California's Bay area residents to pay higher rates for 'giving their water" to Southern California

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Delta-tunnels-would-mean-higher-prices-3745372.php

Wyatt Buchanan

Updated 11:42 p.m., Sunday, July 29, 2012

Sacramento --

If tunnels under the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta actually get built, more than 2 million people in the Bay Area will see their water bills increase to help pay for them.

That's because three water agencies in the Bay Area receive a significant amount of their supply from the delta, via pumps near Tracy, and construction costs of a new water routing system will fall on those users and others across the state who rely on that supply.

Leaders of those three Bay Area agencies - the Santa Clara Valley Water District, the Alameda County Water District and the Zone 7 Water Agency in southeastern Alameda County - said they expect rates to increase from 10 to 20 percent, but opponents of the project say ratepayers should expect much higher charges.

Water rates are relatively low compared with other utility costs, like energy or even cable television, so if the leaders of the agencies are correct in their forecasts, the average household would see bills increase by a few dollars a month.

The plan still has many unanswered questions, though, especially on how costs will be divided among farmers and urban water users statewide, and the final numbers could be much different.

Leaders of the Bay Area agencies said they have yet to tell their customers about the potential costs of the project, as it has been unclear whether it would ever come to fruition. But they said the announcement last week of a preferred plan means they will have to start advising customers.

'Worthwhile expenditure'

In the Alameda County Water District, which serves 340,000 people in Fremont, Newark and Union City, rates have increased between 6 and 8 percent a year the past few years. Officials estimate the tunnels would create the need for an increase of an additional 9 to 12 percent.

"To go to our ratepayers with a 9 to 12 percent increase is higher than we have traditionally done, but if the increase in the reliability of the State Water Project supply, if that turns out to be a reasonable increase, I think we could successfully make the case to customers that this is a worthwhile expenditure of ratepayer money," said Walt Wadlow, general manager of the district, which gets 40 percent of its supply from the delta.

The State Water Project supplies cities and Kern County with delta water, while the Central Valley Project is federally managed and supplies farms mainly in the Central Valley. Both use the same plumbing system.

Leaders of the Santa Clara Valley Water District, which provides water to 1.8 million people, said they expect rates to increase about 15 percent. In Zone 7, which supplies Dublin, Pleasanton and Livermore with water, officials are forecasting a 15 to 20 percent increase.

The Zone 7 Agency gets 87 percent of its water from the delta and does not have any alternatives to replace that large amount.

"The Livermore Valley really needs water regardless. There's absolutely no way we can say no to this project and opt out," said Jill Duerig, general manager of the agency.

But, she said, the actual increase could be as low as $5 per month, and she thinks most customers will be OK with paying that.

"It's not like upgrading from a Volkswagen to a Mercedes and seeing that kind of increase in your lease cost," she said.

Maintenance costs

Water advocates who oppose the project disagree with that assessment, though. The agencies are basing their calculations on the projected $14 billion cost of constructing the tunnels. That does not include an additional $5 billion they will have to pay for maintenance and operations over 50 years, or the interest on bonds that usually doubles an entire price.

The true cost of the project will likely be at least $40 billion, said Adam Scow, California campaigns director for Food and Water Watch.

"If ratepayers learn the true costs of this project, they're not going to be very happy with what that means," he said. He also noted that agricultural water buyers pay less than urban users for the same water, which he said is an unfair burden on people in cities.

Much of the Bay Area won't be affected with higher water rates, though, because San Francisco and the Peninsula rely on Hetch Hetchy water and East Bay Municipal Utility District customers also rely on water piped from the Sierra Nevada.

In the North Bay, much of the water comes from rainfall and rivers.

Downstream tunnels

There are a few exceptions, though, as some cities in Napa County get water via the State Water Project, though the pipes are north of the delta, and so customers may not be on the hook for the project because the tunnels are downstream.

That would change if the pipelines are reconfigured as part of the larger tunnel project and the water quality for Napa improves.

On the flip side of that, the Contra Costa Water District, which serves cities in the central and eastern parts of the county from Antioch to Walnut Creek to Martinez, pulls water from the delta, but not through the pumps near Tracy that feed much of the state.

If the tunnel project leads to diminished water quality, those benefiting from the project probably would have to pay to mitigate the damage to Contra Costa, said Jennifer Allen, director of public affairs for the water district.

Where rates would rise

If you live in one of these Bay Area cities, you receive delta water and your water bill is predicted to rise if the diversion tunnels are constructed:

-- Fremont

-- Newark

-- Union City

-- Dublin

-- Pleasanton

-- Livermore

-- All 15 cities in Santa Clara County

Source: Bay Area water districts

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Will a mod please change the "do" in the topic title to "to". Than you.

[X Factor 1,112]

So who is going to make money on this?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

So who is going to make money on this?

The water agencies in northern Cali that provide the water, and southern Californians won't make money, but they will be getting a heck of a deal. Northern Californian's will not only provide the water for Southern Californians, but they will be picking up the tab for them also. It sucks for them.