This is a site mirroring the emails of California Water News emailed by the California Department of Water Resources

[Water_news] 5. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: AGENCIES, PROGRAMS, PEOPLE - 5/17/07

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

May 17, 2007

 

5. Agencies, Programs, People

 

RECLAMATION DISTRICTS:

Reclamation districts wield power but largely lack scrutiny - Stockton Record

 

SAN DIEGO WATER TNFRASTRUCTURE:

Report: City should repair water infrastructure - North County Times

 

 

RECLAMATION DISTRICTS:

Reclamation districts wield power but largely lack scrutiny

Stockton Record – 5/17/07

By Jeff Hood, Lodi Bureau Chief

 

Imagine if your City Council routinely met outside your city, kept its records at an attorney's office, didn't have written rules and allowed wealthier residents to cast more votes than their poorer neighbors.

 

As improbable as that sounds for a government agency, it's how some of San Joaquin County's 52 reclamation districts conduct their business. And it's completely legal.

 

One-person, one-vote may be a hallmark of a democratic government, but reclamation districts, which build, maintain and repair levees in flood-prone areas, are often controlled by their major landowners. If you live west of Interstate 5, you reside in one of these districts.

 

But as some county residents have learned, these reclamation districts established under old state water laws aren't answerable to the Board of Supervisors. Nor are their operations typically scrutinized by the state Reclamation Board, which is more concerned about levees built with state and federal dollars for flood protection than the ones pushed up a century ago by rural farmers.

 

Some former state and local officials with experience in flood control want an overhaul of a system that still functions under some rules dating to 1861. Those laws, they say, no longer serve the needs of the state that depends on inadequate levees to provide flood protection and guide drinking water to pumps that send it to Southern California.

 

"It's time to take a second look at the way we do this," said Jeff Mount, a University of California, Davis, geologist and former member of the state Reclamation Board. "If the job is to manage floods on a regional basis, then there has to be a closer connection between what happens with those reclamation districts and state policy. And now, effectively, there is none."

 

For example, directors of Reclamation District 2074, which encompasses the Brookside community, last year requested $11.5 million from the state to improve its levee on Ten Mile Slough. The Reclamation Board recommended the district receive just $31,000, noting the area already has strong levees.

 

District President Nelson Bahler said his agency sought the money because the Ten Mile Slough levee is untested. It's kept dry by levees on neighboring Wright Elmwood Tract, which is farmed.

 

If a levee on Wright Elmwood Tract failed, water would push against the Ten Mile Slough levee. Yet there's been no discussion among the neighboring districts about it.

 

"Quite frankly, there should be coordination," said Bahler, in-house counsel for The Grupe Co. and a member of both reclamation district boards.

 

Although there's a push by Mount and other scientists to focus on addressing flood control in the Delta on a regional basis, there's also good reason to support local reclamation districts with tax dollars, said Les Harder, deputy director of the state Department of Water Resources.

 

"They can respond to issues a lot faster than if we took it all over," Harder said. "The local districts are there, they can respond quickly, and they can respond more cheaply. But I think we have to look at other strategies to make sure the maintenance gets done."

 

There is no typical reclamation district in San Joaquin County. They range from one owner of thousands of fallow acres to thousands of owners of urbanized parcels. Some boards of directors meet monthly and receive $100 per meeting. Other directors meet only when the district has business, often only twice a year, and receive no compensation. Total assessments for each district can range from a few thousand dollars to hundreds of thousands.

 

Homeowners in San Joaquin County are showing more interest in their reclamation districts, however.

 

"Since I've been on the board, we're starting to have more engineering studies," said Drew Meyers, who was recently elected to serve on the Lincoln Village West board, Reclamation District 1608. "Katrina has really changed the way reclamation districts look at things." #

http://www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070517/A_NEWS/705170334

 

 

SAN DIEGO WATER TNFRASTRUCTURE:

Report: City should repair water infrastructure

North County Times – 5/17/07

 

SAN DIEGO - The city of San Diego should repair aging water infrastructure and guard against inappropriate application of funds from rate increases, the county grand jury recommended in a report released today.

The grand jury's 10-page report, titled "Water for the City of San Diego Revisited," also chastised the city for continuing to rely on imported water and largely ignoring means to reduce reliance on outside sources.

 

"The city appears to lack the vision to take actions to protect citizens from potential water shortages and the rising cost of water," the report states.

 

 

A spokesman for Mayor Jerry Sanders deferred comment to Water Department Director Jim Barrett, who was unavailable, according to his office.

In preparation for the report, the grand jury reviewed recommendations contained in a similar study produced by the 1998-1999 grand jury.

According to the current report, many, if not all of the recommendations, including desalinization and water reclamation that were proposed in the earlier document were ignored.

"It is imperative that the city of San Diego pursue other water sources, including reclaimed wastewater, as part of a plan to improve reliability and cost stability of the city water supply," the report states.

The grand jury found that the city "seems to be satisfied" purchasing water from the San Diego County Water Authority.

"As water becomes scarcer, citizens of San Diego will pay a price for the inaction of the city," the panel warns in itsreport.

The grand jury also found that instead of dealing with the Environmental Protection Agency's goal to have the Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant upgraded to a secondary treatment level, the city may ask for a five-year extension to the current waiver that expires Dec. 31.

If that waiver extension to comply with the Clean Water Act is denied, the city has no plan nor the funds to cover the more than $1 billion it would cost to comply with the Clean Water Act, according to the grand jury.

In February, the city agreed to increase water and sewer rates over the next four years to begin to address a backlog of infrastructure upgrades. As a result, the average ratepayer will shell out about 30 percent more for water and wastewater on a monthly basis by 2011, according to the grand jury report. #

DWR's California Water News is distributed to California Department of Water Resources management and staff, for information purposes, by the DWR Public Affairs Office. For reader's services, including new subscriptions, temporary cancellations and address changes, please use the online page: http://listhost2.water.ca.gov/mailman/listinfo/water_news. DWR operates and maintains the State Water Project, provides dam safety and flood control and inspection services, assists local water districts in water management and water conservation planning, and plans for future statewide water needs. Inclusion of materials is not to be construed as an endorsement of any programs, projects, or viewpoints by the Department or the State of California.

 

No comments:

Blog Archive