[Water_news] 5. DWR'S CALIFORNIA WATER NEWS: AGENCIES, PROGRAMS, PEOPLE - 7/19/07

Department of Water Resources

California Water News

A daily compilation of significant news articles and comment

 

July 19, 2007

 

5. Agencies, Programs, People

 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA LEVEES:

Council backs levy for levees; Officials in YC endorse property assessment - Marysville Appeal Democrat

 

Live Oak: You can flood; Supervisor reminds council of dangers if levees fail - Marysville Appeal Democrat

 

WEST SACRAMENTO FLOOD VOTE:

Editorial: Toward stronger levees; West Sacramento says Yes to flood work - Sacramento Bee

 

INFRASTRUCTURE:

Editorial: Need for two new dams surpasses fears of canal - Modesto Bee

 

IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT MANAGEMENT:

IID Board fires Hosken - Imperial Valley Press

 

LAKE ARROWHEAD ISSUES:

Officials would like to unite water providers - San Bernardino Sun

 

 

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA LEVEES:

Council backs levy for levees; Officials in YC endorse property assessment

Marysville Appeal Democrat – 7/19/07

By John Dickey, staff writer

 

Yuba City is moving ahead with a property assessment to raise money for levee repairs.

The City Council agreed with the Sutter County Citizens Advisory Committee recommendation that an assessment based on flood benefits would be the best way to come up with local share money to attract Proposition 1E funds.

“Now the next step is to educate our neighbors, about how this is going to benefit us as a region,” said Councilman Tej Maan.

City leaders could have chosen another way to raise money – perhaps a sales tax – but went with the assessment. A citizens advisory committee member said a tax on sales would require a relatively large increase.

“It would take at least a 1 percent increase in sales tax,” said Don Covey, a committee member.

The council on Tuesday gave City Manager Steven Jepsen the go-ahead to work out an agreement with other jurisdictions for the $500,000 or more in services to set up a special benefit district.

Costs would include engineering studies to justify the assessments, polling, ballot mailing and a public information campaign to tell the public why the money is needed. Sutter County would share in the expense, according to a city report.

For property owners, assessments could cost an estimated $361 a year – a very rough estimate since the exact costs of fixing Sutter County levees protecting Yuba City are unknown.

Levee repair costs have been pegged at $300 million to $350 million. But core drilling to study the levees has not been completed yet.

Proposition 1E, approved in November, provides money for levee repairs. A local match share is required for the funds. #

http://www.appeal-democrat.com/news/city_51340___article.html/money_sutter.html

 

 

Live Oak: You can flood; Supervisor reminds council of dangers if levees fail

Marysville Appeal Democrat – 7/19/07

By Robert LaHue, staff writer

 

It’s been at least seven or eight decades since Live Oak last flooded, says Sutter County Supervisor Dan Silva.

But looming flood zone re-mappings and the potential for mandatory and massive increases in flood insurance are why Live Oak residents need to be prepared to pay their share of the local match for levee upgrades, Silva told the City Council on Wednesday night.

While Live Oak was not affected by the massive Yuba City levee break in 1955, Silva noted the city was still susceptible to a flood.

“If you have been a half-mile easterly of your town, there’s a levee here,” he said.

Local governments need to raise matching funds to obtain money for levee repairs from the state and federal governments, including bond money approved by California voters last year in Proposition 1E, Silva said.

In order to help determine the best options for raising the local match, a citizens advisory committee was formed earlier this year. Live Oak appointed three residents to the 15-person panel.

The citizens advisory committee is leaning toward a special benefit assessment district as a way to raise the match, Silva said. In such a district, property owners are taxed on levee upgrades and maintenance based on the amount of benefit.

He likened the limitations on spending the money to not being able to change the color of a car, but being able to fix a blown engine.

But such assessments aren’t likely to be cheap, Silva said. Rough estimates are an average of $362 per parcel, $307 per commercial or industrial acre and $20 per agricultural acre to raise $150 million in local matching funds.

Council members expressed concerns about who would be liable if levees fail, if the county or cities would have to assume liability.

Councilwoman Judy Richards wondered if it would even be possible for the city to assume levee liability.

Residents expressed concerns about the amount and some newer residents said they were never told about the potential for flooding when they purchased recently developed homes.

But Silva said that at the current condition the levees are in, the Federal Emergency Management Agency will act as though the levees do not even exist in new flood maps, possibly making flood insurance mandatory and raising local flood insurance rates by hundreds of dollars a year.

“It is up to you, at a local standpoint, to take your destiny into your own hands,” Silva said.

Live Oak residents will have another opportunity to learn more about levee funding during a pancake breakfast in the community scheduled for Aug. 4. #

http://www.appeal-democrat.com/news/silva_51341___article.html/levee_flood.html

 

 

WEST SACRAMENTO FLOOD VOTE:

Editorial: Toward stronger levees; West Sacramento says Yes to flood work

Sacramento Bee – 7/19/07

 

West Sacramento residents who lived through the storms of 1986, 1995 and 1997 can remember the experience of living on an island.

 

When flood waters fill up the Yolo Bypass, the Sacramento River and the Sacramento Bypass, West Sacramento is entirely surrounded by water. An ocean of water.

 

It's a scary sight, especially in a city that depends on levees that are vulnerable to seepage and erosion.

 

This month, West Sacramento property owners took a historic step toward protecting their vulnerable island.

 

Voters approved a $42 million assessment package that will allow contractors to quickly upgrade the city's 45 miles of levees.

 

The move follows a similar assessment approved by Sacramento floodplain property owners to raise $326 million for extra flood protection. The dual assessments put both cities in a strong position to attract state flood bond dollars that voters approved last year.

 

Overall, West Sacramento expects to spend about $400 million on flood control improvements, with much of the funding coming from state and federal sources. If anything, the city's move should put pressure on other Central Valley cities, regardless of size, to organize their own flood assessment districts so they can leverage outside funding.

 

There was strong support for the West Sacramento assessment, at least among those who voted. Some 70 percent of weighted ballots supported the higher assessment, although only 39 percent of the city's 15,000 property owners returned their ballots.

 

That suggests that owners of businesses and large properties may be more energized about floods than many homeowners. As in Sacramento, more work may be needed to educate West Sacramento residents about flood threats and evacuations.

 

West Sacramento deserves credit for proactively examining its levees and taking steps to improve them. This city across the river is on a roll, thinking long-term and stepping up to the challenge of island living. #

http://www.sacbee.com/110/story/279903.html

 

 

INFRASTRUCTURE:

Editorial: Need for two new dams surpasses fears of canal

Modesto Bee – 7/19/07

 

The words are political cyanide.

 

Gov. Schwarzenegger wants to sell Californians a $5.9 billion water bond plan that would give the state crucial new water storage. He made the case this week in visits to San Luis Reservoir and the San Joaquin delta. At each stop, the governor also spoke of the need to build "improved conveyance," but he couldn't quite use those deadly words — Peripheral Canal.

 

The canal has been political poison since 1982, when north valley farmers, suspicious SoCal suburbanites, threatened East Bay residents, environmentalists and anti-tax activists coalesced to defeat a plan promoted by then-Gov. Jerry Brown. Last month, Schwarzenegger added the canal to his wide-ranging efforts to fix the state's water delivery system.

 

A canal would divert much of the Sacramento River into an aqueduct south of Sacramento, send it through the grasslands of San Joaquin County, then on to the massive pumps near Tracy.

 

The delta is the heart of the state's water distribution system; 21 million Californians count on it. But it's in critical condition — its fish are dying, its islands are sinking and an earthquake could ruin it. Bypassing the delta would create a consistent and manageable flow from the Sierra to points south. A canal would circumvent the need to pump directly from the delta, perhaps taking pressure off endangered fish species and the dying ecosystem.

 

Officials at the Department of Water Resources were true believers in 1982 and still are. They insist an improved canal concept is the best way to save the delta.

 

The idea is alluring. But no one has adequately explained how taking more water out of the delta can save it.

The Sacramento River is the delta's main source of fresh water. Without it, the delta will depend on the San Joaquin River — which has problems of its own. As less water arrives from the northeast, more will come in from the west. That saltier San Francisco Bay water will encroach deeply into the delta, making its sloughs and canals unsuitable for irrigation or drinking water. Numerous wells in valley communities have been ruined by saltwater intrusion; more will be.

 

And once a canal gives Southern California a reliable water supply, there will be less incentive to maintain the crumbling levees. An earthquake could dissolve them, creating a giant brackish lake and swamping new tract homes.

 

Many Northern Californians will see this as yet another ploy in the century-old battle to send more of our water to the insatiable south.

 

But the canal is only part of the governor's $5.9 billion plan. Much more ambitious and much, much more important are the dams — on the San Joaquin River at Temperance Flat and Sites Reservoir west of Sacramento.

 

Temperance Flat would help the state meet federal demands to restore the San Joaquin River. Sites Reservoir would hold Sacramento River water that could augment delta flows in dry years.

 

The sooner we build these dams, the better. We'll need them more tomorrow than we do today. As the climate warms, water will come off the Sierra more quickly. If we can't store it, we'll lose it.

 

So vital are these dams to the delta, that many in Northern California could be convinced to support a peripheral canal — if the dams come first.

 

We don't yet know if a peripheral canal is a good idea. But it would be a catastrophe if voters sense they're being sold a canal when what they really need are two new reservoirs.

 

The governor should not muddy the political waters by adding the Peripheral Canal to his water bond package and risk losing the entire thing.

 

Build the dams first. Then, maybe the governor can convince Northern Californians that a peripheral canal will cure the delta and not poison it forever. #

http://www.modbee.com/opinion/story/13804064p-14382028c.html

 

 

IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT MANAGEMENT:

IID Board fires Hosken

Imperial Valley Press – 7/18/07

By Darren Simon, staff writer

 

Imperial Irrigation District General Manager Charles Hosken, who has led IID for less than two years, was fired Wednesday by a 4-1 district board vote.

The firing came following a marathon day-long closed-session, and the action brought an angry response from a gathering of Hosken supporters, some of whom said board members should be recalled.

In public session, IID General Counsel Jeff Garber said Hosken had been terminated.

Hosken was a contract employee, Garber said, and as such he could be terminated without cause. He was terminated without cause, Garber said.

Hosken was given a severance package totaling $128,000, or six months worth of pay. His firing is effective immediately.

 

The board Wednesday called an emergency closed session for 9 this morning to discuss selecting an interim general manager.

THE VOTE

The motion to fire Hosken was made by Director James Hanks and seconded by Director Mike Abatti. Board President Stella Mendoza and Director Anthony Sanchez supported the termination.

Board member John Pierre Menvielle cast the lone vote against the firing.

Board members who voted for the firing declined to comment on their action.

“I didn’t think he needed to be terminated,” Menvielle said.

The firing comes in the wake of an investigation into a 2005 district energy trading program that revealed policies were violated and millions of dollars were spent beyond parameters.

There was no information from the board on whether Hosken’s termination was related to the investigation or whether any other employees will be fired.

Hosken, who began his tenure as general manager in November 2005, months after the hedging program was implemented, was a subject of the investigation because some of the energy trading occurred during his tenure.

As the board considered disciplinary action against Hosken in the past week, some board members raised concern about the hedging program’s impact on IID’s energy cost adjustment charge on power bills.

The ECA is that portion of power bills that covers the cost of natural gas and in March 2006, during Hosken’s tenure, the board approved an action that, in effect, raised the ECA.

In March 2007 the board voted to maintain the increased ECA through 2008, but then information was revealed the ECA increase and the hedging program were linked.

Also, it was revealed there were misapplied energy costs to the ECA.

Hanks would not comment on whether the ECA matter fueled his motion Wednesday to fire Hosken.

Hanks and Abatti also have voiced displeasure at IID management in recent months over what they have considered a lack of information coming forward to the board.

There was no information on whether that concern led to Wednesday’s vote.

HOSKEN’S COMMENTS

Hosken said he did his best to serve the district.

“I wish I had been more diligent in finding out what was going on,” Hosken said of problems related to the hedging program.

Imperial Valley residents attending Wednesday’s meeting voiced anger at the board.

“Shame on you,” farmer Clem Muller said. “This is a lousy way to do business.

“I think you people should be ready for a recall,” Muller said.

Farmer Earle Sperber said, “A great injustice has been done today.”

Hosken’s wife, Debra, also spoke.

“He has given his heart and soul to this community,” she said. “He’s a good man, an honest man. He’s taken one for the team.” #

http://www.ivpressonline.com/articles/2007/07/19/news/news03.txt

 

 

LAKE ARROWHEAD ISSUES:

Officials would like to unite water providers

San Bernardino Sun – 7/19/07

By George Watson, staff writer

 

Out of the turmoil caused by years of political infighting among Lake Arrowhead's water officials comes a possible solution to solve the water woes in the San Bernardino Mountains.

 

Longtime adversaries Steve Keefe and Ted Heyck, board members of the Lake Arrowhead Community Service District, want to explore a plan to unite mountain water districts and water companies.

 

In doing so, they could try and find a way to gain access to the state's water project system, delivering water from Lake Silverwood through the Crestline-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency to Lake Arrowhead, and possibly other mountain water providers.

 

For Heyck, just don't use the word "consolidation" when it comes to this plan. He believes local agencies and water companies can together build a second pipeline that would bring the water to the Crestline-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency and then distribute it from there.

 

"We need to work together. We don't need to consolidate," Heyck said. "That way you retain local control but get the water that you need."

 

Keefe is far more open when it comes to investigating options.

 

"Right now, the pipeline seems the most possible," Keefe said. "But I'm not saying no to anything yet."

 

Still, he added, "What it comes down to is conservation, and ground water (wells) aren't going to be enough. Don't get me wrong. They are very important.

 

"But when we look forward 10 years from now, we are going to need a supplemental source."

 

Roxanne Holmes, the general manager of the Crestline-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency, said she has not been approached by Lake Arrowhead representatives yet with this idea.

 

Would she listen?

 

"Definitely," Holmes said. "It would be interesting to see how this would work out."

 

Bitter feelings remain among some Crestline-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency officials, past and present, from a decision made by Lake Arrowhead water officials decades ago not to join in a partnership in which the water agency was formed. When Lake Arrowhead backed out, those who remained paid higher taxes to make up the difference, Holmes said.

 

Some of those feelings have lessened since a 2005 partnership between the two agencies, Holmes said. In that pact, the Crestline-Lake Arrowhead Water Agency agreed to deliver up to 8,000 acre-feet of water to Lake Arrowhead for 10 to 15 years.

 

"The deal has worked out to be equitable, and that's helped," Holmes said. "The agency just wants to totally protect the people who have paid already and be fair."

 

Former state Sen. Jim Brulte, R-Rancho Cucamonga, sponsored legislation that would have made it easy to consolidate the districts, but the bill languished. And then Brulte's final term expired, and with it the bill.

 

State Sen. Tom Harman, R-Costa Mesa, has a law on the books that makes it easier to consolidate any special districts.

 

David Caine, a Lake Arrowhead resident and a real-estate agent, believes consolidation is necessary.

 

The political bickering makes him believe there is no other choice.

 

"I don't subscribe to the belief that it's going to be done voluntarily," Caine said. Even if they did, he said, "It's just a patchwork-quilt. "It's not a long-term solution."

http://www.sbsun.com/news/ci_6409539

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://listhost1.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.