Clearlake City Council opposes proposed water rate increase

CLEARLAKE >> The Clearlake City Council determined on Thursday it would formally oppose a rate increase imposed by the Golden State Water Company of 23% over the next three years.

The water company, which is allowed to raise rates every three years, proposed an increase for its Clearlake customers of 14.9% in 2022, 4.22% in 2023, and 4.31% in 2024. The council directed staff to draft a letter to the California Public Utility Commission reflecting the council’s opposition and bring it forward at the next meeting.

Councilmember Joyce Overton said she was in favor of sending a letter to the CPUC as she thought water rates were already too high in the area. Overton said she herself didn’t have a green lawn because she couldn’t pay a “$500” water bill.

“Literally, people will ask what water company it is and they will not buy a house because of the water company’s rates already, so I think it’s going to be really detrimental for us,” she said.

Councilmember Russ Cremer said the company had been a good community partner over the years but he shared Overton’s concerns. Compared to a 14% increase overall across the state, he said what was being asked of Clearlake “just isn’t right.”

“People that see that — that’s one of the things they’re gonna look at,” Cremer said. “‘I don’t think I can afford to live in that house,’ you know, ‘I’d like to water my lawn. I’d like to have a garden. I can’t do that there.’ So they’re gonna look somewhere else.”

Councilmember David Claffey questioned why Clearlake would see the highest increases and pointed out that customer usage was low compared to many other cities in the state.

Overton did add that the water company had proposed conjoining water districts years ago in order to more evenly distribute costs, and the residents of Clearlake had been opposed to that effort at the time.

Keith Ahart, Golden State Water Company operations superintendent, said via Zoom that he hoped the council would support the company’s efforts to increase the ratepayer area. Ahart said the proposed rate increases were higher for Clearlake than other California cities because of its small size and the large amount of maintenance and updates needed.

The only public comment came from Bruno Sabatier, the new chair of the Lake County Board of Supervisors. Sabatier said he had drafted a letter in opposition to the proposed increases he would be happy to share with the council.

He said the proposed increase was “close to insanity,” calling attention to the city’s poverty rate of 33% and average household income of around $30,000.

“We need to find a way for Golden State, as a private company, to be able to obtain grants to be able to increase and enhance the infrastructure of their water system without having to place the burden on people who are already impoverished,” Sabatier said.