Letter: North County stood up to government with water district vote
To the editor,
–Last week, the voters of the North County stood up to the government and exposed just how out of touch political insiders have become with the people who elected them. The resounding rejection of the formation of the Paso Robles water district and its funding, shows us that when we get involved with our government, we will get the representation we need.
The overreaching piece of legislation, authored and championed by one of my opponents, State Assemblyman Katcho Achadjian, would create a board of directors to manage groundwater that would essentially raise fees and taxes while trampling individuals’ private property rights. Even more concerning, the legislation was designed to circumvent the people by allowing the County Board of Supervisors to bypass the requirement of a local petition of residents.
Roughly three-quarters of voters in the North County voted against the water district and have stood up to the government’s attempt to silence the voters – another example of political insiders willing to do whatever it takes to get re-elected or seek higher office at the expense of the people they’re elected to serve.
Furthermore, it was just reported in the LA Times that California’s largest water district has been misleading investors by not disclosing $8.3 million in accounting transactions. This is what happens when the politicians give the government a larger scope. Taxpayers’ dollars are poorly spent and we end up having to cover the costs.
Increasing fees and raising costs on residents for saving water are penalties, not remedies. Instead of pushing for more bureaucracy and regulations, representatives should work to develop long-range solutions to our water problems that will yield returns for the taxpayers. California’s drought stems from the little foresight current and past politicians have had, and their failure to invest in our infrastructure.
Solely depending on water conservation has proven to be insufficient in solving our district’s water problems, and only encourages additional government overreach. It is imperative that we prioritize investing in our future by modernizing our infrastructure and putting forth 21st century solutions like increasing capacity for current reservoirs, creating more water treatment facilities, and removing barriers for new technologies like desalination.
As your representative, I will never take the politically expedient route. I am listening to the concerns of the taxpayers and I will bring next generation leadership to Washington that will solve problems with our district’s infrastructure, not mask them with further fines and penalties. I’m running for Congress to bring a voice for the future of the Central Coast to Washington.
–Congressional candidate Justin Fareed
Fareed is running for the seat that Lois Capps (D-Santa Barbara) will leave vacant for the 24th Congressional District, which encompasses Santa Barbara County, San Luis Obispo County, and part of Ventura County. Also running for the seat: Democrat Santa Barbara Mayor Helene Schneider, Republican Assemblyman Katcho Achadjian, Democrat Salud Carbajal, and Democrat William Ostrander.
The Paso Robles Daily News welcomes letters to the editor from local people on local news topics. For more information, click here >> Write a letter to the editor.
Will the well owners also pay for the additional infrastructures needed to replace the water they use? Or is it just city water users that are responsible for that expense? Our water comes from wells too, the same water source that the vineyards draw from.
Wow, what an opportunistic "vote for me" plug. If you consider yourself a conservative, then you would have done the same as well – empower local government. Your argument is flawed in many ways. You have no idea what you're talking about.
You claim this legislation "push[es] for more bureacracy and regulations" — in fact, it did the very opposite. It expedited and made more efficient the voting process, bringing it back into the hands of locals rather than those in Sacramento.
The board of directors the bill created is made up of local land owners represented from all different property sizes. This counters the "overreaching" argument you're making.
Plus, you never knew about this water district until your newly hired campaign advisors wrote this article and told you to harp on it. You're starting to sound like Hilary day by day. Take a note from Bernie and start speaking intellectually backed truth rather than little sound bites to sound like you know what you're talking about.
In the end whether the county Board of Supervisors or the State manages this basin everyone will pay a fee, it may not be called a tax but we will be assessed. It isnt going to be free. It would be unthinkable that the county would use general funds to manage this one basin…and certainly reserved should not be used for ongoing management costs. So yes Mr. Fareed a local district might have been considered another layer of government but the county will have to assess us a tax, hire more personnel, open office space and hire staff in the north which just increases government. Katcho worked with many stakeholders to try to bring them together to manage themselves.
Will the well owners also pay for the additional infrastructures needed to replace the water they use? Or is it just city water users that are responsible for that expense? Our water comes from wells too, the same water source that the vineyards draw from.
Wow, what an opportunistic "vote for me" plug. If you consider yourself a conservative, then you would have done the same as well – empower local government. Your argument is flawed in many ways. You have no idea what you're talking about.
You claim this legislation "push[es] for more bureacracy and regulations" — in fact, it did the very opposite. It expedited and made more efficient the voting process, bringing it back into the hands of locals rather than those in Sacramento.
The board of directors the bill created is made up of local land owners represented from all different property sizes. This counters the "overreaching" argument you're making.
Plus, you never knew about this water district until your newly hired campaign advisors wrote this article and told you to harp on it. You're starting to sound like Hilary day by day. Take a note from Bernie and start speaking intellectually backed truth rather than little sound bites to sound like you know what you're talking about.
In the end whether the county Board of Supervisors or the State manages this basin everyone will pay a fee, it may not be called a tax but we will be assessed. It isnt going to be free. It would be unthinkable that the county would use general funds to manage this one basin…and certainly reserved should not be used for ongoing management costs. So yes Mr. Fareed a local district might have been considered another layer of government but the county will have to assess us a tax, hire more personnel, open office space and hire staff in the north which just increases government. Katcho worked with many stakeholders to try to bring them together to manage themselves.