Water cutbacks and new development
Last updated 6/12/2008 at Noon
A recent Tribune editorial titled “Unfunded Mandate” implied the proposed legislation requiring new development to pay for the water it requires was an un-funded mandate – meaning government makes you do something without providing the revenue.
This is a masterful twist of a catchy phrase to discredit a sensible proposal that new development buy its own water instead of having us subsidize growth with water derived from our “conservation” efforts.
Facing serious cutbacks in water supplies, authorities spend $1.8 million promoting conservation, yet behind the scene they continue approving new development in spite of State law saying sufficient water must be available before approving large projects.
This proposed legislation may need a few adjustments, but it’s unfair to say it will “stop projects that create jobs.” Plenty of jobs would be created by implementing the water-saving technology involved.
Our Water Authority does not have to wait for Sacramento to solve the problem of our subsidizing growth. It can on its own require new development to buy their own water through funding the conservation measures required. This has already proven to be successful in other areas.
Glenn F. Carroll