Reminder of Flag Code

With Memorial Day observances and gatherings approaching, I would like to offer key points in the U.S. Flag Code, comprising Title 4 of the United States Code. Following U.S. Supreme Court decisions in 1989 and in 1990, enforcement of anti-desecration statutes, including bans on burning the flag as a public protest, is unconstitutional if aimed at suppressing one type of expression; nevertheless the U.S. Flag Code remains technically part of U.S. law and is widely honored.

I particularly want to remind the community that the flag should never be used as wearing apparel, nor printed on paper napkins or on anything else designated for temporary use and discarded. Further, Section 3 of the U.S. Flag Code specifies that throughout the code “flag, standard, colors, or ensign” refers to any “part or parts” of the flag. The test is “the average person seeing the same without deliberation may believe the same to represent the flag, colors, standard or ensign of the United States.” 

To me this means that wearing a design including the stars and stripes of the U.S. flag violates the law.

Roberta Medford

Montrose

Distressing CVWD News

I would like to expand on the article “CVWD Proposes Raising Rates” (News, May 9).

This will be the 16th consecutive year the District has raised water rates. The increases have averaged more than 6% every year. We have seen our meter charges increase 161% since 2009. We have also seen our wastewater rates increase in a similar fashion. In 2016-17, the District introduced a new charge called “usage rate,” which is now part of the wastewater charges.

The May 9 article forgot to mention the proposed 3.8% usage rate increase in addition to the 4% wastewater service charge, 7% water usage rate and the 7% water meter charge. This equates to a 22% increase over last year.

The notice published by CVWD calculates the rate increase on the use of 17 units of water. This equates to 10 units in tier 1 and seven units in tier 2 for the calculation. I believe this isn’t a fair representation of the real cost many users will pay.

Although the District publishes a $10.65 bi-monthly increase, if one looks at the different costs between tiers it tells quite a different story. Between tier 1 and tier 2, the user pays 57% more for the same water. In tier 3, the user pays 138% more for the same water.

In fairness to consumers thinking they will see an increase of $10.65 bi-monthly as published, the District should provide a simple template where customers can fill in their consumption and see the real increase they can expect.

Finally, I would like to see the District and [its] board develop specific cost-cutting goals that can be measurable. Without measurable goals we will see our rates continue to rise year after year.

Jonas Williams

La Crescenta