANAGER, MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
Why is Measure O a bad idea?
If approved,
Measure O requires the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District to do a
feasibility study before moving forward with a takeover. However, we’re given
no information about how much this study would cost, how the MPWMD would
interpret the results, nor does it force them to come back to voters for a
final decision. Measure O would give a blank check – with no oversight – to the
MPWMD to study seizure of the water delivery system from Cal-Am. In 2005, the
proposed study was estimated to cost $550,000. Today, the price tag could reach
$1 million or more. Furthermore, it could delay the construction of a desal
plant that is the long-term solution to the Peninsula’s water shortage issues.
The actual fact:
Of course there is oversight. Moneys can only be expended for the purpose
defined in the initiative. There is a Board of Directors and management staff.
We also have had discussions with a national firm that performs this type of
analysis who thinks such a study should cost $400,000 to $600,000. Also, we see
no direct linkage between the study and the obligation to proceed as scheduled
on the desal plant. How do you determine
that it will cause a delay?
Won’t our rates be cheaper if water
distribution is managed by the public sector?
Just because the
government is running something instead of the private sector does not ensure
that it is run more efficiently. Government operations incur all kinds of
expenses that the private sector doesn’t, which ultimately can lead to local
residents paying the bill through increased taxes and/or water bills. Currently the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District spends an
average of over $100,000 on each employee.
DAVID J. STOLDT,
GENERAL MANAGER, MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT:
The actual fact: Calendar 2013 Gross Salaries paid = $2,257,886 divided by 36 total employees equals $62,719
earned per employee. Even if you include benefits costs it won’t get above $100,000. Plus,
since a renegotiation of labor contracts, employees pay an increased share of their own
retirement benefits, decreasing what the District pays. Be careful about
relying on gadflies and
hobbyists who don’t know what they are doing when they examine the District’s budgets. Will
you show similar calculations for Cal-Am Monterey District employees and
G&A charges
locally for non-Monterey District staff?
Won’t a public takeover ensure increased public
oversight?
No. Currently oversight
of local water rates is done by the California Public Utilities Commission
which undertakes a grueling and thorough analysis of proposed rates. Additional
protections are provided through the Office of Ratepayer
Advocates that represent the interests of rate payers by insuring the
lowest possible rates. If the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District
takes control, these safeguards to protect ratepayers will not exist. MPWMD
will have no oversight whatsoever in the setting of water rates.
The actual fact:
The safeguards to protect ratepayers exist and are established by law. MPWMD would limit imposition and collection
of rates and charges as required by the MPWMD enabling legislation and by other
requirements of state and federal law. These limitations include, but shall not
be limited by the following:
· California
Constitution Art. XIII C, Section 1(e), mandates that the rates shall not exceed the
estimated reasonable cost of providing the services for which MPWMD charges the fee.1
When the budgeted cost of activities funded by the rates, less proceeds of any
other sources of revenue, are less than the authorized, MPWMD shall be
required to reduce or suspend collection of the rates to avoid overcollection.
The rates must
be reasonable, fair, and equitable in nature and proportionately representative
of costs incurred by MPWMD.2
· MPWMD
acknowledges continued collection of rates is subject to the requirements of Propositions
62 and 218, including publication, mailing, and protest hearing processes to
ratepayers.
· MPWMD shall to
adhere to requirements of Water Code sections 35470 and 354713 even though it
is not a municipal water district as defined by the California Water Code, and
instead is a special district created by special legislation.
· MPWMD has a
Board of Directors answerable directly to the electorate. In its annual budget
review and approval process, the Board shall assess any need to adjust or
rebalance revenues based upon prior year revenue and expenditures funded by the
rates. It is a public process, typically accompanied by a rate design performed
by outside consultants.
Doesn’t the MPWMD have its own experts better
qualified to study and provide recommendations for solving our area’s water
shortage?
The Monterey Peninsula
Water Management District primarily exists to augment the
water supply for the Monterey Peninsula. Despite costing over $100,000,000 of
taxpayer dollars over 35 years, MPWMD has failed to find
any new large source of water for Monterey County. Their record does not
inspire confidence that they would be any more successful in an area in which
they have no expertise, institutional knowledge or infrastructure.
DAVID J. STOLDT, GENERAL MANAGER, MONTEREY PENINSULA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT:
The actual fact:
First of all, since its arrival in 1966 Cal-Am has not produced any new large source
of water for Monterey County. The stranded costs on the Regional Treatment
Plant alone were over $44 million.
$26,568,651 RDP
approved for recovery
5,354,229 RDP
2011
860,098 RDP 2012
12,000,000 RDP
“Wrap-Up Costs” for un-winding
$44,782,978 RDP
Sunk Costs
The District
executed all concept, design, test well, and proof of principle for the 900 AF
Paralta Well in the
1980s before turning it over to Cal-Am to convert to a production well.
The District
financed and continues to this day to sell water from the Pebble Beach
Reclamation Project which
created over 800 AF of recycled water, thereby releasing a like amount of
potable water for other
uses.
The District
brought a 3,400 AF desal project which was rejected by voters in 1993 – the
District was ready to go.
The District
brought a 24,000 AF dam project which was rejected by voters in 1995 – the
District was ready to go.
The Aquifer
Storage and Recovery projects were developed by the District and will produce
over 1,900 AF of
water annually on average.
The District,
since its inception in 1978 has spent $49.5 million on capital projects and
$65.3 million on
Conservation and Mitigation (see attached.) The mitigation activities are
required by law under
several permits and CEQA decisions to offset the deleterious effects of Cal-Am
water extractions
from the Carmel River.
Measure O: Initiative takes aim at public buy-out of Cal Am's Monterey system
Conflicting views on proposed takeover's cost, benefits
By Jim Johnson, 05/05/2014
No comments:
Post a Comment