Regional
Under Continued Public Fire, NID Again Delays Approval of DS Canal Flume Replacement Project
Author: Susan Snider, YubaNet.com
Published on Oct 30, 2007, 08:33

On Monday October 22 Sue and Trevor Robbins received a phone call from NID assistant engineer Tonia Tabucchi Herrera. She advised them that approval of the DS flume replacement project was scheduled for the water district's next board meeting, held in two days on October 24.

As landowners who stand to be significantly impacted by this project, the Robbins' were astonished by the last minute notice. Facing review of numerous documents including a revised mitigated negative declaration, Sue and Trevor Robbins stood before NID board members on October 24 asking for a continuance of 30 days.

Other members of the public present at the board meeting expressed substantive concerns with not only the project itself, but also the environmental review process. Nick Wilcox pointed out that NID, according to one of the project mitigation measures, plans to conduct future plant surveys to assess possible impacts. Citing the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a lead agency like NID should not be writing negative declarations on a project before a survey has been conducted.

"It's like the cart before the horse in terms of CEQA," Wilcox observed. "It is rather unusual to use promises of future surveys when writing negative declarations."

Director Nancy Weber also objected on similar lines, noting that without current plant surveys, it is impossible to accurately assess impacts.

Trevor Robbins also objected to the lack of any written document describing the scope of the project. Concerned that he has been misled too many times by NID, Robbins noted that a project of this magnitude warrants a definitive design description.

At the board meeting, Herrera noted that NID submitted a notice of intent with the local print newspaper, as well as a posting on the water district's website. However, at the same time, she admitted that letter notification to interested property owners like the Robbins, who have expressed concerns with the project from its inception, was an oversight.

Board President Scott Miller worried that, "staff have made us vulnerable" and that NID "didn't get it right" by failing to notify those people directly impacted by the project. Director John Drew echoed Miller's concerns, agreeing with the Robbins' that 30 days would be an appropriate time frame for extending public review.

NID Chief Engineer Gary King and Herrera both observed that such a continuance would delay construction scheduling. However, the board postponed its decision on the project and called for continued public hearings until November 28, when a special meeting is scheduled for 6 p.m.

According to NID's engineering department, the DS canal system's 8 remaining wooden flumes are deteriorating and pose safety and maintenance issues. In addition, engineers cite that flow in these flumes is restricted below NID's master plan levels. The proposed project would replace the wooden structures with pipes supported by steel structures.

Biggest Users, Smallest Revenues: You Do the Math

During a workshop in which NID Finance Manager Marie Owens made a preliminary 2008 budget presentation, board members and the public alike heard some rather startling numbers.

2008 projected figures for NID's water division indicate that while sales to treated water customers would represent less than 8 percent of all NID district water sales, they would generate nearly two-thirds of the water district's revenues.

By contrast, of the district's total water sold in 2008, nearly 93 percent is projected to go to raw water users. Yet revenues from these customers would represent roughly only 34 percent of all dollars generated to NID.

According to Owens, these figures are based on trend analysis and have not fluctuated much in recent years.

Of the three largest municipal raw water users during 2007, water sales to Placer County Water Agency topped the chart. Among sales to government agency raw water customers during the 2007 irrigation season, water demands by Placer County far exceeded those by the State of California or Caltrans.

During recent NID board meetings, discussion has centered around the fact that Nevada County property tax revenues received annually by NID help subsidize the district's raw water users. This is a difficult pill to swallow for those Nevada County residents who pay their fair share of property taxes but continue to wait for NID water.

In addition, questions arise as to why such a large gap in revenues exists between the district's smallest users--its treated water customers--and NID's biggest consumers, its raw water users.

NID is currently in the process of conducting a water rate study that will evaluate rate options and recommend rate adjustments to improve rate equity. According to Proposition 218, water rates cannot exceed the cost of providing service.

DVD copies of NID Board meetings are available for viewing at the Madelyn Helling Library in Nevada City. NCTV also runs taped versions of these proceedings. Contact Channel 11 for scheduling times and dates.

NID Board meetings are scheduled at 9 a.m. on the second and fourth Wednesdays of every month and are open to the public.

© Copyright 2007 YubaNet.com