www.montereycountyweekly.com october 5-11, 2023 MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY 19 Mark Twain reportedly said, “Whiskey is for drinking, water is for fighting.” That latter part is all too true in Monterey County, where it applies to pretty much every drop of water, even reclaimed wastewater from salad washing facilities and yes, your toilet. There is fighting about whether to deploy desalination—and at what scale (and cost), and in which location— and there is fighting about how much we pay for water. But the big fight is an existential fight, and it’s coming to a head on Tuesday, Oct. 10. That’s when the elected board of the Monterey Peninsula Water Management District will vote on whether or not to pursue a public takeover of the private water utility company California American Water’s local system. Cal Am, which serves some 675,000 customers in California (including on the Monterey Peninsula and in Carmel Valley), is a subsidiary of American Water, which serves 14 million customers in 14 states. For two decades, there have been efforts underway to take over Cal Am and make it into a public utility. In 2005, Measure W failed by a 63-37 margin, a loss for the group Citizens for Public Water. A citizens’ group called Public Water Now was back in 2014 with Measure O, which voters defeated again, by a 55-45 margin. But public water proponents tried again, and in 2018, voters passed Measure J by a margin of 56-44. That vote set in motion a years-long analysis by water district officials and consultants. Their charge, per the ballot measure, included: “If and when feasible, to secure and maintain public ownership of all water production, storage and delivery system assets and infrastructure providing services within its territory.” That translates roughly to mean the (public) water district should publicly acquire (private) Cal Am, if feasible. It’s been five years since voters said yes to Measure J. District officials reached a milestone in April when they offered to pay $448.8 million to Cal Am; the company replied that it’s not for sale. That leads us to Oct. 10, when the district board will consider the next step—whether or not to seek to take over Cal Am by eminent domain. The culmination of five years’ worth of analysis by the district, at a cost of $2.7 million, is packaged in a 150-page report (with 130 pages of appendices) by General Manager Dave Stoldt. His recommendation to the board: Yes, it’s feasible, cheaper and there is a compelling public good. A lot of Stoldt’s focus is on cost, with evidence that ratepayers will save money under a publicly owned utility rather than an investor-owned utility. (Cal Am officials have repeatedly disputed cost assumptions.) But the bigger point is about the public good. “Even if the ‘all-in’ cost of water to the ratepayers of the [Monterey water system] would not be significantly reduced in the short term after the transition to MPWMD ownership, ratepayers should nonetheless be given the opportunity to invest in their future by owning their water system,” according to the report. Public Water Now campaigned hard for Measure J on the basis that a public utility will save ratepayers money. I’m more interested in the grander ideals connected to public ownership. “MPWMD can be expected to do everything possible to minimize the need for future rate increases,” Stoldt’s report reads, as in: Trust us. More compelling than that is the idea that if trust is violated and promises go unfulfilled, voters can hold their publicly elected board to account. Per the report: “Democracy does not always work, but it has a much better chance of working than self-interested or under-informed decision-making from afar.” If the board says yes to the takeover—and I expect they will—the district will have to take Cal Am to court, seeking a judge’s determination that eminent domain is justified. If they cross that threshold, there will be a subsequent battle over the fair value of Cal Am. The hearing takes place at 5:30pm on Tuesday, Oct. 10, and the public is welcome to comment virtually or in person (up to two minutes). Anticipating a crowd, this meeting takes place not in the district’s office, but at the Middlebury Institute’s Irvine Auditorium at 499 Pierce St., Monterey. Whiskey will not be served, but there should still be plenty of intrigue. Sara Rubin is the Weekly’s editor. Reach her at sara@mcweekly.com. Water Way Five years after Measure J, a decision on whether to take over Cal Am. By Sara Rubin Power Less…Squid was huddled in Squid’s lair Thursday night, March 9, when—while bingeing on Ted Lasso and shrimp-flavored popcorn—the power went out, leaving Squid in the dark. The outage lasted 48 hours, and it wasn’t just Squid: Approximately 37,000 PG&E customers in Monterey, Pacific Grove, Pebble Beach and Carmel were impacted, with some homes going without power for over a week. Recently, Squid opened up the mailbox to find a rare paper check for $25.22 from PG&E. The reason given: “Storm Refund.” Squid’s colleague inquired with PG&E officials about it, and was told it’s from the company’s safety net program, through which homes (not businesses) that go 48 hours or more without power automatically receive checks for amounts between $25-$100, depending on the length of the outage. (Those who were out 120 hours or more got $100.) Some safety net. Squid’s check barely covers this month’s shrimp-flavored popcorn bill, not to mention the spoiling food Squid had to toss during the outage. Squid’s colleague asked how many customers on the Peninsula received checks and how much PG&E shelled out in total. No answer was provided. Multiplying 37,000 times $25.22 gets $933,140. Meanwhile, Squid received an email on Sept. 19 from PG&E with the announcement: “Your energy bill is going up.” Exactly how much, PG&E doesn’t yet know, pending approval from the California Public Utilities Commission, but Squid expects the increase to total at least $933,140. Bait and Switch…Squid loves a good political party (lowercase p), even if it’s exclusive. But Squid couldn’t float the $3,300 to brunch with Florida Gov. and Republican presidential candidate Ron DeSantis on his Sept. 28 visit to Monterey County, the day after a debate at the Reagan Library in Simi Valley. DeSantis came at the invitation of Taylor Farms CEO Bruce Taylor, and the campaign stop-off was met with a huge pushback of anger from local community organizers. Squid’s no fan of DeSantis who, as far as Squid knows, has not laid out a meaningful policy on cephalopod protections. Squid’s also no fan of GOP frontrunner Donald Trump, who has labeled DeSantis “Ron DeSanctimonious” and “Meatball Ron.” Are Taylor and friends looking for the lesser of two evils? Regardless, Squid wanted to hear what issues they would talk about, and planned to ooze over to Corral De Tierra Country Club where the brunch was scheduled to take place. Then came a follow-up message to attendees the night before: “We’ve had a security breach and are needing to move the location,” with instructions to call for the new location. Sneak attack! The new location was the same as the old location. No word on whether meatballs were served. the local spin SQUID FRY THE MISSION OF MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY IS TO INSPIRE INDEPENDENT THINKING AND CONSCIOUS ACTION, ETC. Yes, it’s feasible, and there is a public good. Send Squid a tip: squid@mcweekly.com
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjAzNjQ1NQ==