When Anthony Kalvans looks out into the small town of San Miguel he sees many things.
He sees his home. He sees where he has served as a San Miguel Community Services District (SMCSD) board member since he was the age of 19.
But he also sees a problem—one rooted in the public policy that led to extremely high utility rates he believes are driving people out of town and out of California.
“I think it is frustrating that California has [moved] from the Golden State of opportunity to what feels like a status quo state,” Kalvans said. “Most of my friends have left California because they can’t afford to raise a family here. … We have major problems that need to be addressed.”
He hopes to address those affordability problems by introducing a new way of calculating utility costs, which he’s spent the last four years studying and developing.
“Water rates have two components: a base rate and a consumption rate … the base rate is made up of fixed expenses that must be paid even when water is not used—like maintenance, infrastructure, loans, and staff,” Kalvans said. “My method focuses on making our system more efficient by taking those fixed costs and charging them proportionally.”
The change in calculation method, which he hopes the SMCSD considers adopting, would impact both how current residents and businesses are charged.
“To put it plainly, let’s say there is a water pipe serving 10 homes and it costs $500,000 to replace the pipe … nine of the 10 homes are on the same size lot but the 10th home takes up a space of five normal homes,” he explained. “Under traditional utility rates, all 10 homes would pay $50,000 equally to replace their pipe; however, using my lot-sized method, nine of those homes would save over $15,000 while the larger lot would pay the true cost of their share of the infrastructure.”
According to Kalvans, his method could also mean that more people consider moving to San Miguel who may not have thought about it as an option before.
“By using my lot-sized method for connection fees, I think we can lower the construction cost and overall price of starter homes for families,” he said. “I also think that lowering construction costs for businesses would bring more jobs to our town.”
Kalvans said he doesn’t expect the proposal to be accepted immediately or even wholesale.
“As with any new idea, it should be fully tested and peer-reviewed,” he said. “While I am only one director and all final decisions are up to the whole board, I would support fully exploring implementing this method for all CSDs’ utility systems.”
He’s hopeful that the proposed method can serve as a potential second option if public opinion at the upcoming Sept. 28 water rate increase proposal meeting is swayed in that direction.
“I am currently offering my proposal as a Plan B to the traditional rate increase being proposed for the water fund,” Kalvans said. “If the community shows up to the public hearing and is opposed to the traditional rate increase, the board can discuss this option.”
Regardless of what happens at that September meeting, Kalvans is hopeful that his study will spark interest from other directors and constituents on how important it is to introduce new ideas to a governing body—even if it just spurs discussion.
“I would encourage all elected officials to stop talking about the affordability crisis and help make a difference,” he said. “It’s not enough to just show up to a board meeting or ask someone to solve our problems. We must take responsibility and take risks by proposing new ideas.” Δ
This article appears in Aug 3-13, 2023.