Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br />I <br /> <br />Traditionally, a primal)' fimction of fIxed fees (revenue sources that are not sensitive to <br />water use) has been to generate a stable source of revenue. Recently, however, the <br />reliance of water districts on fixed fees has been criticized because it does not give water <br />users an incentive to consume water efficiently. Therefore, in evaluating the allocation <br />methods presented in this report we will also discuss revenue stability in light of its <br />impacts on efficiency. In certain circumstances, the potentially negative effects of a <br />revenue-stable allocation method can be mitigated by the existence of secondary water <br />markets. <br /> <br />We now turn to a detailed description and analysis of the allocation methods under both <br />organizational structures. We will fIrst discuss the possibilities under the current <br />organization and then turn to a discussion regarding the shares organization. <br /> <br />EnWater Resource Consultants September 5, 1997 Final Report <br /> <br />21 <br />