My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
2025.11.10 Speaker Card - PC
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2020-2029
>
2025
>
Speaker Cards - Public Comments
>
2025.11.10 Speaker Card - PC
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/12/2025 10:47:16 AM
Creation date
11/12/2025 10:46:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Speaker Card
Meeting Type
Regular
Agency Type
City Council
Date
11/10/2025
Text box
ID:
1
Creator:
REDWOOD_CITY\NANCYRAMIREZ
Created:
11/12/2025 10:47 AM
Modified:
11/12/2025 10:47 AM
Text:
mailto:andytong@yahoo.com
ID:
2
Creator:
REDWOOD_CITY\NANCYRAMIREZ
Created:
11/12/2025 10:47 AM
Modified:
11/12/2025 10:47 AM
Text:
mailto:council@redwoodcity.org
ID:
3
Creator:
REDWOOD_CITY\NANCYRAMIREZ
Created:
11/12/2025 10:47 AM
Modified:
11/12/2025 10:47 AM
Text:
https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
89
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
From:Andy Tong <br />To:GRP-City Council <br />Subject:Protest against proposed water rate increase <br />Date:Wednesday, August 13, 2025 10:45:03 AM <br />You don't often get email from andytong@yahoo.com. Learn why this is important <br />Dear Redwood City council members, <br />As a home owner of a single-family residence in Redwood City for over 20 years, I would like <br />to submit a written protest against the proposed water rate increase, slated to be discussed on <br />Nov 10th, 2025. My residence address is 19 Grand St., Redwood City, CA 94062, parcel <br />number: 052-224-190. <br />The two main objections I have against this proposal are twofolds: <br />1. Eliminating the tiered metered rate for single family residence with the “uniform volumetric <br />rate”. For years now, the water rate structure has increased weight of flat charge and reduced <br />weight of metered charge. I understand the rationale is to to offset fixed costs. But to <br />eliminate tiered metered rate in addition to that, would entirely disincentivize ANY form of <br />water conservation, and disproportionately negatively impact households that have actively <br />conserved water. For example, for those with low water usage (tier 1), this proposal <br />represents a 33% increase of the metered rate in 2026 (and more in subsequent years.) That’s <br />a substantial increase. I STRONGLY urge the council to reject this proposal, and continue to <br />use tiered rate to encourage water conservation. <br />2. The higher % increase of flat service charges for single family residiential meters. By 2028, <br />the service charge would have gone up by $20 over the current $82.09, whereas the 2” and <br />above multi-family and commercial meters would have had minimal increase. Again, this <br />disproportionately impact those households who are single family residences and have <br />dedicated meters, and have been actively conserving water. I would suggest reduce the % of <br />increase to single family service charge, and increase the service charge for 2”and above <br />meters to offset it. <br />Thank you, <br />Andy Tong
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.