Water Rate Hearing Gets Heated

A public hearing on a proposed 18 percent rate hike turned heated at times on Monday as  customers voiced their strong opposition to the plan.

District board members say the rate, which would go into effect Jan. 1, is necessary due to a significant revenue shortfall. A Proposition 218 notice was sent out in late October saying the district does not anticipate receiving enough revenue to cover its debt or operating expenses.

The main reason revenue is down, officials say, is that water usage is 25 percent below what was anticipated. Usage is down to due to a wet winter in 2010 and mild summer in 2011, a sluggish economy and new metering issues.

Board members pointed out that the 18 percent increase proposal is only one component of a customer's bill and would affect each individual classification differently.

Still, most speakers said they opposed the proposal and urged board members to consider alternative methods to raise revenue. Several took issue with a debt increase in which the water district borrowed $2 million to enter into an agreement with Aerojet and Sacramento County to protect the groundwater basin at from migrating contamination.

"They borrowed money we can't afford to pay back," Carmichael resident Jim Baker told the audience about the board members. "We would not be here if these gentlemen would have treated our money like theirs... I will not stand for this and neither should you."

Anna Grotheer, another area resident, said she lives on a fixed income with elderly neighbors who are doing the same.

"This is devestating to us. Do we have to give up food or medicine to pay for our water?" Grotheer said. "We're in a recession; we're all struggling. We're talking about Ancil Hoffman but some of us are worried about having water and playing our bills."

Pamela Pinkston, a co-leader of the Carmichael, Citrus Heights and Fair Oaks Tea Party Activists organization, had heated words for board members.

"An 18 percent rate increase- do you think ratepayers are going to roll over and take it?" Pinkston asked. "You're trying to pull something over us and you're not going to get away with it."

Not all speakers were opposed to the board proposal.

"I fully support the rate increase," said resident Seth Hodges. "I have seen the workings of this board- where have you all been?" Hodges asked the packed meeting room, which had about 85 people.

Mike Morando, a local resident, said he felt the partnership between the district and ratepayers was not equal and that it's reflected in the makeup of Carmichael residents.

"The changing demographics of Carmichael will only get worse," Morando said. "We're not seeing new families moving into the neighborhood because of costs like these."

Small business owners would also be hurt by any rate increases, said Carmichael resident Jim Montgomery, who owns Montgomery Marble.

"I've been a small business owner for 33 years and the last five have been hell... I can't go to my customers and ask for 20 percent more," Montgomery said. "Perhaps you (board members) can delay projects and wait until things turn around."

After hearing about an hour of public comments, board members addressed some of the public's concerns and accusations. The board is scheduled to vote on the rate increase proposal at its Jan. 23 meeting but member Roy Leidy said the board should consider holding a special meeting before then.

"We're not making money on your backs," said board member Ron Greenwood, adding that members get paid $144 per monthly meeting. "There's also an attitude it's you against us. That's not true."

"We are all Carmichael people and I want to do the best for all of us," Greenwood said. "We're trying to do the best job possible."

If the Carmichael rate increase is approved, an average customer would pay about $81 for two months of water, Capital Public Radio reported.

---