Measure K: validity, accuracy
Published: Thursday, Sep 4, 2008
Editor: In last Thursday’s guest commentary, Bryant Moynihan, a one-term former councilman, made a variety of invalid assertions. He knows the Sonoma County Water Agency supplies fresh water to Petaluma and that this city has no power to control rates. SCWA rates are based on operation, maintenance and capital costs of the collection and transmission system.
However, he proposes adopting rates of two years ago and tying rate increases to “a cost of living adjustment” (actually reads “Bay Area Consumer Price Index” in Measure K). This is like tying a cat and dog together! Then he presents his interpretation of the city’s wastewater and water services budgets, with claims of excesses.
Our forefathers built a facility that served Petaluma for 70 years. The city is responsible for properly treated wastewater. Is it wise to cut corners on a new wastewater facility that will serve for the next 70 years for a growing population and increasingly stringent requirements for wastewater processing?
Voters should know that opposition to Measure K comes from a long line of opponents. Opposition started in the days Mr. Moynihan served on the council. At that time, he could not persuade fellow council members to accept his viewpoint. In the intervening years, with over 40 appearances before the council, there has been no change, still 100 percent opposition at the council level and now opposition from a broad range of community leaders as well.
Perhaps this accounts for his letter to the city clerk, with copies to the city manager, city attorney and others asserting that the city should not be permitted to offer an “argument against” for Measure K that will go in the voter information pamphlet. Does this really serve the interests of Petalumans — to just get one side’s argument?
Whew! Join me and vote “no” on K.
Bill Phillips, Petaluma
