| 
		 
		
		
		 In 
		drought-stricken California, cities push back against steep water cuts 
		
		 
		Send a link to a friend  
 
		
		[April 16, 2015] 
		By Sharon Bernstein 
		  
		 SACRAMENTO, Calif. (Reuters) - Cities set 
		to feel the brunt of California's mandated cutbacks in water use pushed 
		back on Wednesday, calling a plan by regulators to demand reductions of 
		as much as 35 percent in some communities unfair. 
             | 
        	
			
            | 
            
			 Water utilities in the areas surrounding the state capital of 
			Sacramento, in line to face steep rationing despite years of 
			conservation said factors such as leaks in the delivery system from 
			streams and reservoirs, and the needs of big local water consumers 
			like prisons and hospitals should be considered before a region was 
			penalized. 
			 
			"I am not against severe conservation," said Rob Roscoe, General 
			Manager of the Sacramento Suburban Water District, which serves 
			about 173,000 people in Sacramento's northeastern suburbs. "But I 
			want everybody playing from the same rulebook." 
			 
			Earlier this month, California Governor Jerry Brown, standing in a 
			dry mountain meadow that in a typical year would have been covered 
			with five feet of snow, ordered a 25-percent statewide reduction in 
			water use for urban areas. 
			  
			
			  
			 
			In order to reach that goal, Brown said, cities that already used 
			less water than others would suffer smaller cutbacks, while those 
			who used more per capital would have to reduce their usage by a 
			higher amount. 
			 
			His order, as a devastating drought moved into its fourth year, 
			created the first statewide mandatory water rationing in California 
			history. 
			 
			Last week, the State Water Resources Control Board released a basic 
			framework to meet that goal by forcing cutbacks of up to 35 percent 
			of water use for communities that use higher amounts of water per 
			person. 
			 
			But those communities say the proposed rules are not based on a fair 
			reading of how much water they use. 
			 
			
            [to top of second column]  | 
            
             
            
			  
			For example, the calculation does not consider whether the 
			communities were using water that they had banked for their own use 
			so that their residents wouldn't have to worry about running low, 
			Roscoe said. 
			 
			It also doesn't consider the environment where a community is 
			located, or how fast the water that is used outdoors evaporates, the 
			trade organization representing the state's water utilities said in 
			a letter submitted to regulators and released on Wednesday. 
			 
			The plan also doesn't give communities credit if they return clean 
			water to local aquifers and streams. 
			 
			Cities also complained that their economies could be hurt if 
			businesses that use a lot of water to process food are penalized. 
			 
			(Reporting by Sharon Bernstein) 
			
			[© 2015 Thomson Reuters. All rights 
			reserved.] 
			Copyright 2015 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, 
			broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. 
			
			 
			
			   |