Customers asked to cut back on outdoor water use
#1 Jan 24, 2013
This headline brought a hearty laugh from the civil engineers in our group who provided facts and figures about the huge volume of rainfall being thrown away by the County's Chief Engineer in defiance of State law. They know this Flood Control & Water Conservation District manager is aware that more than five times as much rainwater falls here as households use, making demands for reduced water use an insult to the intelligence of the public.
When a newly developed community has both chronic flooding and a chronic water shortage it is obvious that public servants in charge are functionally deficient. Saving one gallon out of ten to meet all needs using federally-recommended/funded planning and design would:
-- A) meet all household needs with pure, much cheaper water;
-- B) Cost far less than the proposed Murrieta Creek Flood Control scam yet provide much more reliable protection from flooding;
-- C) reduce pollution to avoid the billion plus NPDES planning would cost;
-- D) provide beautiful linear parks and travelways throughout the Valley;
-- E) greatly enhance wlidlife habitat for fine recreational opportunities.
Dumping stormwater off new tracts causes flooding, forces water importation, is contrary to State law and common sense. But it is an effective way to guarantee the job security of entrenched bureaucrats and politicians.
#2 Feb 14, 2013
A Patch letter to the editor points out the high cost of water in the Valley.
This unfortunate truth is a direct result of voters being fooled into replacing the Murrieta County Water District Manager twenty years ago because he, like the head of Rancho water, cooperated with the EMA-Resource Conservation District to collect rainwater and percolate it into the immense natural underground reservoir of this Valley.
That planning would have made the recently resurgent $112 million Murrieta Creek flood control project unnecessary and eliminated need for imported water. But this would have significantly reduced windfall profits of major land developers so these managers had to go.
Local newspapers were bought up to pressure the Californian into cooperating to fool voters by withholding or distorting critical facts and figures about this program that would have brought self-sufficiency in water supply. Murrieta voters responded by electing officials who gave away control of their water supply.
So the next generation is paying the high price of mindless voting. Residents are seeing the inevitable result of not electing a majority of competent, honest officials;
#3 Aug 17, 2013
Several years ago San Deigo water customers were 'asked' to cut back on their water use, with prominently publicised water police imposing severe fines for "overuse" like washing a car or watering plants.
This and the rapid rise in rates worked beautifully, homes typically use only 55% of the national average now.
But they still pay a 'base cost' of $540 yearly, the same as customers that use more than ten times as much. Their cost per gallon is double that of the folks with horse pastures, golf courses and luxuriant landscape.
The wordsmiths - professional liars - hired by water districts are experts at fooling news reporters so that we are kept ignorant of the extortion we are paying to support bloated public agencies that manipulate facts to enrich the few who can afford to overuse water that costs them only 44 cents per 100 gallons.
Residents who don't use forums like this one to inform themselves properly deserve the water/powerr extortion that has broken California's bank.
Add your comments below
|Californians fight over migrants||12 hr||barefoot2626||158|
|Unidentified flying object over Wildomar||Sat||dragonldy||3|
|Water bond scam||Sat||james marple||1|
|MENIFEE: Metal storage containers return for a ... (Sep '13)||Oct 17||maryjaneprincton||2|
|Majory Injury Traffic Collision Last Night in W...||Oct 17||Saras||1|
|Board of Directors Candidate George Cambero||Oct 16||vote for george||1|
Find what you want!
Search Murrieta Forum Now