RON DAVIS -- Through my eyes

I’m just a little chapped at what I understand will be the proposed

sewer fee to be charged the residents of Huntington Beach. Apparently,

this sensitive subject will come before the City Council at its meeting

on Aug. 6.

I don’t doubt the need to repair and maintain our sewer system. And I

don’t doubt that in the final analysis the taxpayers of Huntington Beach

will have to shoulder either another fee or tax for that purpose. But the

fee as proposed stinks as badly as the interior of the pipes requiring

repair.

Based on the documents I’ve been given, the city proposes a monthly

fee of $5.96 for each traditional residence, which includes separately

metered condominiums. The proposed monthly fee for apartments, mobile

homes and townhomes served by common water meters is $4.95.

Notice that the fee for residential users is either a flat fee of

$5.95 or $4.95.

There are really two basic approaches to charging for something -- the

flat-fee or buffet approach versus the jukebox or pay-as-you-play

approach.

In the buffet approach proposed by the city, the owner of the

residence is charged a single flat fee, regardless of the number of

family members and how much they flush the toilet, run their dishwasher,

washing machine and so forth. This hardly provides an incentive to

conserve.

It’s fairly obvious that the buffet approach is unfair. People with

big homes and big families get a deal, and people who are single with

small homes get the shaft. How anyone in the city could propose to charge

a single retired person living in an 800-square-foot condominium the same

amount as a family of 10 living in a 6,000-square-foot home is beyond me.

And while mobile homeowners get a 20% break and pay $4.95, I’ll bet

their sewer usage is less than half of that of the average, regular

homeowner who pays a buck more.

It is patently clear that this buffet approach proposed by the city is

inequitable and unfair to the residents of this community. One has to

wonder how the city could propose such a charge, which is so obviously

inequitable and unfair.

Unfortunately the answer is that when the city looks at choosing

between what’s fair and equitable to you and what’s convenient and

efficient for them -- you lose.

That’s right! The report that addresses this fee implicitly recognizes

that there is a more equitable way to charge the fee. And that more

equitable way is the jukebox approach, where you pay depending upon how

much you use the sewer.

So, why isn’t city staff proposing the more fair pay-for-what-you-use

approach and is instead proposing the unfair flat-fee approach?

According to their report, they are proposing the flat fee because it

would be inconvenient, costly and difficult for the city to adopt

something more fair and equitable to the taxpayers of this community.

And, regrettably, this theme of the city first and the taxpayer last is

becoming all too common in Huntington Beach. Hopefully, when this subject

comes before the council on Aug. 6, the council will unanimously reject

this proposal and remind the city staff that fairness to the taxpayer

ought to come before the needs of the city.

* RON DAVIS is a private attorney who lives in Huntington Beach. He

can be reached by e-mail at o7 RDD@socal.rr.com.f7