River Watch Header Image

The Real Cost of SR’s Discharges

The PD carried articles on wastewater storage pond creation as a remedy to discharge issue – PD nov 15 and today.

Is it appropriate to point out that the current ratepayer is carrying a large part of the financial burden for this project (and others – Geysers pipeline, and efforts to evade regulation at a rate of over 2 million/year) – while new development, which is responsible for the need for these infrastructure additions, does not carry it’s share of the financial burden?

Also, several of these new storage ponds are indicated for the flood plain area near the treatment plant. For each acre of land used for a pond there is one less acre of useable flood plain, thus exacerbating flooding problems. This seems kind of crazy.

Should not these issues be pointed out to those now paying the bills.

Alan Levine