Budget Breaker

On the morning of April 16, Jack McGrory, our new city manager, presented the San Diego City Council with its 1991-92 budget. McGrory’s budget is a breath of fresh air, as it does not purport to cut library funding, park and recreation programs, tree trimming, street sweeping, lifeguard services, the police force or any other projects dear to the hearts of the council members and their constituents. For the first time in six years, the city manager has presented a balanced budget that does not create mass hysteria throughout the city. It is a policy- and program-driven document that the council can review rationally.

On the afternoon of April 16, that breath of fresh air evaporated. Under the mayor’s water conservation plan, water rates were rolled back over $10 for the average household user (350 gallons per day) to award those who had achieved a 50% conservation effort since 1989. This plan further cut rates by $3 for those who had achieved a mere 20% savings in water consumption since 1989. This, coupled with additional rollbacks, created an immediate deficit of $8 million in the brand new, balanced 1991-92 city budget.

Ideally, water rates should not be raised to penalize those who have been conserving water. However, it is not fiscally prudent to roll back the rates for a select group of savers when the cost of water is increasing and our water sources are diminishing.

It is even more disturbing to implement a water-rate program that permits users to “pay” for consuming enormous quantities of our precious water instead of encouraging them to “play” fair by conserving it. Why should households that once used 2,500 gallons per day and now conserve 50% pay only $25 more per month? Is this equitable?

The mayor’s water conservation plan may well result in cutting many programs and projects that are very important to our neighborhoods. It was nevertheless adopted by a 6 to 1 vote. I voted no, and now you know why.

ABBE WOLFSHEIMER, Council member, District 1