|
Subject:
We are not giving up ============================================================= MONTHLY COST OF RIVER WATER In addition to the $19.80 per month for twenty years for infrastructure costs for the conversion from City well water to City river water there will be costs for a loan origination fee and possibly increased excavation costs to install your meter in addition to the increased monthly metered water rates. The residential water bill will probably be an extra $60 to $80 a month or more. Well water users will have to pay approximately $50.00 a foot to bring water to their homes from the closest water main line in addition to the above costs. Are the residents willing to pay the monthly metered rates and the infrastructure costs? YUBA CITY WELL WATER SYSTEM To show City ownership of the wells, do not say Hillcrest Water System, HWS etc. Call it the Yuba City Well Water System. They own it. It is theirs. They are denying ownership when they call it the Hillcrest Water System and they are giving the perception that the Walton, Hillcrest and Jones Rd. residents own it. WE WISH TO BE CALLED WALTON AREA, HILLCREST AREA and JONES RD. AREA. Do not say Regions 2/3 and 1. That is "in-house" talk and people will waste thinking time trying to figure out what you mean. WALTON AND HILLCREST AREAS WERE PART OF THE INITIAL PLAN; JONES RD. AREA WAS ADDED LATER Say the City began the plan to have the residents pay for water infrastructure with the Walton and Hillcrest areas. These two areas are in the city. The Walton activists "negotiated" with the city to reduce the costs. Months later the Jones Rd. area, which is not part of the City, was added and those residents will benefit from our activism to get reduced costs. TIERRA BUENA'S WATER PROBLEMS On further research, the Walton activists have determined the Tierra Buena water system cannot be compared to the Yuba City Well Water System. The Tierra Buena system was going to be shut down because of high levels of nitrates and the residents asked to be annexed to the City. Contrarily, the City wanted the Walton, Hillcrest and Jones Rd. areas annexed to the City. The Jones Rd. residents successfully "fought off" the annexation. COMPARISON OF RIVER WATER AND WELL WATER Do not use the terms surface and ground water. People will waste thinking time trying to figure out what you mean. Some people prefer river water because it is softer water than well water. Some people don't like the river water because of the chlorine that is added. Many people, who have water softeners, are satisfied with well water and would rather not have chlorinated water. Some people prefer the chemicals that are in the river water over the chemicals in the well water. Many people who have Yuba City well water, and are on limited budgets, are satisfied with the well water and what it costs. With river water there will be the $19.80 infrastructure charge (if the protest is not successful) a monthly meter is bound to increase the costs for your monthly usage. The City expects you to reduce consumption by 30% and the state of Ca will probably implement drastic reductions in supply. THE CITY OF YUBA CITY SHOULD PAY FOR WATER INFRASTRUCTURE COSTS. It is their system. PROTEST NOTICE The City should have sent a separate cover letter and protest form to each resident. The City should not have "buried" information on a protest in a water bill. SELLING WELL WATER SYSTEM
This is most
definitely unwise. We are in the midst of a drought. We
need to maintain control of our water supply. Purchasing
river water will get more and more expensive.
The City of
In 2000
In 2001, through eminent domain
proceedings,
HWC was a viable private water company regulated by the California Public Utilities Commission. This company was making a sizable profit until the City took possession and now the system is no longer financially sustainable. Doesn’t that sound familiar whenever government takes over from private enterprise? The City intends to use the Hillcrest water wells as an emergency backup by blending it with city surface water when needed. Doesn’t this really benefit the whole city? The City maintains two separate water enterprise funds – one for well water and one for surface water. If there is only a surface water enterprise fund and the Walton area becomes part of that fund, that could obligate Walton citizens to whatever existing financial liabilities are in that fund. For example; the City’s 18 million Surface Water Treatment Plant bond and future maintenance of the standby water wells. Below is a link to a good read: Hillcrest Water Quality Issues |
||
elainemiles wrote:
Seabird is correct. There are approximately 700 already metered accounts in the so-called Hillcrest Water area. Almost all of them are in Region 3. The City added a charge of $500 to each non-metered resident in Regions 1,2 and 3, which is included in the $19.80 a month surcharge tax. According to Mr. Lewis, $500 would cover the cost of the meter and installation by City forces. However, the City contracted to pay $160+ for each meter with a company that also contracted with Sacramento for their meters. Sacramento Bee investigated meters and found that the meters could be purchased for a mere $92 each instead of the $160+ paid by Sacramento and Yuba City. Criminal charges resulted in the meter investigation in Sacramento.
Even if there were 3,500 meters to be installed (City figures were a lower figure if it is only groundwater customers), at $500 each that comes out to $1.75 million and not double as has been awarded by the grant. So, where is the extra money going? To the newly authorized houses in Canterberry? To the Lincoln East development? To pay and benefits of the City Utilities Department? This is taxpayer money, as Seabird stated. We, as taxpayers should carefully monitor how and where this grant money is expended.
2nd issue in article is the nearly $900,000 granted for water lines going from Sanborn to Walton, etc. The City claims these lines have nothing to do with the groundwater project, and, therefore, the $900,000 will not come off the construction being charged to the Region 1,2, and 3 for converting to surface water. Why? What exactly are we paying for? We have not seen detailed construction plans or bid proposals where we could monitor what is actually in a 20-year long surcharge tax.
As for non-metering water use, no where has the City provided documentation that non-metered customers are using more water than metered customers. The City has said this is happening, but did not provide statistical proof so the claim is unsupported. However, something that is happening in the City is that senior citizens are given a senior discount that is not available to the former groundwater customers whether metered or not. This is just one instance of inequity in the former Hillcrest area we found while working on the groundwater issue.
6/16/2009 1:01:53 PM
seabird wrote:
Let's see. The water meters cost $500 each to buy ($92 for the meter and the rest in maintenance installing) according to the City. So, how did the 3,500 meters get to 3.5 million in costs? Someone better be looking over the shoulder of the City on how and where they are spending this money. One thing to get a grant--another thing to pad their pay with it. By the way, "grant" is another word for taxpayer money.
6/16/2009 12:29:43 PM