SPRING VALLEY — The voice of the people came in loud and clear Tuesday when the Lake County Board of Supervisors voted in line with their will in regard to solving water distribution issues in Spring Valley. The BOS vote unanimously in support of proceeding with Alternative 1, improving the existing sand filtration system rather than developing a well field to serve Spring Valley water needs.
The BOS voted in support of Alternative 1 despite the CSA 2 Advisory Board”s recommendation to proceed with Alternative 4, the well field. Many from the public expressed concern that the advisory board”s recommendation did not adequately convey the will of those the board is meant to represent.
“We”d be ill-advised to proceed down a path that the public doesn”t support,” BOS Chairman Anthony Farrington said.
According to Special Districts Director Mark Dellinger, all alternatives presented provide state required improvements including 100,000 gallons of storage. He said within five years of completing the capital project, another 200,000 to 300,000 gallons of storage will need to be added to meet fire flow requirements.
Dellinger said that existing challenges in the distribution system including old pipes and storage deficiencies need to be addressed by current customers. He said that once an alternative is selected, proposed rate increases will be refined working with the advisory board”s finance and planning committee.
Many of those speaking as members of the advisory board indicated that they supported Alternative 4 primarily as a way to increase source reliability. They also conveyed a concern for trihalomethane (THM) levels, which have been an issue with Spring Valley water in the past. THM is a bi-product of chlorination and can present risks for cancer. Dellinger said that risk of increasing THM levels is more prevalent in ground water sources, such as the existing system. He said risks decrease with direct water sources such would be with the well field.
However, Dellinger said that there are possible litigation costs to consider with regard to implementing Alternative 4. “The struggle I”m having, from source reliability stand point Alternative 4 make excellent sense. But there”s the issues of litigation and costs and those things that we need to take into consideration,” he said. “In reality I don”t think we can afford to wait that much longer on this. We spent a lot of time trying to evaluate this. I still believe wholeheartedly in Alternative 4, but I weigh that against the costs of what getting that alternative are going to be.”
According to Dellinger, the advisory board voted opposite what was largely conveyed by straw vote among community members present at an advisory board meeting earlier this month. Tony Field, Spring Valley resident and secretary of the advisory board, said that she does not feel that the community was disregarded in the advisory board”s recommendation. She said that 85 percent of those in attendance had never attended a meeting before. “I”m hoping that this one vote on June 2 when the advisory board voted the way they did will not shed bad light on what the facts are. We need a second source of water,” she said.
Ed Smith, who is also a member of the advisory board, disagreed with Field. “In this case, I really believe that the advisory board does not represent the will of the people. The people spoke and the advisory board apparently ignored the input of the people,” he said. “In this case, why invite the people to come to decide the issues if you”re not going to listen to them?”
A few additional members of the advisory board conveyed opinions such as that of Field”s while several former board members and community residents shared that of Smith”s.
Supervisors Farrington, Rob Brown and Jeff Smith expressed concern for developing a well field more than a mile and a half away from the area it is to serve. They indicated that they opposed solving one area”s problems while creating a potential for problems in another area.
Supervisor Denise Rushing brought up a concern that should Alternative 4 be selected, a lack of community support presents a potential for additional costs associated with taking the issue to ballot.
Contact South County reporter Denise Rockenstein at drockenstein@clearlakeobserver.com or call her directly at 994-6444, ext. 11.
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
