Archived: Why the WRD Is Taking Legal Action

3

One of the fundamental tenets of life is that ‘you can’t get something for nothing.’ It’s a basic rule that everyone learns in kindergarten and most people adhere. It sets the parameters for how we conduct business. Unfortunately, there are always some challenges to this timeless adage, even at the literal expense of others, including neighbors.

Last week, the Water Replenishment District of Southern California (WRD) sought a court injunction to prevent a handful of local cities from further pumping groundwater because they have refused to pay their water bills, some for up to 10 consecutive months, and they now owe more than $5.3 million. The consequence of their withholding payment has shifted the financial burden of sustaining the region’s groundwater supply to the remaining paying cities from WRD’s service area that includes 43 cities and nearly 4 million residents. Without WRD maintaining the local groundwater supply, these 43 cities in southeast Los Angeles County would be forced to purchase imported water that is 3-4 times more expensive than groundwater.

One councilman in the City of Downey, Mario Guerra, recently stated publicly that his city will not pay the bills they owe because his city is among those challenging the process by which water rates were set as not purportedly complying with Prop 218. However, in written publications, the California’s Legislative Analyst’s Office has referred to the way Prop 218 applies to water assessments as a gray area. So instead of waiting for a final resolution from the courts, these handful of cities have snubbed case law and taken matters into their own hands by refusing to pay their bills. In fact, Mr. Guerra’s political spin is demanding that all money for which they purchased water dating back to 2006 be returned. Mr. Guerra is demanding something for nothing.

Ironically, the cities of Downey, Cerritos and Signal Hill have continued to collect money from customers in their respective cities despite their calculated decision to withhold payment to WRD for the very same water they use for everyday life. In fact, these cities have even turned off the water on customers for failure to pay their water bills. So should these cities be treated any differently than the way in which they treat their own customers? Moreover, should these cities be allowed to threaten the water supply for nearly 4 million people?

WRD believes these cities should not be treated any differently than anyone else. Consequently, after months of amicable requests to make payment on their respective water bills, WRD exercised its remaining enforcement remedies, as defined in the California Water Code §60339, that allows WRD to file for a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction against further pumping for any operator delinquent in the payment of a replenishment assessment.

Of course, the cities will still have access to other sources of water and residents will still have flowing faucets. The big difference, however, is that it will be at a significant increase in the cost of water to customers who never stopped paying their fair share, because unlike these handful of cities, their respective customers know that you can’t get something for nothing.

Albert Robles is president of the Water Replenishment District of Southern California Board of Directors.

Posted - Copyright © 2022 Eastern Group Publications, Inc.

Share.
Print This Post Print This Post

3 Comments

  1. Mario A Guerra on

    Loren, the courts have ruled. They have given their verdict that WRD owes the residents of these cities $ 15 million dollars. They have also ruled that WRD violated the law with their iLLEGAL assessment. We have stopped paying $ 5 million. So since the courts have ruled in our favor we are just asking for WRD to send us the difference that they OWE us . Pretty simple. WRD is misleading the public. I would welcome anyone to call me and I would be happy to respond with the truth. My phone is 562-904-7274 and my email address is mguerra@downeyca.org. Mario A. Guerra Downey

  2. Loren Gillard on

    So basically Councilman Guerra thinks his city should get something for free? I believe I understand that I read that a “final resolution” from the courts has yet to be made but Guerra feels he’s the judge here. I just don’t get it. Logically it seems to me that if a FINAL determination had been made, WRD would actually be returning funds, but OBVIOUSLY they have not be made to SO it would seem Mr. Robles is correct. Given that simply use of logical deduction, why does Downey feel entitled to bypass the courts and be their own judge and jury. I hope a court shuts Downey tap and are forced to pay 3-4 times more for their water, actually, to FINALLY pay their fair share. I am stunned by such blatant arrogance and I hope this blunder exposes Downey’s elected body for what they are, freeloaders!

  3. Mario A Guerra on

    Mr. Robles , you fail to state all the facts. Two separate judges have ruled that your position is wrong and you ILLEGALLY overcharges our residents for several years. All we are asking was that you follow the law and do what is right for all the residents of our communities. Other cities are now wanting to join Cerritos, Downey and Signal Hills because they realized what you have done is illegal and wrong…you also claim that we are not paying you $ 5.3 ( while you owe us $ 15 million ) and that is hurting other cities, but you fail to mention that you currently have $70 million in reserves of our citizens money. You have no legal statue to have that much money and I suggest you refund these dollars to the cities you have overcharged for all the years. Our citizens deserve better and we hope you will do what is right and follow the law…please let us know when we can expect our check so we can let our residents know..thank you..Councilman Mario A. Guerra City of Downey

Leave A Reply

Comments are intended to further discussion on the article topic. EGPNews reserves the right to not publish, edit or remove comments that contain vulgarities, foul language, personal attacks, racists, sexist, homophobic or other offensive terminology or that contain solicitations, spam, or that threaten harm of any sort. EGPNews will not approve comments that call for or applaud the death, injury or illness of any person, regardless of their public status. Questions regarding this policy should be e-mailed to service@egpnews.com.