Panelists answered the following: Do you agree with the state’s $500 penalties for certain types of water use in light of the drought?
Mary Zanger: “Yes. I agree with penalizing over usage. However it would be fair and enforceable to tie the penalty to usage where it can be penalized, monitored and enforceable. Better to issue responsibility to the cities. Let them ration the allotments per household. Cities could mandate a 10% or 20% reduction per monthly water usage or charge. When reductions are missed then the city could scale the fees exponentially. That means even small increases in usage would trigger large and larger fines. All of us need to wake up to this dangerous water shortage.”
Marty Richman: “No, this will have spotty enforcement and pit neighbor against neighbor; what we should be concerned with is how much water is used and for what. To do so we have to start by getting everyone in the state, including so-called private wells, on metered systems – good luck with that.”
Nants Foley: “This would cost more to administer than it would generate in income. We could add it to the war on drugs and the war on illegal fireworks.”
Jim West: “Like the state’s $1,000 penalty for highway littering, a water-wasting penalty tells the public an issue is important. In our culture shame no longer works; only the promise of financial gain or the threat of financial loss motivates us.”
Ruth Erickson: “The $500 fine for water wasters should be higher! Some California cities have few water meters where water usage can’t be measured for individual households. The only way to fine the offenders is by seeing and reporting the outdoor wastage, when they can see such things as hosing down driveways and over watering lawns and gardens causing water to run down the gutters. Those with meters can also be fined as their water usage is monitored showing leaks and overwatering, which can be detected. Water is the lifeline for every living thing so let’s conserve so that everyone and everything can survive.”