Did you know that:
- The DWP (one of the Valley's 2 water companies) is owned by the City of BBLake?
- 40% of DWP ratepayers live outside of City limits?
- The DWP Board of Directors is chosen by the City Council?
- DWP Board-members must be residents of the City of Big Bear Lake?
Now, you might be saying: "Wait a minute. What about the other 40% who don't live within the City. Shouldn't they have a say?!"
Well, they are about to be given a chance. The City is proposing a Charter Amendment that will allow DWP ratepayers from all areas in the Valley to be considered for Board service. This Charter Amendment will be placed on the November ballot for voter approval. An item to be brought before the City Council on Monday (July 12th) will authorize the filing of ballot arguments and rebuttals.
What do you think? Should DWP ratepayers who are not City residents be allowed to serve on the DWP Board? Register your opinion on the survey to the right or as a response below on this blog. I'd love to hear from you.
Sincerely,
Michael
7 comments:
On the premise that paying customers should have a say, then all ratepayers should have suitable representation on the board. To continue on to the next step, why not combine DWP and CSD and pass the economies on to the customers? The valley is one social and economic entity, regardless of any boundary lines.
Yes, we should have a say so not only with the water but also with issues that affect all of Big Bear ie: affordable housing etc. Alot us live outside the city limits and work within the city limits. Big Bear should be united as one: we need local representation and representation that listens to its constituents.
Decisions made by the City of Big Bear Lake impact everyone in the valley. Therefore, I feel it is imperative to consider the opinions of all residents, not just those with property within the city limits. Allowing ratepayers to serve on the DWP Board is an excellent place to start.
Hello Blog Posters,
It is also my belief that all ratepayers should have a say. Being allowed to serve on the board allows them that say. It also broadens-out the "talent pool" so that a more competent board can be chosen.
Del mentions consolidating the DWP and CSD. I fully agree that this should be attempted. I'd like to see it done with other agencies and utilities such as Fire and other forms of government. Citizens could save in terms of money and efficiency. Considerable redundant administrative costs could be eliminated.
As Anonymous said, a Valley-wide government would be desirable and even ideal. I am for that and promote that. But I find that most Valley elected, appointed and hired officials foster attitudes of territoriality, superiority or just want to "protect their little kingdoms". This is truly unfortunate for Valley citizens.
If DWP customers outside the City of Big Bear Lake wish to have representation on the governing board of their water purveyor, they should convince their primary governmental unit (e.g. CSD, San Bernardino County, etc.) to buy the water system in their area, and DWP should agree to sell it to them at a price they couldn't refuse.
Hi Norm,
Great idea! That's one of the more "fuller" solutions that I would like to see. I've been advocating this since I got into office....to mostly deaf ears. This way the City could possibly take on the water department under, say, public works or a separate department. CSA-53-b (I think) could adopt Fawnskin and the CSD could incorporate Sugarloaf, etc.
Problem right now is that the DWP has applied for many grants and low interest loans: gotten some; waiting on word about others. These monies are dependent upon the DWP being a stable entity. Splitting it up now would de-stabilize this grant/loan process. These monies are essential for the rehab of the DWP system following a couple of decades of neglect.
But, I would like to revisit your idea or something like it in the future so that we could reach a more enduring solution.
Thanks for your input!
Sincerely,
Michael
While we're at it, let's ask the non-resident property owners (by far the majority here) how they feel about taxation and high utility rates without representation. We may get an earful, and I think some good suggestions from successful business owners and professionals who own second homes here. And let's be grateful that these non-resident property owners pay for a huge portion of the infrastructure that we full-timers benefit from. Life is SO good here in the mountains!
Post a Comment