NVR Logo
Season of uncertainty
The scramble for a real summer at Lake Berryessa
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Save and Share Share
On Thursday, under bright blue skies, fishermen’s boats headed in and out of Markley Cove Resort at Lake Berryessa. Motorcyclists and others stopped by the convenience store along Highway 128.

At nearby Pleasure Cove Marina, families settled in for a bass fishing tournament sponsored by the Northern California Angling & Camping Club for the Deaf. But a little more than a month before the summer season kicks off, uncertainty reigns at Lake Berryessa, which an estimated 1.5 million people visit every year.
At least four of the seven privately-run resorts will be closed this summer as the transition from old operators to new has hit several bumps. The U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation, which runs the lakeshore, had hoped to start a new era at the lake this year with the removal of more than 1,000 mobile homes from the lakeshore and the refurbishing of the resorts.

But the bureau’s deals with new resort operators fell apart last month, when the bureau acknowledged it had mistakenly included improper clauses in the contracts. It will have to go out to bid again on all seven resorts. Bureau officials acknowledge that they have a lot of work to do to get Berryessa in full swing by 2010.
Complicating matters more, two of the old resort operators — at Berryessa Marina and Putah Creek — are in bankruptcy, and the facilities are visibly deteriorating. But other resorts are ship-shape and ready for summer.

Surprises by the shore
With the summer fast approaching, some would-be visitors are checking in to see what’s going on around the lake.

“It looks like this one is closed down,” Marcos Franco of Sacramento said Thursday, as the Berryessa regular stopped his motorcycle near Spanish Flat Resort on Knoxville Road, one of four closed resorts. “I was surprised to see it closed.”

Spanish Flat, Rancho Monticello Resort, Lake Berryessa Marina and Putah Creek Resort are not expected to open this year. The Bureau of Reclamation wants to open three other resorts — Markley Cove, Pleasure Cove and Steele Park — along with the more bare-bones, government-run beaches and sites.

On Friday, Bureau of Reclamation area manager Michael Finnegan said talks are scheduled next week for short-term deals with Markley Cove and Steele Park. Bureau officials and Pleasure Cove operators say the resort will be up and running this year.

The bureau’s contract error has fueled criticism from Berryessa-area residents and business owners. They are concerned about the viability of the lake economy with the transition going so slowly and unpredictably.

The contract snafu surprised Linda and John Frazier, who have run Markley Cove for two decades. The couple bid successfully last year to continue to operate the resort near Monticello Dam.

Frazier said she is moving forward with summer plans to remain. Staff have been hired, dozens of new boat slips have been built, the store has been re-stocked and she is waiting for the bureau to approve the overnight rates for her new cabins. “All we can do is continue to operate as though we’re going to be open,” Frazier said last week.

Help on the way

Napa County officials are making summer preparations, as well. They have set aside more than $1 million to provide fire, police and ambulance service at the lake this year.

Napa County Sheriff’s Capt. John Robertson said patrols will work on land and on the lake, as in years past. The Pope Creek Bridge waterway will be closed on Memorial Day, the Fourth of July and Labor Day weekends to prevent accidents and incidents that often result in arrests.

To help deal with the expected demand, Finnegan said the bureau plans to open as many as 100 campsites at Oak Shores Park, a public area, this year. Robertson said sheriff’s deputies will patrol the campgrounds once they’re open.

Finnegan on Friday said the Bureau has made “good progress” on the revised negotiations with concessionaires. A prospectus for the concessions could be released by May 11; then bidders will have 90 days to send in proposals. Contracts could be signed by December, Finnegan said.

The plan to have all resorts open in 2010 gained more steam Friday, when the Bureau of Reclamation announced it will receive $4.4 million in federal stimulus funds to clean up debris at resorts such as Putah Creek, where owners of dozens of mobile homes  abandoned their property.

Napa County Supervisor Diane Dillon said the $4.4 million is a big boost for the lake, even if it doesn’t particularly help this summer. “This is very good news for the long term,” Dillon said.

Meanwhile, the bureau is gearing up to sue the former concessionaires to force them to remove the evidence of their presence there, whether trash or building structures, that they’ve since left behind. When the new contracts are signed, he said, the operators will need a clean slate in order to build the businesses the way they want to.

But Bob White, former concessionaire of Rancho Monticello Resort, said Saturday he will fight for what he brought to Rancho Monticello. He and his family are only protecting the investment they made, he said. “We’re still there,” he said. “We’ll be happy to defend ourselves in court.”

White, whose company unsuccessfully bid to run some of the resorts two years ago, said he will submit a new bid to run one or two resorts this year. He said he is open to operating Rancho Monticello this summer if he can reach acceptable terms with the bureau.
15 comment(s)

GET REAL wrote on Apr 19, 2009 8:24 AM:

" Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought Lake Barryessa was a man made lake created for drinking water purposes in the early 1950's? It was not created for Napa recreation? I believe that the City of Vallejo has water rights and was instrumental in the creaction of Lake Barryessa? The City of Napa had the opportunity to help pay for the intrastructure at the time, but decline, and lost their water right? Someone told me this that works for Park and Rec, not sure of my facts... "

MarshaMarsha wrote on Apr 19, 2009 9:11 AM:

" to GET REAL:

Berryessa is a man-made lake, and the dam was built in the 50's. There was a little town called Monticello in the valley, and all the residents (including the ones burried in the cemetary) had to be relocated.

When the government came to town and said they wanted to build this huge lake they bragged about the wonderful recreation that it would create for generations to come. They also promised that it would always have public access for anyone who wanted to visit, play, or relax. The City of Napa said, "OKay, go ahead and build your huge lake. But we won't pay for it because we don't need all that water. Sounds fun, though."

So now, after 50 years of keeping thier promises, the government is messing things up under the pretense of making it "better". "

guesswhoiam wrote on Apr 19, 2009 9:35 AM:

" You are partially correct. Solano County has water rights, Vallejo's water is up wild horse valley. It is man made intended to be used for water supply and recreation. Yes Napa didn't any any part of it in the mid fifty's.

What blow's me away is that this entire fiasco (remove the trailer's "exclusive use") was started by liberal hiker conservationists who screamed save the natural habitat!! Well it's man made!!! We created the habitat.

The entire terrain is different than it was fifty years ago. all man made. 65 years ago there was no shore line only Putah creek running through the small town of monticello. You can see pictures of what Monticello looked like before it was flooded on the walls of the Historical Court House on brown street. "

dellasumbrella wrote on Apr 19, 2009 10:36 AM:

" You're partially right, Get Real....Solano County Irrigation District has rights to the water, and if you drink Budweiser beer made in Fairfield, you're probably drinking Berryessa beer. And as I understand it, Napa County opted out of the water deal.

I wonder how many people will be enticed up to the lake after seeing the photos in the NVR. I guess no one really cares to know how beautiful it is. Oh well, the less the prettier. "

napagirl76 wrote on Apr 19, 2009 10:54 AM:

" i wonder how much tax money the county is going to lose this year with all these resorts closed? it's sad all around that the families that used the lake well have to fight to have a place this year. "

berryessababe wrote on Apr 19, 2009 11:28 AM:

" spanish flat resort is not move in ready i"m sure either is putah creek resort so that makes ALL four resorts useless! what happens with all the contaminated soil and debris that stil remain? 4.4 million isn't enough, the bor knew that the older trailer were full of asbastos and was removed wrong they just ripped everything apart no tenting protection sounds like fun i don't know if I would want to drink that water or camp on that soil "

dellasumbrella wrote on Apr 19, 2009 12:52 PM:

" Did Napa County get any tax money from the resorts? I didn't think it did, but I could be wrong. As I understood it, Napa County spent a lot on Sheriff & some other services (like roads) but didn't get tot for people staying at the resorts.

But I do know, contrary to what guesswhoiam says, that there in fact was watershed terrain here before the lake was built -- that's why Berryessa Valley was such good farm land. And there was wildlife, native plants, rock formations, creeks, etc. Those are not man made. Only the resorts, the non-native species, the cement pads for trailers, docks, etc. etc. and the water depth, plus fish and some water fowl, were created or invited by virtue of human activity. "

WORD wrote on Apr 19, 2009 3:43 PM:

" The history of the dam and lake is certainly interesting but doesn't have much relevance for short or long-term recreation at the lake. The BOR should be encouraged to open and monitor some of the boat launches and potential camping areas in and around the closed resorts. They owe it to the visitors and lake residents. "

Byoung wrote on Apr 19, 2009 3:44 PM:

" Its sad that the goverment decided to ruin the lake for all of us... oh well i guess i can still go to lake folsom this summer "

tiredofcomplainingnapkins wrote on Apr 19, 2009 4:32 PM:

" Most of the trailers are vandalized because Meth addicts are attempting to strip all the copper wire out of the trailers. "

winelink wrote on Apr 19, 2009 10:59 PM:

" Napa County Supervisor Diane Dillon said the $4.4 million is a big boost for the lake, perhaps it can help the losses suffered by the failure of the BOR to negotiate a contract with Sean at Steele Park. The problems the Highlands are facing could have been avoided had the BOR considered the continued operation at Steele Park by Sean Buckley the current owner (and a successful resort), but for some unknown reason they opted for PENSUS GROUP to hold a Monopoly with all five resorts instead and consequently we at the Highlands as well as other lake users are now being held hostage while we continue to wait for some good common sense, come on Dianne Dillon-how about helping them see the light? "

pconstan wrote on Apr 20, 2009 1:44 PM:

" The following is a direct quote: "To help deal with the expected demand, Finnegan said the bureau plans to open as many as 100 campsites at Oak Shores Park, a public area, this year. Robertson said sheriff’s deputies will patrol the campgrounds once they’re open." So let me get this straight. The same bumbling beauacrats that have had 9 years to get this accomplished...messed it up and now is going to open 100 campsites most likely in Oak Shores and Smittle Creek. That makes a lot of sense. Ever been to those locations? I have. If you use 4.2 per household as the average number and mulitply that by 100 campsites you get 420 people. Those two sites were built for day use with not much facilities for washing dishes, shower facilities...well you get the drift. Thank God I don't drink Budweiser with all of those campers washing their pots and pans in the lake and bathing. Classy people like that you know for a fact that they will be using biodegradable soap products--right!
By the way the same jokers proposing to turn day use facilities into over night camping are same folks that APPROVED THE REMOVAL OF THE 1300 TRAILERS. EVERY TRAILER/MOBILE THAT WAS REMOVED HAD TO BE APPROVED BY THE BOR. The BOR said the removal would have NO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT. If you have a complaint about the removal go to the folks that created this fiasco in the first place. As a person that has dealt with the lies and misrepresentation of the BOR for the last five years...I am surprised the mess isn't worse. I wonder how that bed that shared Supervisor Dillon, Berryessa Trails, Sierra Club and BOR is now. "

766husky wrote on Apr 20, 2009 7:54 PM:

" Can not believe thatg someone would think that the resorts did not pay taxes, do you really think that a company can run without being taxed.
The 5 resorts now closed grossed close to 15 million a year they had 100 full time workers they not only paid taxes they paid a franchise fee to the BOR of close to one million a year, the workers paid taxes there venders paid taxes the customers paid sales taxes, you have to live in hole or work for the goverment to think something so crazy.
AS for the resorts being a mess look no farther then the BOR they refused to allow the removal of "anything attached to the ground" including concrete and non native species ,
They refused to manage then and do so now how can you be charge but except no blame, this has become down right criminal, so what do they do promote people and give raises, now they are proud that they have 4.4 million more of the tax payers money to fix something that the did "

766husky wrote on Apr 20, 2009 8:00 PM:

" The real crime here is the loss of hundreds of jobs and millions in tax dollars plus the loss of enjoying the lake for families , someone should be fired not promoted over all of this "

usa boater rights wrote on Apr 22, 2009 4:52 PM:

" Sadly, the editor had to show more of a theft problem then abandement.
Cleary, Rancho has every right to protect their property and investment. "

Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy