Letter: Water district customers deserve consideration

EDITOR,
Although I sympathize with the sentiments of the recent Press-Banner commentary (“SLV tiered water pricing: Who needs it?” Bruce Holloway, May 20) criticizing the new increases in the already high San Lorenzo Valley Water District water rates, and I support this criticism, it appears to fail to take into account that although the residents of a large mobile park may pay rates in a higher tier, they likely split the basic charge. If they each were to pay the full basic charge, their individual bills would probably be much higher.
As small customers, we are required to pay almost double basic charges, because we have two small cottages on our property, like many people in this situation. Also, comparing SLVWD rates to other water districts is inappropriate without comparing costs and our abundant, clean, nearby supply.
Other than an undersized upgrade paid for by a new customer who wanted water after the earthquake, our pipes and system are the original ones installed in the 1940s; and other than undersized fire hydrants, criticized by our insurance companies, which I understand there are no plans to upgrade, they are still in good working condition. We have also experienced a fivefold increase in rates since moving here, much of it recently.
Again, I say that considering the current economic situation, over 13 percent unemployment in Santa Cruz county (probably higher in the San Lorenzo Valley), the previous recent rate hikes, a $10 million surplus fund, extravagant tens of thousands of dollars in grants paid for by our money, and no apparent effort to contain costs, this recent hike is highly inappropriate, particularly for many senior or unemployed customers. Please give us a break!
I suggest a slower improvement schedule paid for, at least in part, out of the reserve, consideration for senior or unemployed customers, and recognition that revenues are likely to increase with the improved water supply this year. We appreciate the good quality and service of the district but wish their agenda reflected the situation of their customers more considerately.
Michael Alperin, Ben Lomond