Conservation tied to safe water supply
If a company's leadership discovered that its current structure resulted in the loss of over $30,000 a day — that's $1 million a month — what could it do? It would need to find new ways to cut costs and increase revenue. Heads might roll or layoffs could occur. It could declare bankruptcy. It could merge or be acquired by someone else.
It could simply shut the doors and walk away.
But what happens when that organization is the Marin Municipal Water District, the only supplier of water to over 190,000 people in Marin County?
The choices are limited. There's talk about a “potential” increase. Be real: The rate hike is inevitable.
Across California, rate increases for water have averaged 7% annually. Since 1992, MMWD leadership went 16 years with no increases and only three years with 10% increases or greater. From 1993 to 2007, rates were reduced by 25% and then were flat for 11 of the next 14 years.
To offset some of the costs, the “watershed management” fee was introduced in 2016 and the “capital maintenance” fee came in 2019. Still, MMWD customers pay roughly a penny a gallon for water.
Over the last month, MMWD officials held community workshops about the proposed “adjustment” to water rates. They offered solid information, but unfortunately, there were often more staff in attendance than customers.
As the recent Marin IJ editorial points out (“This time, MMWD must assure that rate hike will help secure reliable supply,” Feb. 21), some customers see the rate increases as “punishment” for conserving water.
It's not that easy.
A vicious loop is created when lower water revenues combine with higher inflation (which hits everything from the cost of water purchases to infrastructure). As they have for many of us who live in the wildland-urban interface, MMWD insurance rates have gone up, too. Bad planning and lack of foresight haven't helped.
The deficit can't be blamed on a hiring binge. In 2014, there were 244 full-time employees. Today, there are 243. More professionals are needed.
Qualified staff means a bigger portion of the budget spent on salaries.
In his blog, newly elected Director Jed Smith recently wrote, “Our revenue shortfall,” combined with “inflation and drought, has … put us in a bit of a bind.”
He went on to write, “We need upgrades at San Geronimo Water Treatment plant, Toscana pump station, old storage tanks and more. These critical infrastructure needs rise to a level of severity comparable with our water supply. Critical capital program prioritizing is … in the works.”
Some at MMWD blame costs of deferred infrastructure maintenance on a 100-year-old water system, implying it's old and they inherited it. But who did the deferring in the last 20 years? What about the last five years?
Is there a “win-win” here? How do we get enough water to quench our thirst, to grow our fruits and flowers, to make it through long droughts or after a catastrophic event — such as a major fire in the watershed or an earthquake?
Sustainable water conservation, both indoors and outdoors is one way. It shouldn't be considered punishment, but rather a positive daily practice, like putting seatbelts on. Conservation goes hand in hand with building a resilient water supply. Both options increase water rates. Water for a penny a gallon is a thing of the past.
Regarding MMWD's recent strategic water supply assessment (which cost more than $700,000), Many are eager to learn more about the roadmap to water resiliency in the coming weeks.
Will the focus be on expanded reservoirs, groundwater banking and regional desalination? Could it be increased recycling, which could work with our challenged topography? Could it be all of that (or none of it)? Right now, we have less than a two-year supply of water. It has yet to be made clear how we can secure a four-year water supply.
No matter what, it will cost. Every road is a toll road, so we would need to keep our eyes on it. Our water supply and our budgets are threatened. The next direction MMWD takes needs to improve both.