CC MIN 1977 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

� 8��;' , � � , Mr Mitche7l called attention to the section of the Model Ord7nance relating �o regulations and restrictions on all customers regardless of the amount of water ration and to the penalties expected'to be enforced It was pointed out that the intent of the penalty is to get the attention of the customer if water is being used in excess of allocation, but that flow restricting devices may be installed and water service discontinued if violations persist. Mr. M�tchell ' observed that the City w�ll asstst water customers �n reducing ' water consumption and �t js expected that they will be cooperat�ve and that enforcement w111 not become a problem , In response to question, Mr Mitchell stated that regard�ng new customers, res�dentzal and non-res�dential, interviews would be held to determine minimum needs, the capacity of the City to supply and means by which water savings could be made. In response tu question regarding equitable treatment for those who have already commenced conserv�ng water and the possib�lity of rationing water on a gailonage bas�s, Director of Public Works Pusich advised that such ratiom ng would present an impossible administrative problem because of the manner in which water use is computed and the larqe r�umber of customers Mr Pusich reported he had received com- munications on the matter and advised that the 1976 base year should reveal a sav�ng over 1975, if conservation had already begun and the Department would be happy to consider such cases. He noted, however, that investigation of water records of those who have insisted they have already c.ommenced conservation reveal that the conservation is very recent and use of 1976 as a base year is not unfair. Discussion fol�owed and Mr Fales, Mr Pusich, Mr MTtchell and Finance Director Ference cortanented and repl�ed to questions concern- ' ing the use of flow restrictors, the desirability of using some , �udgment �n handl7ng water rationing on �ndividual basis, the need for severe penalties for flagrant and continued v�olat�ons, the informat7on abaut the program and statement of water consumption h�story wh�ch will be sent to each customer for use in making the required reduction, the poss�b�lity of iisting on each month's b711 the ration for the next month; the use of the Park and Recrea- tion Schedule for pubiic information on the water conservation pro- gram, the des�rabil�ty of providing one sheet which could be posted snowing conversion of cubic feet to gallons and the number of gallons required for various household tasks, the expectation that i:he provisioris of the Model Ordinance would be �n effect shortly after the f�rst of Apr11, the poss�ble cost of admintstration of the program and tne lack of any relevant experience; the expectation that a cutback of 50% w111 be rea7ized at publ�c facilities, the des�rability of advising customers why it 7s not possible to ration on a gallonage basis, the proh7bition against filling of new swim- min9 pools, the need for a highEr penalty in the event some prospec- tive pool owners might be willing to pay a large fine in order to fiil a new pool, and the need to discourage people from participating in "water rustl7ng" Mr r"aies advised �hat the San Franc�sco Water District plans to charge users 48� rnore than the present water rate because of the reduced revenue antic�pated by the water conservation program and ' to meet �he costs of administering the emergency program. In re- sponse to question, Mr. Fales adv�sed use of Publ�c Works Employment Act funds to meet the increased costs will be investigated since a _2_ Ad�.Mtg 3/21/77