The State of California introduced new legislation in recent weeks that aims to limit a household’s daily use of water; capping the daily level at 55 gallons per person and penalizing local water districts who don’t enforce the new regulations.
Guess they’re going to have to keep really close track of who lives where.
Water is a measured utility you’re registered for so users are already tracked.
It may be recorded, but not scrutinized with the aforementioned implications.
I guess the water districts can just fudge the records.
People pay for water unless they have a private well, so it’s already tracked.
Wouldn’t “chaos” be NOT imposing a limit and then running out?
Is that so? I never would have guessed.
You said water usage wasn’t scrutinized, so I thought I’d point out the obvious.
Thanks
…
You’re welcome.
Since I’m assuming that the bolded text doesn’t require further explanation, I will point out that water usage isn’t scrutinized in the true sense of the word. It’s recorded and the billing process is automated.
There’s no one there looking at how many gallons I use at this point.
If I install a pool or incur a line leak, it’s up to me to notice the difference in my bill and react accordingly.
Unless water is visibly flowing in the street and/or a domicile is vacant (so the bill isn’t being paid) the water company doesn’t care.
What an odd thing to get pedantic about.
Have a great evening, tho.
So you think that the process described in the OP won’t be automated, there will literally be someone from the government personally tracking the water usage of every domicile in California? That’s what you think is going to happen?
To actually impose a limit according to the number of people in the house, they would have to, as I stated, keep closer track of who lives where, wouldn’t they?
If they just wanna have the people who have unreported guests pay more for their water, then nah. Not till they complain about it and force the issue.
The comm director has left the door open for additional actions if encouraging people to use less water (avg is 80 - 100 gallons per person per day) doesn’t get them to where they want to be.
There’s no way to monitor that many households without automation.
California has well-documented water problems. The Hannity bot seems to think these restrictions are draconian, but what else should they do?
If they are going to allow 55 gallons per person then it stands to reason that they need to keep track of how many people are in the house to figure the cost. Hence, my original comment.
If they are going to do anything more than charge a higher fee for overages, then more scrutiny than just automating the billing will likely be in order.
It’s not complicated.
Good day.
Why are you asking me what they should do?
That’s basic census info and overages can easily be automated.
That’s what the IF was for.
Because California’s response to their water problem is the topic of the thread.
You asked me to answer what else they should do, even though I didn’t say they shouldn’t do what they’re doing now. Do you think I program the Hannity bot?
