Comments on: San Diego Wheels, Deals and Sues for Water https://calwatchdog.com/2012/05/07/san-diego-wheels-deals-and-sues-for-water/ Tue, 08 May 2012 17:42:29 +0000 hourly 1 By: LGMike https://calwatchdog.com/2012/05/07/san-diego-wheels-deals-and-sues-for-water/#comment-17919 Tue, 08 May 2012 17:42:29 +0000 http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=28267#comment-17919 MWD is a “government” style organization that seems to always find ways to increase operational costs (mostly in salaries and benefits to employees) and just keeps adding this to the “ratepayers” (again mostly in San Diego County).
Every time someone questions “costs” and wants to see the books to justify charges it just goes to court to stop or stall any “open transparency” to the operation. I am surprised they haven’t used the “competitive disadvantage” argument to hide these cost. Probably because that would be an admission to “gaming” the system. MWD needs to be audited by an outside agency on all aspects of its operations. It also needs to have the board “elected by the public” with representatives allocated by percent of purchased water as compared to total source used in any jurisdiction. (If I am not mistaken, even MWD admits SDCWA is the largest purchaser of water). Any finally, to make it absolutely transparent, if a water rate increase or new project is needed, then it must be submitted to the public for approval with itemized details provided , not just a catch all request.

]]> By: Rogue Elephant https://calwatchdog.com/2012/05/07/san-diego-wheels-deals-and-sues-for-water/#comment-17918 Tue, 08 May 2012 02:24:35 +0000 http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=28267#comment-17918 Overcharging? Undercharging? Subsidizing? These terms only have meaning where government is distorting a market. In a free market, absent government interference, the price is none of these things. It is, simply, the price.

]]> By: Wayne Lusvardi https://calwatchdog.com/2012/05/07/san-diego-wheels-deals-and-sues-for-water/#comment-17917 Mon, 07 May 2012 21:26:22 +0000 http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=28267#comment-17917 COMMENT RECEIVED BY EMAIL FROM CHARLES WARREN,PLEASANT HILL, CA
(forwarded by Wayne Lusvardi)

Re: “San Diego is geographically “at the end of the pipeline” of MWD’s system. It would thus pay the greatest transport costs compared to other water agencies that are members of MWD. If San Diego’s contention were proven in a court of law, MWD’s water transport rate would be a subsidy to water ratepayers in Los Angeles and an overcharge on San Diego ratepayers.”

how do you figure? if we consider the freeboard to be a pipe, it would cost something per mile on average, slopes working out equal, to pump water. what could be a bit weird is allocating capital costs. in theory the only relevant capital cost applies to the proportion of the pipeline used and by the shortest route. if however, the water is dumped anonymously in one end of the system and an equivalent amount extracted at the other, arguably SD could be charged a proportion of the cost of the whole system. on that basis, the MWD just found a profit center rather than a simple cost offset. in a sense there’s nothing more wrong with that than railroads setting tariffs to take advantage of their corridors. in a similar sense, though, they can only do that to the extent that there isn’t a competitive alternate route. and there’s ALWAYS one of those.

at the moment the best desal looks to be about $600/acre-foot, so, rather than pay the farmers $500 and MWD another $400…

wonder what the political benefits of simply leaving the allotment in Imperial, without even buying it? let it trickle into the Colorado… or is SD contractually required to pick up a quantity of water whatever the MWD ripoff for delivering it?

]]> By: Charles Warren https://calwatchdog.com/2012/05/07/san-diego-wheels-deals-and-sues-for-water/#comment-17916 Mon, 07 May 2012 20:17:12 +0000 http://www.calwatchdog.com/?p=28267#comment-17916 Re: San Diego is geographically “at the end of the pipeline” of MWD’s system. It would thus pay the greatest transport costs compared to other water agencies that are members of MWD. If San Diego’s contention were proven in a court of law, MWD’s water transport rate would be a subsidy to water ratepayers in Los Angeles and an overcharge on San Diego ratepayers.

how do you figure? if we consider the freeboard to be a pipe, it would cost something per mile on average, slopes working out equal, to pump water. what could be a bit weird is allocating capital costs. in theory the only relevant capital cost applies to the proportion of the pipeline used and by the shortest route. if however, the water is dumped anonymously in one end of the system and an equivalent amount extracted at the other, arguably SD could be charged a proportion of the cost of the whole system. on that basis, the MWD just found a profit center rather than a simple cost offset. in a sense there’s nothing more wrong with that than railroads setting tariffs to take advantage of their corridors. in a similar sense, though, they can only do that to the extent that there isn’t a competitive alternate route. and there’s ALWAYS one of those.

at the moment the best desal looks to be about $600/acre-foot, so, rather than pay the farmers $500 and MWD another $400…

wonder what the political benefits of simply leaving the allotment in Imperial, without even buying it? let it trickle into the Colorado… or is SD contractually required to pick up a quantity of water whatever the MWD ripoff for delivering it?

]]>