Summary of Ordinance
Regarding Revision to Chapter 6 Water System Ordinance
Section 6-6.18 Summary of Charges

(A certified copy of the full text of this ordinance is posted in the office of the City Clerk)

The purpose of this ordinance is to revise section 6-6.18(q) to allow all private well water users of record within the City's water service area one last opportunity to take advantage of the City's surface water option previously extended to the former Hillcrest Water System groundwater customers for a one-time 30 day period under the same terms and conditions from June 1 through June 30, 2011.

This ordinance was introduced and read at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Yuba City on the 15th day of March 2011. The City Council will consider adoption at their regular meeting on the 5th day of April 2011 beginning at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall.

Terrel Locke City Clerk
March 27, 2011 Ad #00116409
Appeared in: Appeal Democrat on Sunday, 03/27/2011
 

 

Judge rules against group in Sutter Pointe water dispute
By Ben van der Meer/Appeal-Democrat - 2011-03-03 23:10:20

An administrative law judge in San Francisco has ruled against a state agency over an application to provide water for a proposed housing project in south Sutter County. Judge Kimberly Kim ruled Thursday against the state Division of Ratepayer Advocates, which filed a request in January for the state to deny Golden State Water Company's application to build and operate a water system in the county.

Golden State first applied for the system in 2006 to serve Sutter Pointe, a proposed development of about 17,000 homes near where Highways 70 and 99 meet and Riego Road. Since the state Public Utilities Commission deemed a subsequent application complete in May 2009, Golden State has been negotiating a resolution settlement with an agricultural water provider, Sutter Pointe's developer, Sutter County, and other interested parties on water rights in the area.

The DRA, a unit of the state's utilities commission, filed the request to dismiss the application because of the protracted settlement negotiations, a point Kim addressed in her ruling.

"DRA's motion and its counsel's argument at the January 2011 hearing show the escalation in frustration and disbelief stemming from numerous representations by some or more of the Settling Parties of imminent settlement in the past, which thus far have not been followed by an actual settlement agreement in this proceeding to date," Kim wrote in her judgment. "Especially since the January 2011 hearing and since the latest delay following that hearing, I share in DRA's frustration to a degree."

In dismissing the denial petition, Kim wrote, she strongly encouraged the county, Golden State and other parties to meet their own target date of March 14 to complete the settlement. Danilo Sanchez, the DRA's program manager for water, said his division will wait until the settlement terms are released before deciding what to do next.

"We'll probably oppose it," Sanchez said. "This has just dragged on to the point where we said to the parties, 'we have to reallocate our resources.'" Officials with Sutter Pointe have said they don't plan to begin construction until potential flooding issues are addressed.

 

 

Yuba City ready to test waters on rates

Yuba City residents' willingness to pay more money for public utilities is unclear, but city leaders are edging closer to testing that resolve.

Later this year, voters could face decisions on a series of rate hikes for water and wastewater services. The proposals, which public works officers released Monday night, aim to help Yuba City keep up bolstering aged pipes and replacing outdated water and sewage treatment equipment — all in the teeth of recession, a weak construction market and the state's tightening water quality rules.

"I don't know how the public will react, but the responsible thing is to take care of the assets we have in this city," Mayor John Dukes said of the rate plans. "We've postponed this for three years because of the poor economy, but it's not getting better, and we can't keep pushing this down the road."

Proposition 218 requires a majority of city residents to approve any rate hikes in a 45-day mail-in vote for the higher charges to take effect, a vote Dukes said could take place in about six months.

The rate changes would be Yuba City's first for water service since 2007 and for wastewater treatment since 2008. Residential rates currently average $17.36 a month for water and $28.81 for sewage treatment, among the Mid-Valley's lowest — and a contributor to a predicted shortfall for water services in the current fiscal year.

Gradually lifting monthly charges over five or 10 years would allow Yuba City to fund $1 million a year for capital improvements, as projects such as fish barriers to allow more water intake from the Feather River, Ian Pietz, senior engineer of the city Public Works Department, told the City Council during a workshop Monday at City Hall.

Various proposals could cover only cost-of-living increases or also raise funds for improvements and maintenance. The most ambitious plan, if spread over a decade, would raise the average per-month water charge for homes to $20.54 in the 2011-12 fiscal year and to $24 by 2020. Sewer charges would go as high as $37.60 in the first year, gradually ramping up to $58.25 — though those rates could go higher if California demands more intensive treatment at the city's sewage plant.

Rate hikes also would be set higher in the first two or three years before slowing in later years, so the city can maintain minimum revenue-to-expense ratios required by its bond covenants.

Despite the unyielding fiscal arithmetic facing the city, one resident predicted any hikes designed to keep up with salary or pension costs would make the plan a non-starter for many.

"I know the city has financial problems, I'm sure you have good employees, but any automatic cost-of-living increases will be the death of this plan with the public," said Elaine Miles, treasurer of the Sutter County Taxpayers Association.

Nonetheless, council members appeared to edge toward putting some kind of rate hikes on the ballot, as the slowing of home construction has choked off the surplus revenues that once supported capital improvements.

Yuba City needs 150 new water connections a year to avoid exhausting its reserve funds for debt service by 2015, but is expected to get only 50 hookups in the next three years, public works officials said.

"At some point we have to get back to the business of taking care of our infrastructure; it's what we do," said City Manager Steve Jepsen. "We can't let that go. At some point we need to bite the bullet or else we'll run into problems.

"In 10 or 15 years, people will wonder why we didn't do more."

 

 

Yuba City's Sanborn water project almost done
February 03, 2011 11:53:00 PM  -  By Ashley Gebb/Appeal-Democrat

A final link to Yuba City's expanded water network is almost complete. The 3.6-million-gallon water tank and pump station at Lincoln and Sanborn roads should be finished in three months, Utilities Director George Musallam said Thursday.

The Sanborn Storage and Pumping Plant will store some of the city's water supply from the Feather River and provide and treat water for about 4,000 former Hillcrest water system customers. "This is the last project of two years of projects," he said. "Everything has gone on schedule. We expect to be online by May, before peak demand is required."

On Thursday, crews were painting the inside of the pump station, clearing debris and working on site improvements. In the next few months, the surrounding water lines will be pressure tested and filled, and then the storage tank will be sanitized and filled. "We're getting close," said Claire Shawver, construction project manager for Yuba City. "It's a lot of work that's not really visible."

The 32-foot-tall tank was completed by November, and crews are working to finish the pump station. Two weeks ago, five pumps were lowered through the skylights by crane and set inside, and for the next few weeks, crews will continue to finish the electrical work, site improvements and exterior stucco. "It's a lot of specialized stuff, but we started early on the projects," Shawver said. "We've had a nice break in weather that allows to get a lot of stuff completed."

The project cost appears to be closer to $6.5 million than the $8.5 million estimate, including construction, design and administration, Musallam said. A $26 million low-interest state loan reserved for water projects is paying for the Sanborn pump plant and other improvements.

Yuba City also received $3.5 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to help pay for the pipelines and installation of 3,100 water meters in the old Hillcrest area, which is meant to conserve water by tying monthly rates to customers' usage.

A $17-a-month surcharge per customer is helping repay the loan — a move that inspired opponents to launch an unsuccessful ballot-collecting drive against the charges in 2008. All three Hillcrest regions have since been converted from groundwater to surface water because the former water supply was marred by high levels of arsenic requiring expensive treatment before Yuba City bought the system in 2001.

Possible Sutter Pointe water supplier has one more shot
By Howard Yune/Appeal-Democrat  -  2011-01-20 22:17:44

Golden State Water Co., threatened with the loss of a chance to supply the Sutter Pointe community with water, will have a plan ready for review by early next month, officials and lawyers announced Thursday. A week after state utility regulators moved to throw out its application to provide water in south Sutter County, Golden State said Thursday it has reached a tentative deal with the county and developers for the water rights needed to supply the future community south of Nicolaus.

Golden State Vice President Roland Tanner confirmed the deal is in progress, as did Michael B. Day, an attorney representing the county, though neither would disclose its terms. A final settlement is expected in the first week of February, when the state Public Utilities Commission would consider approving it.

The Division of Ratepayer Advocates on Jan. 4 filed a motion with an administrative law judge to dismiss Golden State Water's application, which it filed in August 2008. Lawyers for the division attacked the San Dimas-based firm for a plan it called "an exercise in whimsy and wishful thinking," pointing to seven delays in a hearing to review the Sutter Pointe plan.

Ratepayer officials branded the proposal shaky for not nailing down a solid agreement to buy water from Natomas Mutual Water Co., and predicted the depressed housing market made it uncertain whether any homes would be built for Golden State to serve. The motion also objected to Sutter County handing the company control of a separate, deteriorating water pipe network in Robbins, saying other Golden State customers should not be required to cover its repair costs.

Company and county lawyers struck back Wednesday in a reply to California Public Utilities Commission Administrative Law Judge Kimberly Kim, arguing a water settlement was near and the ratepayers' division had approved all previous delays in the review. "In fact, stripped of its rhetoric, it is apparent that DRA's motion is as attempt to undermine the settlement reached among all of the active parties except DRA that will soon be filed with (the) commission," Golden State attorney Joseph Karp wrote in the rebuttal.

Sutter Pointe backers defended developers' investments in the planned community, saying the project requires years of planning for water, sewage and road services before any construction begins. Karp also ridiculed ratepayer advocates' evidence the town could go unbuilt — a MSNBC.com report quoting an executive for an online seller of foreclosed homes.

Approved by county voters in a 2004 ballot measure, Sutter Pointe is envisioned to mix retail and light industrial buildings with as many as 17,500 homes. The development would occupy about 7,500 rural acres east of Highway 99/70, centered on Riego Road.

 

Sutter County supervisors OK loan for Robbins water district
By Howard Yune/Appeal-Democrat  -  2011-02-01 22:26:16

A water and sewer system in rural south Sutter County, having bled cash for years, will get a partial reprieve for the next year and a half. Water Works District No. 1, the money-losing water utility serving Robbins, will receive a $670,000 county loan to pay off its debts through June 2012. The loan, which the Board of Supervisors approved Tuesday night, also is meant to pay for long-deferred repairs needed to replace aging pipes and meet tightened state water-quality rules.

More relief for the Robbins water district is expected later this month in the form of an $800,000 grant from the Clean Water State Revolving Fund, which can be used only for capital improvements. About $630,000 would be spent before this July, with the rest to be used the following year, according to a water district budget the board also approved. Grant money would go toward replacing rusting water pipes, overhauling the wastewater treatment system, and improving removal of arsenic from water to comply with stricter California curbs on the toxic element.

Supervisors passed the loan by a 4-1 vote, despite concerns by Supervisor James Gallagher that a district with barely 400 residents can ever produce enough in monthly fees to make the water system solvent. The water and sewer district would not make payments until the end of the 2011-12 fiscal year, but then would have to repay the sum with interest or refinance the loan.

"Sounds like on the sewer side, the loans realistically could be repaid — but on the water side, not so much," said Gallagher, whose 5th District includes Robbins and other south county towns. "If we make this loan, does the district have the money to repay it?" "Call it a loan, call it a gift, but either way you have to resolve the issue of Robbins water," replied Supervisor Jim Whiteaker. "I'm willing to move forward and get this done."

Originally a privately owned system, the Robbins water district was taken over in 1986 by Sutter County. But water and sewer fees went unchanged from the 1990s onward, starving the district of maintenance and upgrade funds.

Residents vetoed two bids by the district to raise fees in 2007 and 2008. A third attempt succeeded in 2009, more than doubling the household rates to $50 a month for water and $55 a month for sewage treatment — but still too low to meet basic operating costs even without considering upgrades, according to the county Public Works Department.

The loan is intended to buy the county time to sell the Robbins water delivery system to the Golden State Water firm, which plans to connect the system to its network in Rancho Cordova. That sale is planned for completion this year but faces a fight from the state's Ratepayer Advocates division, which last month protested the county's plan to link the transfer with Golden State's application to provide water to the future Sutter Pointe community south of Nicolaus.  (Note: See the meeting - click here)

 

Sutter Pointe water plan sputters
By Howard Yune/Appeal-Democrat  -  2011-01-13 23:18:15

A dispute has flared up involving the company hoping to provide water to the planned community intended to become south Sutter County's heart.  A division of the state Public Utilities Commission has filed a motion to dismiss Golden State Water Co.'s application to become the water supplier for the master-planned Sutter Pointe development.

The conflict leaves an uncertain future for the town envisioned to include new retail and light-industry zones, along with as many as 17,500 homes. County voters in 2004 approved a ballot measure for Sutter Pointe, which would be built east of Highway 99/70 and centered on Riego Road just north of Sacramento County.

At the heart of the complaint is the lack of a firm agreement for Golden State to buy water from the Natomas Mutual Water Co. to feed Sutter Pointe.  Deriding the company's "fond hopes" for doing business at Sutter Pointe, the Division of Ratepayer Advocates, in calling for throwing out Golden State's application, complained the firm has postponed hearings to review its water plans seven times since it first applied in August 2008.  Ratepayer motion  

The fraying of regulators' patience was obvious in a tartly worded, eight-page motion the Division of Ratepayer Advocates filed last week seeking to cut off Golden State Water's plans.  "It is time for the commission to recognize GSWC's protracted 'settlement' is simply an exercise in whimsy and wishful thinking on GSWC's part," ratepayer counsels Jason Zeller and Hien C. Vo wrote.

County Administrative Officer Stephanie Larsen declined comment, citing the pending litigation.  Golden State Water has until Wednesday to file a reply with an administrative law judge. Roland Tanner, a vice president for the San Dimas-based company, declined to speak in detail about talks with the Natomas water company, insisting "we feel a deal is in the near future."

"It's surprising they filed this before the hearing," he said, referring to a meeting set for Jan. 27 in San Francisco. "Golden State Water has made these requests before, but we had the agreement of all the parties to do that. They all saw the progress that was being made."

The dismissal filing also attacked a part of the plan not directly tied to Sutter Pointe — an agreement for Golden State to take over the crumbling and cash-starved Water Works District No. 1 in Robbins.

With barely 400 residents in Robbins to pay monthly fees, Golden State customers in Rancho Cordova and other distant places would have to foot millions of dollars for repairs in Sutter County, Zeller said.

 

Mandatory flood insurance cut 20 percent in Sutter County

Appeal-Democrat  -  2010-10-25 13:07:42

The Federal Emergency Management Agency informed Sutter County officials earlier this month that mandatory flood insurance premiums in the county's special flood hazard areas has been reduced by 20 percent. The savings applies to policies purchased or renewed on or after Oct. 1. In a letter dated Oct. 12, FEMA notified the county that it had earned a Class 6 designation in the agency's Community Rating System, qualifying property owners for the discount. Sutter County was rated a Class 10 community prior to 2008 and Class 8 last year.

The improved rating is based on the county's floodplain management activities, including enforcement of building codes and an extensive community outreach program, according to Division of Water Resources Chief Dan Peterson. The rating applies to the unincorporated areas of Sutter County and the city of Live Oak. Yuba City has its own Community Rating System.

South Sutter County was remapped by FEMA in 2008. The Department of Water Resources estimates the 20 percent reduction will save south county property owners $800,000 per year. If FEMA remaps the remainder of the county in 2012, as it has indicated it will, the new rating would save property owners $2.2 million in annual premium costs
"Sutter County has been very aggressive in managing the floodplain and conducting public awareness outreach to explain the risk of living behind levees and the need for flood insurance," said county Supervisor Stan Cleveland in press release today.

"Our overall goal in fixing the Feather River levees remains to remove properties from the special flood hazard altogether. In the interim, however, the Class 6 rating will take some of the sting out of the higher insurance premiums."
In June, voters in Sutter and Butte counties approved a $72.5 million property assessment to help pay for levee improvements on 44 miles of the Feather River. The $250 million project is expected to be complete in 2015.

 

Walton water line project finished

Yuba City has completed the Walton Water Transmission Line Project, installing nearly 20,000 feet of pipeline to help facilitate conversion from groundwater to surface water in parts of the city.

The final cost of the project was $4.24 million, about $220,000 less than expected. The project is being funded two-thirds by a Hillcrest Water Service surcharge and one-third from future customers through connection fees.

Construction of the project lasted from November to September, and the City Council voted this week to accept the project and authorize a Notice of Completion.

 

Project launched near Tracy to link 2 canals that carry Delta water

Published Friday, Oct. 15, 2010 in the Sacramento Bee.
 

Published in Appeal-Democrat By Rob Young/Appeal-Democrat  2010-09-20 00:10:00

AquAlliance, the California Sportfishing Protection Alliance (CSPA), and the California Water Impact Network (CWIN) have filed a lawsuit against the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (Bureau) to protect the economy and the environment of the northern Sacramento Valley.

The Bureau‟s Environmental Assessment (EA) and Findings of No Significant Impact (FONSI) for the 2010-2011 Water Transfer Program reveals plans to export 395,000 acre-feet of Central Valley Project (CVP) and State Water Project (SWP) water to buyers south of the San Francisco Bay Sacramento/San Joaquin Delta. To replace the water sold to San Joaquin Valley growers in low-priority water districts, the plan would permit Sacramento Valley surface water right holders to substitute 154,237 acre-feet of groundwater to continue rice production. The plaintiff groups allege that the EA/FONSI violates the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) because, among other things, it: