Should Grover Beach City Councilmember Dan Rushing be recalled? | Opinion

A fight over water rates in the city of Grover Beach has spiraled so ridiculously out of control that one of the city’s most competent and conscientious members of the City Council is facing a recall measure on the November ballot.

Dan Rushing, who represents District 2, voted last December to raise water rates to help pay for the city’s share of Central Coast Blue, a regional water reclamation project that would have piped wastewater treated in Pismo Beach to Grover, where it would have been used to recharge the groundwater basin.

Mayor Karen Bright and Councilmember Zach Zimmerman also voted in favor of the higher rates and they, too, were initially targeted for recall.

Ironically, even after the city dropped out of Central Coast Blue on account of skyrocketing costs and lowered water rates, many citizens still weren’t happy.

Grover H2O — a group of residents shepherded by mayoral candidate Debbie Peterson — went ahead with the recall against Rushing, who has two more years left in his term. (Bright and Zimmerman, whose terms expire at the end of the year, are not seeking reelection.)

This is nothing more than an attempt to bully a councilmember who followed his conscience and did what he thought was best for both current and future residents of Grover Beach.

As Rushing explained during a December council meeting, without last year’s “miracle rains,” projections showed that the city faced the prospect of having its allotment of Lopez Lake water — 800 acre-feet — reduced by 35%.

“This is what had me up at night,” he said then.

There you have it. Here’s a councilmember who loses sleep worrying about the welfare of his city. And now he’s in danger of being tossed out of office?

That’s just cruel. It’s also shortsighted. The council needs a Dan Rushing who has the good sense to recognize that the city cannot afford to sit back and do nothing when it comes to planning for the future in a state where drought is a given.

Measure G-24

Not only that, Grover H2O also is the driver behind Measure G-24 on the November ballot, which seeks to repeal water and sewer rates adopted last December. Again, the water rates have already been rolled back, though the council let stand a $2.50-per-month sewer rate increase.

If the measure were to pass, the city would lose that $2.50 per month, which is expected to generate $280,000 this year. That loss would create the potential for disaster. The city would be forced to delay some much-needed work on the aging sewer system — some components are 60 years old — including replacement of sewer mains, storm drain repair and upgrades to lift stations.

Not only that, the city would be unable to complete several street improvements financed by Measure K-14, a local, taxpayer-approved bond, since the city is not going to repave streets, only to tear them up again to replace sewer lines.

Grover H2O already won a huge victory when the city pulled out of Central Coast Blue and reduced water rates. And now it’s quibbling over a $2.50-a-month sewer increase?

At this point, it appears the group is far more interested in teaching City Hall a misguided lesson than in looking toward the city’s future. In so doing, it’s just delaying the inevitable.

If Grover Beach is to obtain a supplemental water supply, it’s guaranteed that water rates — which are currently the lowest in the county — will have to go up. The longer the city waits, the more costly it could get.

What’s next for water?

Unfortunately, options are limited.

Grover Beach does not have access to the State Water Project, which is not a reliable source anyway.

Desalination is both expensive and difficult to permit; the Coastal Commission expects agencies to exhaust every other option — including recycled water projects like Central Coast Blue — before it will consider an application for desal.

There has been talk about piping desalinated water from Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant to the South County, but so far, it’s been just that. Talk.

Additional conservation measures could help, but not by much. City residents already are doing an outstanding job of conserving water — they use an average of 66 gallons per day per person, compared to the state average of 120 per day.

It’s not going to be easy to find more water, and intimidating councilmembers and city staff for trying to do their job will not help.

City officials don’t enjoy raising water rates. They do so because they believe it’s necessary — not because they want to punish their citizens.

For the sake of Grover’s future, District 2 voters should keep Dan Rushing on the City Council, and we strongly urge voters throughout the city to vote no on Measure G-24.