Well, I don't know if perhaps we didn't catch ol' B.D. napping because what should have been our web address back when was not re-registered this year, and we have now gotten it back. This remarkable event occurred thanks to the selfless detective work of an attentive reader who had been following this travesty ever since it first occurred.
My friends, justice has now been served. No longer will those typing in sierramadretattler.com (which many have done over the years) be redirected to GoDaddy.com. Which is where Howes had parked our intellectual property.
Now you can locate this blog under two addresses. SierraMadreTattler.blogspot.com (link) and SierraMadreTattler.com (link).
I'm telling you, sometimes all you need to do is wait the little buggers out.
Voluntary Water Use Reductions Worked?
(Mod: I have always been skeptical about the imposition and enforcement of water use cuts. I just didn't think it would happen. Yet according to the following article that CBS Los Angeles has up on their site now - link - water use has been drastically cut in California. And during a time when doing so was voluntary. Here is the big news.)
Record Water Savings Shows Big Cuts To California Supplies Feasible - Water use in drought-stricken California plunged by record levels in May, and Gov. Jerry Brown’s administration cited that as proof cities can hit steep summer conservation targets they have blasted as unfair.
The State Water Resources Control Board on Wednesday released data showing urban water usage fell 29 percent in May compared to the same month in 2013. The savings were the best showing since the agency started tracking conservation last summer.
Regulators cautioned the savings may have been skewed by unusual May rains that reduced lawn watering. But they also credited heightened awareness about the four-year drought after the governor imposed sweeping mandatory conservation measures following April’s record low snowpack measurement.
Every region of California had stepped up from what had been lackluster cutbacks. The southern coast, where more than half of California lives in cities including Los Angeles and San Diego, cut water use by a quarter after months of tepid savings.
“It’s gratifying that far more communities are stepping up, and we want to see this much more through the summer,” said Felicia Marcus, chairwoman of the State Water Resources Control Board. “It’s just being prudent.”
May also marked the last month of voluntary savings. The water board assigned communities mandatory conservation targets between 4 and 36 percent compared to 2013 that took effect in June. Cities that lag face state-imposed restrictions in water use and fines.
Dozens of water departments had criticized the targets as unfair and unrealistic, saying they didn’t take into account savings before the drought or ample local supplies. The city of Riverside has even filed a lawsuit challenging its 24 percent reduction target.
Marcus says May’s conservation showed steep cuts are possible.
Mod: Nobody was more surprised by this than I. A different perspective is shown by the Sierra Madre Watchman. He has a column over on the Sierra Madre Weekly site (link), and he is quite critical of water reduction enforcement in Sierra Madre. Here is what The Watchmen had to say.
Water Use Regulations Hitting Residents Hard - The Sierra Madre City Government has become a “big bully” of regulation and the charges that they have placed on the people of the city, whom they are supposed to be serving.
On the subject of water use, if it isn’t bad enough doubling the water rates and the contraction of “4” tiers of charges, they also introduced a 30% mandatory reduction in the use of water. They constantly say there is no penalty when they charge $2.66/HCF for the first tier and $4.66/HCF for the 4th tier. What else is it if not a penalty?
Then they set quotas for each household which is theoretically 30% below the use after the 20% voluntary reduction. If a person appeals for an increase based upon the city’s error, then they cannot get the issues settled. Now the city wants the homeowner to submit to an audit by a city-approved water expert. They also are placing limits on how much and what kind of landscaping a homeowner can plant.
Now comes the subject of the 30% reduction, and we shall use the figures supplied by the city. The base figure August 2012 was 316 GPCD (two month billing). 30% reduction would be 221/HCF. The highest use per billing period equaled an overage of 203 (September 2014).
The lowest use was December of 2014 equaling an average of 110 (More than 60%). Now they want to reduce the figure from 110 to 73/HCF per two-month billing period, which equals a 77% reduction from the 316 figure.
You are welcome to check the math! What do they call 30%?
Now the staff is recommending so-called surcharge (penalty) for any excess use over the individual conservation goals per Sierra Madre Municipal Code.
1st violation —2 x tier one rate
2nd and more —3 x tier one rate
The Energy Environment and Natural Resource Commission is recommending:
1st violation – 2 x the tier 4 rate
2nd violation – 5 x the tier 4 rate
3rd violation – 10 x the tier 4 rate
With this kind of thinking, who needs the EENRC after these kinds of recommendations? The only reason that the city did not adopt these recommendations is because the computers could not handle that program. Do we have a city government that is out of control? We welcome your opinion!
Mod: I haven't seen any water use reduction figures from Sierra Madre lately, but if we are in line with the statewide reduction figures than most of what the Sierra Madre Watchman is describing might very well be moot. Which just goes to show, you never can tell about these things.
sierramadretattler.blogspot.com or sierramadretattler.com