In my April 11 letter to the editor I stated: “EID’s average small farm ratepayer to date has not conserved in his/her water consumption and receives all water over one quarter of an acre-foot at the rate of $49 while residential ratepayers pay $829 per acre foot.”
Thank you for reading the MtDemocrat.com digital edition. In order to continue reading this story please choose one of the following options.
If you are a current subscriber and wish to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com, please select the Subscriber Verification option below. If you already have a login, please select "Login" at the lower right corner of this box.
Special Introductory Offer
For a short time we will be offering a discount to those who call us in order to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com and start your print subscription. Our customer support team will be standing by Monday through Friday, 8am to 5pm to assist you.
If you are not a current subscriber and wish not to take advantage of our special introductory offer, please select the $12 monthly option below to obtain access to MtDemocrat.com and start your online subscription
Boy, what a firestorm of desperate rebuttal my April 11th statement has driven in response from EID’s general manager, a board member or two and a couple of self-proclaimed citizen financial wizards.
For EID’s June 23 board meeting packet EID’s general manager has produced a mind-numbing 34-page document to divert public attention away from the facts that every aspect of my above April 11 statement is absolutely true.
Of the 1,924 acre-feet of water EID sold to small farm customers in 2013, 91 percent of those acre feet were sold at $49 per acre-foot. The other 9 percent of those 1,914 acre-feet were for inside residential use and thus sold at EID’s residential Tier 1 rate.
As for the $829 residential rate, all water over one quarter of an acre-foot annually currently is sold by EID at the rate of either $697 or $829 per acre foot … 14.3 or 17 times the $49 small farm rate.
Three reasons I ran for EID director included my observations that EID spends too much money, it forces most ratepayers to pay extra rates to subsidize special interests, and then it spreads misleading cover-up propaganda in its news releases, on its Website, and in its boardroom and board packets.
My unhappiness with EID’s spending, unfair rates and misleading propaganda is why I ran to become EID director. And, I believe my 20-point victory margin was because the overwhelming majority of EID ratepayers are fed up with EID’s management and board.
In any event, fighting to give a fair shake to EID’s 39,000 regular residential, commercial and recreational turf customers will continue to be my guiding star.
EID Director, Division 2