Murky Water's Bulletin Board
Home    -    Return

 

NOTICE 

The Sutter County Assessment Appeals Board No. 1 will meet at 1160 Civic Center Boulevard, Yuba city, California on various dates for the purpose of equalizing the assessment of property in Sutter County and will continue in session for that purpose from time to time until the business of equalization is disposed of.

Taxpayers who wish to file an application for hearing for reduction in assessments are advised that the time for filing applications will be from July 2, 2009, through September 15, 2009, at 5:00 p.m. Before a hearing on an application for reduction in assessment can be held, the applicant must first fill out an application on a form provided by the Clerk. Appellants are encouraged to review the application in person with the County Assessor, 1160 Civic Center Boulevard, Yuba City, California, prior to filing the application with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors.

Applications forms are available at the office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, 1160 Civic Center Boulevard, Yuba City, California; and from the Sutter County Assessor's Web Page: http://www.suttercounty.org/doc/government/depts/assessor/assessor. Application forms may also be requested by telephone from the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors' Office (530) 822-7106. The Assessment Appeals Board No. 1 is required to find the full cash value of property which is the subject of an assessment hearing and if the board determines that such value differs from the full cash value on which the assessment is based, the Board will adjust the assessment by either increasing or decreasing the enrolled value.

DONNA M. JOHNSTON
Clerk-Recorder
by: Karna-Lisa Aucoin, Deputy
June 26, 2009 Ad #00076525

Appeared in: Appeal Democrat on Friday, 06/26/2009

 

 

November 20, 2008 - Please Answer These Important Questions

City Council Members
City of Yuba City
1201 Civic Center Boulevard

Yuba City, CA  95993 

Dear Council Members:

At the November 18, 2008 council meeting, Mayor Ramirez requested Don Kessel and I reduce to writing questions about the City’s handling of current and future water needs and financing thereof.  Apparently, the Council and staff were not prepared to address these serious concerns of Walton area Concerned Citizens at the meeting.  Mr. Kessel has submitted his questions, which are attached, along with some questions I have raised.  Mr. Kessel requested I forward his questions as he is currently traveling.

·         In the documents submitted with the Proposition 218 ballot process dated October 8, 2008, the city has told residents in Regions 1, 2, and 3 that they will be receiving surface water and the City has an adequate supply to serve current customers and all the groundwater customers.  However, last summer, the city applied to activate a well that exceeds the arsenic standards by the city’s own admission.  How can you tell the residents you have enough water to supply all groundwater customers in the so-called HWC areas with surface water and that they are voting on whether to  connect to surface water—not blended water?  Why would this deception not negate any Proposition 218 vote based on the fact the customers are not going to receive what they have been told they would receive for the surcharge?

·         The city has said the groundwater customers will not be subsidizing development, but the Sutter Heritage and Siller Development planning documents indicate these developments will be served by the same 30” pipe Regions 1, 2, and 3 are being asked to pay for.  What is the proportionate share the developers are going to pay of the $19.8 million loan being sought?  What mechanism is in place or going to be in place to reimburse the groundwater customers for the costs they may incur if the surcharge is implemented in order to deliver water to the above two developments?

·         Please provide a response to the November 17, 2008 letter from Concerned Citizens for Walton Water Customers in Hillcrest Water System—South Walton Area, specifically answering why the proposed surcharge would not be a special tax and/or fall under the definition of an assessment and subject to the processes for establishing an assessment?

We look forward to receiving your response, hopefully before the public hearing is scheduled on November 24, 2008, at 4 p.m.

Sincerely, 

Elaine Miles
487 Anita Way
Yuba City, CA  95993
530-671-7916


November 19, 2008
City Council

Hillcrest water users will soon be making a decision whether or not to convert to surface water. Below are a few concerns that need to be answered and/or clarified.

A City ordinance requires anyone out side the City limits to annex before receiving surface water. The City Council made a decision to exempt Region 1 (which is in a county area) from this requirement if Region 1 decides to convert to surface water. The question is, what is the status of the county residents who reside in Region 2/3? Will they receive the same exemption? Why haven't they been given the same opportunity to as  was given to Region 1 to separately protest or not protest the City's proposal to convert to surface water?

It appears that the city intends to activate a City well (Not a Hillcrest well) to blend with City surface water - a well that, at the time of the request, exceeds the arsenic standards. Since we have been told by the City that the City has plenty of surface water and even sells water why is the City reactivating this well? Has the City decided to implement a water blending program? Can city residents expect to receive blended water in the future? Shouldn't all the City be advised that they will be receiving blended water?

Regions 1 2 and 3 have been told that they would receive pure surface water. if it is the City's intent to blend, shouldn't these regions be advised that they will be receiving something less than pure surface water?

Don Kessel
A concerned Hillcrest water user


SHOULD THE CITY BE COMMITTING US TO ANOTHER NEARLY 1 MILLION DOLLORS FOR A PROJECT THAT: "includes the furnishing of all labor, materials, tax, equipment and services for the construction and completion of the Water Treatment Plant Administration Building Remodel Project."? THIS DOESN''T SEEM TO BE A CRITICAL PROJECT THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AT THIS TIME. SINCE WE ARE IN A RECESSION, WHY DOESN'T THE CITY PULL BACK ON THEIR EXPANSION PLANS? WITH THE POSSIBILITY OF PERS REQUESTIONING MORE RETIREMENT FUNDS FROM ITS PARTICIPANTS IT WOULD SEEM THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD BE MORE PRUDENT ON HOW YOUR MONEY IS SPENT. AFTER ALL FOLKS, THE CITY HAS NO MONEY UNLESS YOU GIVE IT TO THEM. WRITE AND/OR CALL YOUR COUNCILMEMBER IF YOU THINK THAT THIS IS AN INAPPROPRIATE EXPENDITURE IN THESE TROUBLING TIMES.

Appeal-Democrat, October 31, 2008 Page D8

SECTION 00020

NOTICE INVITING BIDS


NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of Yuba City, hereafter referred to as “Owner”, will receive SEALED BIDS at the City Hall, City Clerk’s Office, 1201 Civic Center Blvd., Yuba City, CA 95993 until 3:00 p.m. local time, on December 10, 2008, for construction of:

Water Treatment Plant Remodel Project
Contract No. 08-30


At said place and time, and promptly thereafter, all Bids that have been duly received in accordance with the Contract Documents, will be publicly opened and read aloud. The clock located in the City Clerk’s office is considered the official time.

Project Description: In accordance with plans and specifications prepared by Robert Estrada Engineering-Design-Associates and the City of Yuba City, the Work includes the furnishing of all labor, materials, tax, equipment and services for the construction and completion of the Water Treatment Plant Administration Building Remodel Project.

The total Contract Time to achieve Final Completion is 180 calendar days.

The estimated cost of construction is $840,000.

At the time the Contract is bid, awarded and for the duration of the contract, the Owner has determined that the General Contractor shall possess a valid State of California Class B- General Building Contractor’ License. Failure to possess the specified license shall render the bid as non-responsive. Bidders must comply with the provisions of the Business and Professions Code Section 7028.15 by setting forth their license number and expiration date on their bid.

A full set of Contract Documents and all information available to Bidders, as further defined in Section 00200, INFORMATION AVAILABLE TO BIDDERS, may be examined at the Owner’s Engineering Division during regular business hours. Bidders may also purchase a copy of the Contract Documents and related information from the Owner on the following basis:

Document DescriptionNon-Refundable Charges
Complete half-size set of Contract$75.00 + $15.00 if mailed at
Documents (specifications and half-sizeOwner’s expense
drawings). Set will also include a CD
containing pdf files of non-scale drawings
and specs)

Optional full-size drawings (drawings only).$150.00 + $20.00 if mailed at
Available only to Bidders who purchase aOwner’s expense
complete set of Contract Documents.
Individual drawings will not be sold separately.

Procedural questions regarding the purchase of Contract Documents and/or obtain a plan holders list should be directed to Sandra Barcenas at the Public works Department at (530) 822-4626. Mailed in requests with payment for Contract Documents shall be mailed to:

City of Yuba City Public Works Department
1201 Civic Center Blvd
Yuba City, CA 95993
Attn: Sandra Barcenas


Checks should be made payable to: City of Yuba City. Charges are not refundable, regardless of whether the documents are returned or not.

Complete sets of Contract Documents must be used in preparing Bids. The Owner does not assume responsibility for errors or misinterpretations resulting from the use of incomplete sets of Contract Documents.

The Owner, in making copies of the Contract Documents available on the above terms, does so only for the purpose of obtaining Bids for the Work and does not confer license or grant for any other use.

A mandatory pre-bid walk-through meeting will be held on November 18, 2008 at 10:00 a.m. at 701 Northgate Drive, Yuba City, CA 95991. At this meeting, representatives of Owner and the Design Engineer will discuss the bid documents, site constraints, order of work and other items specific to this project. A project walk-through will follow. A sign-in sheet will be available up until commencement of the pre-bid walk through meeting only. Attendance at the entire pre-bid meeting and walk-through is mandatory for bidding. Bids received from Bidders who did not sign the sign-in sheet and attend the meeting and walk-through will be returned to the Bidder unopened. Attendance by subcontractors is not mandatory, but all interested prospective subcontractors are encouraged to attend. The Owner will transmit to all recipients of complete sets of Contract Documents such Addenda as Owner considers necessary in response to questions raised at the meeting and walk-through. Oral statements not confirmed by Addenda may not be relied upon and are not binding or legally effective. Except for mandatory walk-through, no other access to the project site will be granted pre-bid without the Owner’s approval. During all site visits the Bidder must be accompanied full time by an authorized representative of the Owner. No exceptions to this requirement.

Written questions regarding the Contract Documents and/or the proposed Work should be directed to Ian Pietz, Associate Engineer, by phone at (530) 822-7685, facsimile at (530) 822-7574 or e-mail at ipietz@yubacity.net no later than ten (10) calendar days before the time specified for opening bids.

Bidding procedures are prescribed in the Contract Documents. Bids shall be executed upon the Bid Forms bound and made a part of the Bid Documents. All prescribed Bid Forms may be removed from the Contract Documents for submission in a sealed envelope.

A Bid Guaranty in an amount not less than ten percent (10%) of the total aggregate of the bid, including all Additive and/or Alternate Bid Items shall accompany each bid. This Bid Guaranty is to be forfeited should the Bidder, if awarded the contract, fail to enter into the same, or fails to furnish the bonds and/or proof of insurance as stipulated in the Contract Documents. The checks or bond shall be made payable to the Owner.

The successful Bidder will be required to furnish both a Faithful Performance Bond in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) and a Payment Bond in the amount of one hundred percent (100%) of the Contract price.

Pursuant to the provisions of California Labor Code Section 6707, each bid submitted in response to this Invitation to Bid shall contain, as a separate bid item, adequate sheeting, shoring, and bracing, or equivalent method, for the protection of life or limb in trenches and open excavation, exceeding five feet, which shall conform to applicable safety orders. By entering an amount for this bid item, the Bidder warrants that its action does not convey tort liability to the Owner, the Engineer, the Construction Manager, and their officers, employees, agents, and subconsultants.

Pursuant to Sections 1770, et. seq., of the California Labor Code, the successful Bidder shall pay not less than the prevailing rate of per diem wages as determined by the Director of the California Department of Industrial Relations. Copies of such prevailing rate of per diem wages are on file at the Owner’s Engineering Department where copies will be made available to any interested party on request. These rate determinations may also be found on the State of California Department of Industrial Relations’ website at http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlsr/DPreWageDetermination.htm. The successful contractor and its subcontractors shall employ the appropriate number of apprentices, in each apprenticeable craft, on the project site as stipulated in California Labor Code, 1777.5.

The successful Bidder must insure that its policies and practices provide equal opportunity to all applicants and employees without regard to race, color, creed, sex, age, religion, ancestry, citizenship, national origin, handicap, mental condition, veteran or marital status. The successful Bidder must comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 22300, for monies earned by the Contractor and withheld by the Owner to ensure the performance of the Contract, the Contractor, may, at its option, choose to substitute securities meeting the requirements of Public Contract Code Section 22300, or have the retained, earned monies deposited in an escrow account at a federal or state chartered bank.

No bid received and read aloud may be withdrawn for a period of sixty (60) days after the bid opening date, except pursuant to Public Contract Code Section 5101 et seq.

Telephones will not be available to Bidders at the Owner’s offices for the preparation of bids or for communicating bid results. Bid forms received after the designated time will not be opened and will be returned to the Bidder unopened.

Bidders shall develop and submit bids at their own expense. The Owner will not reimburse any costs associated with the development and submittal of any and all bids.

The Owner reserves the right to award the Contract, to reject any and all Bids, to waive irregularities, and to reject nonconforming, nonresponsive or conditional Bids.

DATED:Terrel Locke, City Clerk

Oct. 31 & Nov. 7Ad #00059845

 

Editor's Notebook

 

November 10, 2008 - 5:28PM

Speaking of new cool stuff — have you been to the A-D Web site's Info Center lately? Go to the homepage and click on the "Interact" tab to check out our latest offering: a public salaries database that shows what local governments are spending on employee salaries. The database can be searched by county, city, job title or salary range.

There was some consideration early on in the information-gathering process whether to include employees' names, but it was decided that listing the names of rank-and-file county and city employees is not critical to our overall goal. What is important is for you to know how your hard-earned dollars are being spent.

 

\
 
 
NOTICE OF ELECTION
 
NOTICE BY THE SUTTER COUNTY CLERK OF THOSE
OFFICES TO BE ELECTED AT THE GENERAL ELECTION
November 4, 2008

 

Notice is hereby given that the following offices are to be elected at the General Election to be held in Sutter County on the Tuesday, November 4, 2008.

FEDERAL/STATE

President/Vice President
US Rep in Congress 2nd District
State Assembly 2nd District

SUPERVISORIAL

1st District - Runoff

CITY OF YUBA CITY
Candidates must reside within the city limits and must be registered to vote. Nomination papers are to be obtained at the City of Yuba City Clerk’s office, at 1201 Civic Center Blvd., Yuba City, Ca.

City Council Member - 2 seats
Treasurer - 1 seat
City Clerk - 1 seat

CITY OF LIVE OAK
Candidates must reside within the city limits and must be registered to vote. Nomination papers are to be obtained at the City of Live Oak Clerk’s office, at 9955 Live Oak Blvd, Live Oak, Ca.

City Council Member - 2 seats

SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Candidates must reside in the school/trustee area and must be registered to vote. Declaration of Candidacy forms are to be obtained at the Elections Office, at 1435 Veterans Memorial Circle, Yuba City, Ca.

Yuba Community College - Trustee Area 1 – 1 seat
Yuba Community College – Trustee Area 2 – 1 seat

Yuba City Unified – Trustee Area 1 – 2 seats
Yuba City Unified – Trustee Area 2 – 1 seat

Live Oak Unified – Trustee Area 1 – 1 seat
Live Oak Unified – Trustee Area 3 – 1 seat
Live Oak Unified – Trustee Area 4 – 1 seat

Brittan School District – 2 seats
Browns School District – 3 seats
East Nicolaus High School – 3 seats
Franklin School District – 2 seats
Marcum Illinois School District – 3 seats
Meridian School District – 2 seats
Nuestro School District – 1 seat
Pleasant Grove School District – 3 seats
Sutter Union High School – 2 seats (1 long term and 1 short term)
Winship-Robbins School District – 2 seats

BOARD OF EDUCATION

Board of Education Trustee Area 1 – 1 seat
Board of Education Trustee Area 3 – 2 seats (1 long term and 1 short term)
Board of Education Trustee Area 4 – 1 seat

NOMINATION PERIOD BEGINS ON JULY 14, 2008 THROUGH AUGUST 8, 2008 SHOULD THE INCUMBENTS FAIL TO FILE BY 5:00 P.M. ON FRIDAY AUGUST 8, 2008. THE NOMINATION PERIOD WILL BE EXTENDED TO AUGUST 13, 2008 BY 5:00 P.M.

Vote By Mail ballot processing may begin approximately, but no earlier than 8:00 a.m. on October 24, 2008. All procedures are open to the public and all interested parties will be afforded the opportunity to observe the procedures. The process will be conducted at the Sutter County Elections Office, 1435 Veterans Memorial Circle, Yuba City, Ca.

Ballots will be counted at a central counting place located at the Sutter County Elections Office, 1435 Veterans Memorial Circle, Yuba City, Ca beginning at 8:00 p.m. on November 4, 2008. This process is open to the public.

Polling places will be open from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. on Tuesday, November 4, 2008.
The Elections Office will be open at 7:00 a.m. on Tuesday, November 4, 2008.

DONNA JOHNSTON, SUTTER CO. CLERK/REGISTRAR OF VOTERS
BY: Chris Goforth, Assistant Registrar of Voters


This document is a California Water Plan Update concerning the use of groundwater. This issue, along with other water issues, will be reviewed by the Department Of Water Resources/Sacramento River Hydrologic Region. There will be a workshop covering water use at the Veterans Memorial Building on April 2, 2008 at 10:00am. The attached document is a short read but very informative. In my opinion, this document clearly indicates how out-of-tune the Utilities Department and the Ad-Hoc Committee has been in attempting to shut down the Hillcrest Water System and to ignore blending as a long-term solution. Adequate quantity of water is the life’s blood to any community – more important than any other service provided to our citizens! Without water there would be no City. I firmly believe that we need to save our wells and integrate and blend the City’s the two water systems. The City needs to halt the present path they are on with shutting down the Hillcrest water system! The City needs to review and revamp the existing Water Master Plan to bring it into tune with the current water problems of today. Future development should be based on the immediate and long term availability of water at reasonable cost and should be the main factor in determining sensible growth. While housing development, roads, schools and retail sales are necessary, none of these could be accomplished without water. While the City struggles on with the problems of housing development, Plumas Street, Roxy Theater, street vendors, etc.,-  I think the City “loses sight of the forest because of the trees”. We need to prioritize and focus on the most important item – water!  We need to revitalize the existing well systems. At last report the City’s surface water contracts are for 29,600 acre feet annual (afa). The City’s current use of that water is 14,000 afa. Could that water be used to recharge our aquifer?  Since 15,500 afa is 0 costs to the city have we been missing the opportunity of recharging our aquifer with “free”water? Will you please pass the attached document on to your fellow council members?

Don Kessel;


To: Walton Water Residents from Sylvia Oakley 

Although I do not live in the Walton 2/3 region, as a concerned neighbor and friend, I have observed the dispute between Walton Water customers and the City and I have gotten involved.

As many of you know, I have assisted in gathering signatures to protest the proposed rate for hooking up to surface water and have attended the ad hoc committee meetings.  I have also spoken to several of the City Council members personally, and on January 15th, I spoke before the full Council.  I expressed to them the concerns I was hearing from homeowners, and I explained the fears of some about possibly losing their homes due to the proposed hookup fees.

As I continue to walk the Walton area, I listen to your concerns and pass on to those who have not been able to attend the ad hoc committee meetings, updates as to what was being discussed.  I fully support an equitable resolution to this problem.   The City made certain promises to Walton area residents at the time of annexation and they should keep those promises.  Please be assured that I will continue to be of assistance until this matter is resolved.

Sincerely,

Sylvia Oakley


 

Yuba City Council Meeting, March 4, 2008

 

This is a Heads Up on Agenda Item 12 from the Agenda for City Council held on Tuesday, March 4, 2008.  Please read the Item and see the meeting at www.yubacity.com.
Item 12 on the Agenda will apply Prop 18 to 3 or 4 Districts for increased tax assessments to Yuba City residents.  It is not clear if the Walton Area will be affected. (The Walton area is District 1).

 

The increase is for street lights and landscaping. This will show how the City will be applying Prop 13 to increase tax assessments. You will be able to vote on this issue. Please go to the City Web-site and read Agenda Item 12 for the meeting held on March 4, 2008.  It was approved at a "cost of not to exceed $69,000"

 

Per the Agenda: The item is for a firm: Professional Services etc.  for Maintenance District Re-engineering and Re-balloting in accordance with the requirements of Proposition 218 for District 1, District 2 and District 5.”  

 

THIS WILL BE A VOTED ON ISSUE TO AN INCREASED ASSESSMENT ADJUSTMENT.

The city has an actual outreach program.  Per the Agenda, “Ballots out in June and finish in the Fall.”  Yuba City residents will be affected and also this will be an example of how the City will apply Prop. 218 to establish new Special Tax Districts.

All items passed except that Item 15 was “pulled.”  (Not voted on.)