Water rates to soar at Berryessa
By KERANA TODOROV
Register Staff Writer
October 5th, 2009
September 18th, 2009
September 17th, 2009
September 13th, 2009
September 12th, 2009
November 19th, 2009
November 13th, 2009
November 12th, 2009
November 7th, 2009
Hundreds of residents near Lake Berryessa could see their water and sewer rates double this summer.
On Tuesday, the Napa Berryessa Resort Improvement District and the Lake Berryessa Resort Improvement District are expected to take the first step in hiking rates for those who live in two of the main residential areas near the lake, Berryessa Highlands and Berryessa Estates.
At Berryessa Highlands, near Moskowite Corners, residents who now pay $969 a year for water and sewer services could see their rates more than double to $1,973 annually.
County officials say the district, which serves about 350 customers, needs the influx of new cash to pay for the increased costs of operating the aging public works systems and of complying with federal and state wastewater disposal laws.
The county has not been able to issue $14 million worth of bonds approved by local property owners in 2007 to make major repairs on the water and sewer systems because of uncertainty regarding the district’s biggest customer, Steele Park Resort.
A year ago the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Reclamation, which oversees the lakeshore, selected Arizona-based Pensus Group to run Steele Park Resort. Pensus was expected to pay 31 percent of the $14 million assessment.
But last month, the Bureau of Reclamation announced negotiations have been canceled with Pensus because of a legal mistake in the bidding process.
The bureau has launched a new bidding process and Pensus may again seek to run Steele Park, but the results of the new contract process won’t be known for several months, at least.
At Berryessa Estates, the northernmost subdivision of the lake on Putah Creek, residents are also likely to see rates rise.
On Tuesday, Napa County’s supervisors — acting as Lake Berryessa Resort Improvement District’s board of directors — considered raising the rates to cover the costs of running the aging sewer and water systems and pay for emergency repairs to the local water systems. The district has 187 customers, but more than 150 lots remain vacant.
“We expect that (vacancy rate and lack of revenue) to continue,” Napa County Public Works Director Don Ridenhour told the board.
In addition, 13 properties, including two with houses, could be subject to judicial foreclosures, Ridenhour said.
To make sure the district has enough funds to balance its budget at the end of the fiscal year, county officials recommended that the board of directors raise the rates by 45 percent to raise a total of $828,000.
The board on Tuesday voted 3-2 for a less severe rate increase, one that would incorporate $50,000 for repairs instead of $100,000.
Supervisor Diane Dillon, who represents the area, and Supervisor Keith Caldwell voted against the motion.
Caldwell said he did not think it would be a realistic budget given the cost of emergency repairs while Dillon said the residents will not be able to pay.
“They can’t afford this,” she said. “They will leave and we will have an even bigger problem,” she said.
On Friday, Dillon said she planned to review the rates over the weekend to find a better solution.
Longtime Berryessa Estates property owners told the board of directors that property owners will not be able to pay the bill.
“It will destroy the community,” longtime resident John Hallman said.
The district recently spent more than $100,000 on emergency repairs and other expenses from February and March, when sewer ponds became full and forced the district to release more than 1.6 million gallon of treated water into Stone Corral Creek in violation of its permit, according to Ridenhour.
No water can be discharged into the creek, a tributary of Putah Creek, Ridenhour explained Friday.
So far, the county has not been fined for that incident.
But in 2005, the Regional Water Quality control Board levied a $400,000 fine against the district for sewage spills, which the board will pay over a 10-year period.
Under Proposition 218, property owners will have an opportunity in June to protest the proposed rate increases.
The rate increases will not take effect if a majority of the property owners file a protest.
That hearing is scheduled for June 16.
Meeting on Lake Berryessa
• What: Napa Berryessa Resort Improvement District and Lake Berryessa Resort Improvement District
• When: 4 p.m. Tuesday
• Where: Board of Supervisors Chambers, 1185 Third St., Napa
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.
eischeid wrote on Apr 19, 2009 7:33 AM:
calisa wrote on Apr 19, 2009 9:03 AM:
reader wrote on Apr 19, 2009 9:37 AM:
To the County: Stop building high density housing in areas with no infastructure to support it. Being eco-friendly is not consistent with violating the land and the people who live on it. "
guesswhoiam wrote on Apr 19, 2009 9:44 AM:
The water is already metered. the number shown is an average. If you consider how many weekend and summer homes that are in the area, the number shown is lower than the average household spends in, "the real world". "
formeressa wrote on Apr 19, 2009 8:22 PM:
vocal-de-local wrote on Apr 19, 2009 10:13 PM:
When are you people going to get this through your thick skulls. Allowing dense development in rural areas is always going to come back and haunt you; maybe not tomorrow, but certainly someday. Don't dump your stupidity on future generations. "
bhenery wrote on Apr 20, 2009 4:05 PM:
This is why there are cities! This is why rural areas have homes well spaced that can rely on standard septic systems.
Urban growth in rural locations with no hope in hell for funding such grand sewer needs should simple be denied by the Board of Supervisors!
Common sense must prevail! "