|
|
Historical facts
that appeared in the local newspaper.
YC may purchase Hillcrest
September 29, 2000 -
9:00AM
$3.2 million offered for water company -
Harold Kruger Appeal-Democrat
Yuba City, moving swiftly to prepare for the annexation of 6,000
new residents, has offered to buy Hillcrest Water Co. for $3.2
million. The city made the offer two weeks ago to Hillcrest
owner Daryl Morrisson. The City Council will discuss the
proposal Tuesday night. Hillcrest, with about 4,600 service
connections, provides domestic water to all but a handful of
homes in the 893 acres between the city limits and Bogue Road
along Walton Avenue. Thursday, the Sutter County Local Agency
Formation Commission approved annexing that land to the city.
Residents had sought the annexation so Happy Park would be
maintained by the city. Hillcrest would continue to provide
water to the annexed area, unless it is acquired by the city,
either by purchase or through eminent domain. "The city would
prefer to acquire your property by negotiation rather than
eminent domain," City Administrator Jeff Foltz wrote in a Sept.
14 letter to Morrisson. A few years ago, Hillcrest approached
Yuba City about a purchase, but the deal fell through, according
to William Lewis, the city's Utilities director. Last year,
AquaSource Inc., an investor-owned utility, tried to buy
Hillcrest. That deal also failed.
"Over the last several months, Hillcrest Water Co. has again
indicated a desire to sell (its) assets," Lewis said in a memo
to the council. Hillcrest provides water from 13 wells. The
city's water comes from the Feather River. "There is a public
perception that Yuba City water is of higher quality," Lewis
said. Acquiring Hillcrest would give the city a backup water
supply, Lewis said, which would come in handy during any future
droughts or emergencies. The city had two firms appraise
Hillcrest's assets and they came to a valuation of $3.2 million.
The appraisers said Hillcrest has annual revenue of about $1
million and annual expenses of about $500,000. Lewis said the
city hopes to complete the Hillcrest purchase by March 1, 2001.
When the city owns Hillcrest, Lewis said, the council will have
to decide who will pay for plant and distribution system
upgrades, the date of conversion from Hillcrest to city water
and if a public vote is needed. He said the purchase will be
financed with revenue certificates backed by water invoice
revenue.
Yuba City, Hillcrest Water merger
under study City Council votes to continue buyout discussions
October 3, 2000 - 9:00AM -
By Daniel
Witter Appeal-Democrat
Yuba City leaders still want to purchase the
Hillcrest Water Company. That's what Yuba City City Council
members wanted Hillcrest to know after the council voted Tuesday
evening to continue discussions with the company about acquiring
its assets. Hillcrest recently approached the city about
purchasing its assets, but has not responded to the city's Sept.
14 offer of $3.2 million. Tuesday's vote will not consummate a
deal between the city and Hillcrest. It allows the city to proceed
with discussion and provides the city with other options if a
price cannot be agreed upon.
"We envision in the long run of it going through eminent domain,
but it will be a friendly eminent domain," said Bill Lewis, the
city's public utilities director. By declaring eminent domain the
city can condemn the property for the greater good of the
community and the city will be required to pay fair market value
for the assets. The process could take up to six months to
complete unless an agreement is reached before then. The city may
also acquire the property through the California Public Utilities
Commission, but that could take 18 months and is an option the
council was not interested in pursuing.
Hillcrest has 4,600 service connections to 10 in-use wells in four
locations west of Yuba City. They include parts of Tierra Buena,
Walton Avenue, an area south of Yuba City bordered by Highway 99
and Bogue Road, and a small area surrounding Darrough Drive in
northern Yuba City. These areas draw their water from the ground
and would stay that way in the event of a purchase unless the
landowner is willing to pay the expense to connect to city water.
Hillcrest initially asked if the city was interested in buying the
company in 1995, but for various reason not stated in the staff
report, the agreement fell through. In April 1999 the company was
almost purchase by the Texas firm Aquasource Utility, but that
deal fell through as well. Hillcrest then approached the city
again to see if it was still interested.
The decision to keep the door open for the offer comes weeks after
Sutter County's Local Agency Formation Commission voted to proceed
with annexation of the Walton Avenue/Happy Park area into Yuba
City. A protest hearing for that issue is scheduled Oct. 16 in the
Yuba City City Council Chambers.
Council continues Walton protest hearing
November 27, 2000 - 9:00AM -
By Dave Nielsen/Appeal-Democrat
Yuba
City officials Denis Cook, Jeff Foltz, John Wright and Susan
Pearson check dates on petitions on a break in Monday's City
Council meeting. Daniel Witter Appeal-Democrat A protest
hearing that began on Monday night at the Yuba City City Council
meeting to decide whether or not the Walton Avenue area should
be annexed into the city has been continued to Wednesday.
The number of registered voters, as well as over 1,000
signatures of residents opposed to annexation turned in at the
hearing, must be verified before the outcome on annexation is
known. An announcement of the results, or further continuation,
will be made in the Yuba City City Council Chambers at 7 p.m.
Wednesday. If 25 percent of the registered voters or 25 percent
of the landowners in the annexation area protest the proposal,
an election will be held of registered voters within the area.
If less than 25 percent oppose annexation, then the process will
proceed.
If more than 50 percent oppose the annexation, the city council
will be required to terminate the annexation proposal. More than
100 residents from the Walton Avenue area turned out to voice
their concerns over being annexed into Yuba City. Many present
at the meeting complained that they had more question than
answers, and until they could be convinced they would benefit
from annexation, they oppose becoming part of Yuba City . I
don't see what the city can do for us," said resident Mike
Buzbee. "I am happy where I am at." His comments brought a cheer
and clapping from the crowd.
"As a homeowner in the area I am very concerned about this whole
thing," said Denise Nevills as she stood before the city
council. She had questions about what the city would require
residents to do if the area is annexed. She asked if the
homeowners would be required to hook up to city sewage and
water, and what the cost of hooking up would be. She worried
that the requirement of hooking up would drop her property
values by thousands of dollars.
Another complaint by residents was that they did not receive
enough information before annexation proceedings began and they
had to play catch up to find out about the process. Many
expressed the feeling annexation had been thrust on them and
they had little to no say that their neighborhood was included
in the annexation boundaries. Some of the city council members
agreed that there had not been enough information given to the
residents. "It's obvious the education system has not been
good," said Yuba City Councilman Eric Hellberg.
"We could have done a better job," agreed Yuba City Councilman
Bob Barkhouse. We're hearing a lot of things here tonight that
aren't factual. Denis Cook, Yuba City Community Development
Director, said contrary to what residents thought, very little
will change once annexation takes place.
One misconception people have, he said, is that residents will
have to hook up to city water and sewage. He said the only rule
about requiring residents to hook up to city sewage is a state
health requirement that states a resident must hook up if their
septic system fails, they don't have room to put the leach field
elsewhere on the property, and are within 200 feet of an
existing city line.
And contrary to belief by some residents, just because a city
line is installed within 200 feet, residents have the option not
to hook up to unless their septic system fails. Cook also said
the city will not require homeowners to install water meters on
their properties if they have an existing home. New homes being
built, however, will be required to be have one. The Yuba City
City Council will also meet on Thursday in a joint meeting with
the Walton Fire Protection District Board of Directors to
discuss fire protection and annexation issues with the Yuba City
Fire Department.
Annex meeting draws a crowd
June 19, 2003 - 9:00AM -
By Katherine Tam
Appeal-Democrat
About 45 to 50 people attended Yuba
City's second workshop Wednesday to hear about the possible
annexation of Southland Village and the Lincrest Elementary
School area.
While the group inquired about everything from parking
recreational vehicles to curfews for juveniles, many questions
centered around the cost for city surface water and sewer.
The area being considered for annexation is south of Franklin
Road, north of Bogue Road and flanks Highway 99. The 1,320
parcels are bordered to the north, east and west by the city.
Monday's workshop drew 70 to 80 people. Officials plan to
apply to the Local Agency Formation Commission in early July
to start the annexation process. The first public hearing is
expected in the fall. Residents gathering enough signatures in
opposition can force an election or kill the effort entirely.
City Administrator Jeff Foltz said annexation is being
proposed to allow for better delivery of services. Residents
get water and fire coverage from the city, but law enforcement
and traffic control comes from the Sutter County Sheriff's
Department and California Highway Patrol.
Annexation would mean city police would patrol the area and
the already-annexed Walton corridor. Police beats are usually
smaller than county beats, allowing for more intensive
coverage, said police Chief Richard Doscher. The Master Tax
Exchange Agreement of 2000 outlines how funds would be shared
between the city and county without increasing property taxes.
In addition, Foltz said, "We (the city) get more resources
that make us typically more capable of providing services.
Counties are surrogates of the state, they usually take care
of social services and those types of things."
Residents wouldn't be required to connect to city surface
water or sewer if annexed, but the option would be available,
he said.
The city took over the Hillcrest Water Company's wells, which
contain arsenic. Federal standards for the carcinogen will
become tougher in 2006, dropping from 50 parts per billion to
10 ppb.
Officials said they would have to remove the arsenic and pass
the cost onto residents. Or, they said, consumers could switch
to city surface water for about $5,000 to $8,000. Connecting
to surface water would be a neighborhood decision.
People on private wells don't have Hillcrest's arsenic, but
they can switch to surface water. They would need to pay for
piping in front of their homes at about $100 a foot.
Some residents said the incentive for annexation would be to
get surface water, but they worry about cost. A few said they
would still buy bottled water even if a switch was made.
Paul Dixon said he has a private well and is on a 40-year-old
septic system. He isn't opposed to annexation and sees
benefits, he said, but is concerned about costs if residents
choose city surface water.
"There are some good parts to (annexation), but the costs we
don't agree with," Dixon said. "It tends to be expensive. We
heard one quote for $25,000. That's a lot."
The cost of sewer, water and new streets in an East Hillcrest
neighborhood a few years ago was $25,000 per home, officials
said.
Resident Sue Laird, who owns a business, added, "Businesses
are required by the city to have a business license, pay a fee
to have a sign and a percentage of their gross income. There's
an additional charge for people with (private) wells."
Foltz said the city will expand its plants to provide capacity
if residents move to surface water. And though they don't have
enough water contracts now, getting them won't be a problem,
he said.
South YC residents mull city
annexation
September 12, 2003 - 9:00AM -
By
John Dickey/Appeal-Democrat
Water and sewage services were the
topics of biggest concern at a meeting Thursday to talk about
South Yuba City annexation.
Yuba City officials held an informational meeting before more
than 50 people. The topic was the annexation of about 1,400
south area parcels into the city.
Annexation is being proposed because of possible water
problems down the road and duplication of services between the
county and city, officials said during the meeting. One block
is handled by the county, another could be handled by the city
in the area proposed for annexation, which is a peninsula of
Sutter County land surrounded by Yuba City.
The Local Agency Formation Commission is expected to vote on
the annexation at a Sept. 25 meeting.
City Community Development Director Denis Cook said the only
cost with annexation is business licenses for people with
in-home enterprises.
Officials noted that annexation did not require people to hook
into sewer and water but gave residents options in an area
with potential drinking water problems.
By annexing, they could connect with city surface water drawn
from the Feather River.
"I'm not saying you have to do it. I'm not saying it is the
best option, but it does give you options," Director of
Utilities Bill Lewis said.
Citizens asked a number of questions about the possibility of
city water and sewage services and the associated costs. One
ballpark figure thrown out for hooking up to city water was
$5,000 to $7,000.
The two alternatives are connecting into the Yuba City water
supply or fixing the groundwater system, if groundwater fails
to meet federal standards at some point in the future.
Some residents spoke in opposition to the annexation,
including Bob Renton of Hunn Road.
Renton was at Thursday's meeting, trying to line up people to
sign a petition that he plans to circulate the first chance he
gets, he said.
Although signatures cannot be collected until a protest
hearing is set, Renton said he has found 200 people willing to
sign on 15 streets - almost a fifth of the streets.
"If we progress the way we've been, we're in pretty good
shape," Renton said.
Anywhere from 25 to 50 percent of signatures are required to
put annexation to a vote. The signatures must either be
entirely from registered voters or entirely from property
owners. More than 50 percent of either could kill the
annexation.
|
|
