As it stands currently within the Tahoe City Public Utility District service area, water is water is water. That may change soon.
Beginning in April 2009, the TCPUD’s water and sewer rates could start a climb that would increase the flat rates through 2013, as well as the introduction of a consumption charge, which would charge customers according to how much water they use. The consumption charge is required by state mandate – under Proposition 218 – by next year, and the rate increase will go to fund infrastructure upgrades to the aging water system.
‘Most of our infrastructure is 30 or 40 years old,’ said District general manager Cindy Gustafson.
The TCPUD board decided to adopt the rate changes in November, following an 18-month rate analysis.
‘It was a very comprehensive and very public process,’ Gustafson said.
Unless a majority of district residents (50 plus one percent) formally oppose the changes, the hike will begin. Initially, the monthly flat rate will go from $43.76 to $48; over the next four years it will go to $55.
None of this sits well with Tahoe City resident and TCPUD customer Mike Hawkins.
‘There’s not much imagination among the movers and shakers out there,’ said the TCPUD customer.
Hawkins is a year-round resident. He is retired, living on a fixed income. He believes the ‘movers and shakers’ making the decisions – the TCPUD board – should seek out other sources of revenue to fund infrastructure upgrades.
His issue with local government leaders leaks into realms of an almost philosophical nature. The rate-change debate gives way to an overall beef with the order of things down by the lake.
‘The movers and shakers gave up years ago on any kind of economic engine except for tourism – and construction on the side,’ Hawkins said. ‘We run through significant economic cycles, it’s either boom or bust.’
During times when those income sources sag – such as now – coffers go wanting andthis lack places undue burdens upon the local residents, he said.
Ideally, he argues, the area should have a more stable economic foundation, which would both spread the financial burden insofar as infrastructure costs and also create an environment that could sustain such a community. It’s circular.
‘I’m not blaming all this on the PUD,’ Hawkins said, ‘but I feel they have an inherent responsibility to build a sustainable, economically viable community, and we don’t have that.’
Hawkins refers to the rate changes as ‘the straw that broke the camel’s back.’ He’s planning to move to an area where ‘tourism is not such a big deal.’ When he does he suspects his house will be sold to a second-home buyer.
‘It just doesn’t make for a good community,’ Hawkins said, relaying the lonely Halloweens of the last few years – ‘there’s just no children in the neighborhood.’
Gustafson said that TCPUD customers will be receiving a letter in January detailing the proposed changes in water and sewer rates. If over half of the district’s residents formally oppose the move either in writing, or in person at the Feb. 25 protest hearing, the hikes will fail.
The District’s aging infrastructure’s needs, however, would remain.
