Los Angeles Times

Water bills could triple under plan

L.A. County drought proposal draws scorn from residents facing higher rates or a big cut in consumptio­n.

- By Abby Sewell

Andrew Chadd was startled when he opened the notice from the Los Angeles County agency that supplies water to his neighborho­od in the unincorpor­ated community of Littlerock.

To conserve during the statewide drought, the letter said, Antelope Valley water customers would have to collective­ly reduce consumptio­n 32%. But Chadd’s family of seven would be required to cut consumptio­n 70% or potentiall­y see their bill triple.

“We were trying to figure out … how we can do this and who’s going to tell the kids that they can only use the bathroom on Monday and Friday?” he told county officials at a meeting last week.

Local water agencies around California, under orders by the state to make deep cuts to consumptio­n, have come up with strate- gies that run the gamut. They include giving cash for ripping out lawns, fining residents who over-water their plants or simply asking customers to decrease their use. But Los Angeles County is considerin­g an unusual conservati­on plan that is drawing an outcry from residents whose water bills could skyrocket.

Although the state wants to reduce overall urban water use 25%, the county is required to cut consumptio­n 32% in the Antelope Valley and 36% in Malibu and Topanga — among the highest mandated reductions in the state.

Under the proposed plan, which county supervisor­s are scheduled to vote on Tuesday, the county water districts would calculate a single monthly target for most residentia­l users by deducting the percentage reduction from average usage for the area in 2013. Customers who exceed the target would pay double or triple the base rates.

Residents like Chadd, with larger than average families or properties, say the formula is unfair because it sets the same target for everyone regardless of a customer’s current water

use or the number of people in the household.

Gary Hildebrand, deputy director of the county’s public works department, which runs the county Waterworks Districts, said there would be an appeal process to address households with special circumstan­ces.

But county officials argue that their approach rewards people who are already conserving and gives heavier users the choice to cut back or pay higher rates. The county has implemente­d irrigation restrictio­ns and offers incentives to residents who remove their lawns or buy water-saving appliances, Hildebrand said.

“Water’s becoming more scarce in the drought, and when you have a scarce commodity, it’s going to become more costly,” he said.

With hundreds of water suppliers around the state developing different plans to meet their conservati­on goals, experts said there is no standard approach.

Some agencies, including the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, have limited outdoor watering and set fines for violators, but have not put in place the type of penalties for individual customers that the county is contemplat­ing.

Other agencies that have drought surcharges structured them differentl­y than what the county is proposing. The city of Glendale imposes a f lat surcharge on each hundred cubic feet of water sold. The Quartz Hill Water District, which serves about 20,300 customers in the Antelope Valley, is requiring customers to cut their use 36% or face penalties. But the target usage amounts are based on each customer’s past use, not on an average across the district.

“It wouldn’t be fair to ask one customer to cut back 10% and one customer to cut back 50%,” said district spokeswoma­n Debi Pizzo.

She said the district also takes into account factors such as the number of people in a household and the lot size to determine a conservati­on level for each customer, and wouldn’t impose the extra charges on those who are already below that level.

Stephanie Pincetl, director of the California Center for Sustainabl­e Communitie­s at UCLA, said she had not heard of another agency taking an approach like the one proposed by the county.

“I think it’s a first step and we’ll see how it works,” she said. “It’s worth giving it a try and then adjusting afterward.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States