San Diego Catfight

Alex Ruiz disputes the accuracy of the interview I cited in this post:

Reporter Rob Davis' article is dead wrong in one respect and highly misleading in another. The thrust of the article is Mr. Davis's contention that no San Diegans will avoid an across-the-board reduction in their water allocation.

This is dead wrong.

The proposal that's being developed includes a "floor" below which reductions will not occur. At this point, any customer whose monthly water use is below 600 cubic feet (4,488 gallons) will see no reduction. This information was included in the townhall presentation Davis attended. While the 600 cubic feet consumption threshold could be modified by the time final recommendations are made, clearly we recognized that there are super savers who have already conserved to such a degree that further reductions would be unfair and unrealistic.

Additionally, Mr. Davis contends that "Even San Diegans who have torn out their lawns, planted drought-tolerant landscaping and scrimped on irrigation will have to cut their water use."

This is highly misleading.

Water allocations will be determined from an individual customer baseline established by calculating typical usage during Fiscal Years 2006 and 2007. So customers who took conservation measures since that time n including the period of the "20-Gallon Challenge" -- would not be penalized for any steps they have taken to reduce water use.

These details of our water proposal are not nuances. They have been plainly presented at every public forum and are critical to the public's understanding.

It is important that readers of voiceofsandiego.org get full and accurate reporting on this important subject.

Unfortunately, his points ("floor" and "baseline") do not address MY main criticism that the City of San Diego should allocate water based on the the number of people at the house (Ruiz says "individual customer," but he means household meter) -- not historic use (or waste).

Try again, Mr. Ruiz.