Sewer Rate Debate

A response to City Council member [Ruth] Galanter’s alleged comments in Tuesday’s meeting on the sewer rates: “Council Acts on Petitioners’ Charges,” July 22.

Does City Council member Galanter mean that property owners should be charged a fee for not using the Los Angeles sewer system?

If I buy 1,000 hcf from DWP and use 900hcf for irrigation and another 100hcf for flushing toilets and showers and my sewer charge is based on my discharging 600hcf:

1) Then I am paying a fee for not discharging the extra 500hcf. Or

2) I am being charged for a sewer discharge use that I am not using?

And then there is Galanter’s [comment] from The Times on fruit trees: “Many people in the Valley are very fortunate. We don’t want to be harsh . . . but I’m not comfortable saying someone else in the city who is not so fortunate to have fruit trees should have to pay for yours.” I’m not sure of the context, but . . .

Do you mean that you are comfortable asking me to subsidize the apartment dwellers and others that discharge all of their purchased DWP water into the sewer system?

Do you mean that you are comfortable asking me to pay a fee for not discharging water into the sewer system?

A solution would be to install the second water meter for property owners who irrigate. The big unknown is the amount of water used for irrigation, not other uses that result in zero discharge into the sewer system.

GENE PEARCY, West Hills