Dear Editor:

A recent posting (“Water District Ousts Enviro Chairman”—Oct. 13) included numerous inaccurate statements regarding the deliberations by the Board of Directors of the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California at its meeting on Oct.12 with regard to selecting a chairman for a two-year term, effective Jan. 1, 2011:

The current chairman, Timothy F. Brick, who has served with distinction for two consecutive terms, announced at the meeting that he would not pursue an Administrative Code rule waiver that would have allowed him to run for a third term.

Metropolitan’s recent water rate increases do not cover enhanced employee benefits. A tentative memorandum of understanding was reached between Metropolitan’s four employee bargaining units and the district’s management team last fall. The tentative agreements, however, were withdrawn and were not presented to the board for its consideration.

The Los Angeles delegation voted in support of Chairman-elect John V. Foley. In fact, the final vote of the full board was unanimous in support of Director Foley.

Director Tony Fellow of Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District was not a candidate for chairman. Director Suja Lowenthal, the city of Long Beach’s representative, was nominated from the floor as a candidate. Director Fellow voted for Chairman-elect Foley.

This CalWatchdog entry fell below basic standards of accuracy that all news outlets—whether on-line or print—should seek to achieve.

Very truly yours,

(Original signed)

Linda Waade

Deputy General Manager of External Affairs

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 30, 2010 AT MIDNIGHT

The Union-Tribune report Tuesday about the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California’s dismissal of calls to rein in unnecessary spending is par for the course for the giant water agency. MWD has long shown contempt for the millions of ratepayers who use the water it supplies to 26 local districts in the counties of San Diego, Los Angeles , Orange, Ventura, Riverside and Santa Barbara.

San Diego-area water customers have seen their bills soar as much as 65 percent over the past four years. MWD, meanwhile, has already approved 7.5 percent rate hikes for both 2011 and 2012. But when the San Diego County Water Authority and three other MWD clients questioned plans to spend more than $1 billion on capital projects that may not be essential, a top MWD official blithely said they were all prudent.

Really? $8.8 million for landscaping at a La Verne treatment plant is prudent when MWD is constantly raising water rates on customers rocked by the sharp economic downturn? Spending $7.9 million for a marina, visitor center and RV park at a Riverside County lake is prudent for a water wholesaler?

What former Santa Monica Mayor Christine Reed said about MWD in 1991 is as true as ever: “Met doesn’t have procedures or rules or an ethic about spending the money.” It just does what it wants to do and expects its clients to shut up and go along.

This arrogance and imperiousness was on display in a mid- and late-1990s fight between the San Diego County Water Authority and MWD over the authority’s interest in securing new water supplies from Imperial County. MWD secretively paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to a public relations firm for what the Los Angeles Times called a “clandestine effort to discredit San Diego County water leaders.”

It was on display in 1999 when an audit revealed the MWD had tried to hide a cost overrun of hundreds of millions of dollars on a reservoir project near Hemet.

It was on display in 2004 when an audit concluded the MWD continued to disregard its own official procedures for purchasing and consulting contracts.

It was on display in 2009 when MWD executives tried to quietly reward themselves and all MWD employees with a 25 percent retroactive pension increase that would have added $70 million in unfunded liabilities to a pension account that was already $400 million-plus in the red.

Only a public uproar – helped by some sharp criticism from San Diego area water officials – prevented the MWD pension giveaway. Too bad public outrage is unlikely over a more arcane dispute about whether capital improvement projects are necessary.

But here’s hoping local water officials stick to their guns. The MWD’s hostility to its customers will never change until it faces far more of the criticism it so amply deserves.

Source:
http://pasadenasubrosa.typepad.com/pasadena_sub_rosa/2010/10/san-diego-paper-calls-mwd-arrogant-and-hostile-.html