[M T]

Hopefully not delving into political issues, but San Jose has nothing on EBMUD. Seven years ago, I turned off my sprinklers, as it was at least $600 a month to run them. Only $200 a month when my wife and daughter are both here and no sprinklers. Tuscaloosa, I think is about $50, with sprinklers. . . .

Several years ago during the last drought, EBMUD asked for a rate increase to discourage water usage. It was granted. That winter we got a ton of rain and the reservoirs filled. EBMUD, because users had cut back water usage so much, asked for an increase in rates to make up for the lost revenue. It was granted. . . .

The report shows EBMUD at #30 in their list, serving 1.44M people, costing $955 per year for 60,000 gallons.  (Please see the report for details of how they computed the cost. Note this is just for water.  (Sewage, etc, is not included.))  So San Jose Water Co. is about 50% higher.   I have no further info as to how the rates are set.

Btw, I see that the a new estimate of rain has just been published, (for instance) upping the rain in SF in January by 25% versus the prediction made last month.  SFChronicle:
"From December through March, the model’s average forecast runs at nearly double its normal rainfall in San Francisco and San Jose, and at more than two and a half times normal in San Diego."
     Forecast for December-March for SF/Oakland: 26.0"  for SJ: 28.4"

"This is based on an average of 51 model forecasts from the ECMWF SEAS5 seasonal forecast, Oct. 1, 2026 run. "Typical" is the model's 1993-2016 average at each location, not the local rain gauge's record."

That's a strange definition of "typical".  I was wondering where this "SF/Oakland" gauge would be located.  I believe that for "San Jose", the rain varies greatly by neighborhood.

Their data is based on the API at https://open-meteo.com/en/docs/seasonal-forecast-api
You can run it for wherever you want and for whatever time frame you want.
Hint: Just do the month measurements if you do Dec. through March.
Weekly didn't produce anything.

[M T]

Hopefully not delving into political issues, but San Jose has nothing on EBMUD. Seven years ago, I turned off my sprinklers, as it was at least $600 a month to run them. Only $200 a month when my wife and daughter are both here and no sprinklers. Tuscaloosa, I think is about $50, with sprinklers. . . .

Several years ago during the last drought, EBMUD asked for a rate increase to discourage water usage. It was granted. That winter we got a ton of rain and the reservoirs filled. EBMUD, because users had cut back water usage so much, asked for an increase in rates to make up for the lost revenue. It was granted. . . .

The report shows EBMUD at #30 in their list, serving 1.44M people, costing $955 per year for 60,000 gallons.  (Please see the report for details of how they computed the cost. Note this is just for water.  (Sewage, etc, is not included.))  So San Jose Water Co. is about 50% higher.   I have no further info as to how the rates are set.

Btw, I see that the a new estimate of rain has just been published, (for instance) upping the rain in SF in January by 25% versus the prediction made last month.  SFChronicle:
"From December through March, the model’s average forecast runs at nearly double its normal rainfall in San Francisco and San Jose, and at more than two and a half times normal in San Diego."
     Forecast for December-March for SF/Oakland: 26.0"  for SJ: 28.4"

"This is based on an average of 51 model forecasts from the ECMWF SEAS5 seasonal forecast, Oct. 1, 2026 run. "Typical" is the model's 1993-2016 average at each location, not the local rain gauge's record."

That's a strange definition of "typical".  I was wondering where this "SF/Oakland" gauge would be located.  I believe that for "San Jose", the rain varies greatly by neighborhood.

Their data is based on the API at https://open-meteo.com/en/docs/seasonal-forecast-api
You can run it for wherever you want and for whatever time frame you want.
Hint: Just do the month measurements if you do Dec. through March.
Weekly didn't produce anything.