ValleyWaterWatchdog.org

Main Navigation





NeWS

Click on the links to read the associated article in a new window. close the new window to return. if the link does not work, copy and paste it into your browser search window, then use the "back" button to return

Your One-Stop Source for all things Water

SCVWD
BE ADVISED
- WE ARE ALWAYS WATCHING -


FEB 20
Anderson Dam Retrofit now Estimated at $185 Million
(Morgan Hill Times)
Clean, Safe Creeks parcel tax to be diverted to retrofit?

FEB 19
Three Contenders for one Golden Spigot Seat
(SJMN)

District 2 Director Joe Judge will relinquish his seat in the upcoming election.
So far, those that are planning a run at it are:
(listed alphabetically)
- David Ginsborg
- Barbara Keegan
- Scott Knies


FEB 18
Informal MH Times Survey Shows
SCVWD is Least Trusted Agency

Really.   What a surprise.

FEB 11
District Seeks Safe, Clean Creeks Funding
Now diverted to Anderson Dam Retrofit?
FEB 02, 2012
Incoming District Chairwoman Linda LeZotte's
Cost Control Speech
We ALL Hope this Happens!
Best of luck,
The "Hostages" of the SCCWD

JAN 12, 2012
Water Corruption Gone Wild!
"Say it ain't so, Joe!"
-young boy to Shoeless Joe Jackson as he left the courthouse.
"Well, I'd never have thought it...", he sighed.

DEC 31
Expect another Water Rate Increase Effective 07/01/2012
  
According to the 01/10/2012 District Agenda, the Projected Groundwater Production Charge Rates increases are as listed below:

North County (Municipal & Industrial):  9.3%
South County:  3.5%
Agricultural:  8.5%
DEC 28
District Tightens Belt (a bit)...
- But what about the Directors' Perks & Benefits?
                                          
And from the District...

San Jose, CA – On Tuesday, Dec. 27, the Santa Clara Valley Water District Board of Directors successfully concluded labor negotiations, voting to approve the terms of two new Memoranda of Understanding with the two unions comprising mid-managers and engineers, both represented by the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers, Local 21.
The vote came one week after the board approved the terms of an agreement with the district’s largest union, the Employees Association, represented by Local 101 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
Negotiations with the three unions began in September. The previous MOUs are set to expire on Dec. 31, 2011.
All three agreements have been ratified by the membership of the three unions. In all, the new agreements save more than $7.7 million over the three years of the agreements.
“The district is affected by the weak economy like everyone else,” said district board chairman, Don Gage. “Yet the district has some tremendous, costly challenges ahead, including seismic retrofits at some of our dams. To maintain the workforce necessary to meet these challenges and ensure a sustainable organization, we have to cut costs. I’m pleased that we have been able to do that without any layoffs or furloughs.”
The district’s financial outlook showed that between 2010 and 2015, expenditures exceed district revenues each year. Without further cost cutting measures, these shortfalls would have to be offset by reducing reserves from $366 million in Fiscal Year 2010 to a projected $116 million in Fiscal Year 2015. Reserves provide a critical safety net to ensure that the district has the funds to meet its operational obligations in the normal course of business and in times of emergency.
Water agencies commonly have reserve policies requiring them to maintain a minimum amount of funding to meet operational outlays, ranging from 19 to 35 percent. The water district has a reserve policy of 22 percent for its water utility division, with an actual reserve of 25 percent ($36 million of the budgeted water utility operational outlays of $141 million) in the current fiscal year.
“Continuing to dip into reserves for normal operations is neither responsible nor sustainable,” said water district CEO, Beau Goldie. “As a public utility providing essential services, it is imperative that the public can be assured that we are managing our resources in a way that ensures we can meet our commitments.”
Highlights of the agreements include:
  • Starting in April, 2012, all employees will begin contributing 15 percent of their health care premiums.
  • Employees will pay 11 percent of contributions toward the California Public Employees Retirement System, CalPERS.
  • Employees hired after Jan. 1, 2012 will be in a second-tier retirement plan, earning 2 percent of their salary, multiplied by their years of service, at age 60. Current employees continue to earn 2.5 percent at age 55.
  • Union-represented employees will receive no Cost Of Living Adjustment in 2012. In 2013, the COLA will be 1.5 percent and in 2014, 2.0 percent.
  • Sick leave payouts have been restructured, establishing a cap of 480 hours, reducing long-term and ongoing liabilities.
  • Exempt leave of 20 hours a year has been eliminated for engineers; Management leave has been reduced by 28 hours per year.
  • Holidays have been reduced from 13 to 12, eliminating the Lincoln Birthday holiday.
These savings are in addition to several other cost-savings measures that have been implemented:
  • Employee headcount is at 714, a 21 percent reduction from a peak of 903 in 2004.
  • Overtime has been reduced by 56 percent since 2008.
  • Consultant services have been cut by 12 percent since 2008.
  • Travel for training has been reduced by 34 percent since 2008.
  • The district’s vehicle fleet has been reduced by 13 percent since 2008.
  • Employee mobile devices have been reduced by 40 percent since 2008.
CEO Beau Goldie said, “Labor negotiations, along with the district’s reserves policy, long-term water supply and asset planning and efforts to secure ongoing funding are all part of sound financial planning for this organization. By effectively managing the organization, we are better positioned to respond to future challenges and meet the needs of this community.”


NOV 25
Fluoridation Revisited
SJMN Editorial
Good? Bad? Who Knows?
  On whichever side of the fence you may stand, Director Gage stated during an informal meeting last week of area residents in Gilroy stated, "Fluoridation will never come to South County."


Will they EVER stop increasing?  Not if you CONSERVE water! 
" Due to water conservation, revenues dropped."
Click above to read on...
More on this on July 28, below:

  This subject has been controversial for many years.  Justified fears, or not?
Learn about the toxicity, chemical properties, and health effects of fluoride here.
NOV 07
Santa Clara County Reservoir Daily Updates:
10/25/2011 through 11/06/2011
Creek Project to Protect Homes
OCT 31
Federal Delta Water Pact Fails
Read the SJMN Editorial
OCT 29
Notes from the CEO Bulletin
For the Week of:  10/14/2011-10/20/2011
(Posted on the 11/08/2011 BOD Meeting Agenda)
District Billed $98,411 for Judge vs Callender "Tussle"

  Director Kwok requested the amount billed by Wilson Sonsoni Goodrich & Rosati for Fred Alvarez's work on the the Callender/ Judge investigation.
  To date, the District has been billed $98,411 for professional services from March 3, 2011 through August 30,2011.
WHO actually bears this cost?
Director Judge Requests Flag-Sized Map
  Staff has been asked to provide Director Judge with a large 3-foot by 5-foot, printout of District 2, 2011 redistricting map.

  A three foot by five foot map could not be produced in-house.  Staff sent the map to an outside vendor for printing.  The map was delivered to Director Judge on October 5, 2011.  The cost for producing the map was $68.00 paid through the Office of Government Relations budget.  (Rick Callender)
Why would an outgoing Director require a 3' x 5' map of his own district?
OCT 24

Why the water district owned this land in 1950, then sold it to a developer in 1956 remains a mystery, and no one at the Water District offices can find records showing why.
  Sig Sanchez, who served on the water board until his retirement last year, said,"We didn't do a very good job back then preserving agriculture.  We all thought development was the magic wand. But I suspect we are better off today without it because at least we have some open space as we drive down 101."
OCT 23

(Compiled from "Internal Affairs",SJMN, Sunday, Oct 22)

One can begin to sense the lineups for
political races next year.

An interesting development is that David Ginsborg, currently  the top assistant to Assessor Larry Stone, and current head of the District's Clean and Safe Creeks Program, says he intends to challenge Joe Judge for the Central San Jose seat on the Santa Clara Valley Water District board in the November 2012 election.

Ginsborg, a knowledgeable environmentalist, stated, "The district deals with really important issues, this is about getting the District focused on its core mission.''

Judge, who has been on the board for 25 years, was recently the target of a racial harassment complaint from the head of the District's Head of Governmental Affairs, Rick Callender.

A report from the Wilson - Sonsini law firm (any connection to ex- Director, Larry Wilson?) , found there was no evidence Judge engaged in a pattern of racial harassment.

Judge has a powerful friend in Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-San Jose.  The election results and hopeful ousting of Judge, may well depend on how much coverage the contest gets.

Incidentally, Director Santos of the infamous $2.6 MILLION Dollar Alviso"Golden Gazebo" (located in his District) Will also have to fight for his Board seat on the November 2012 ballot.

Hopefully, Director Estremera (17 years at the end of his 2014),  -  the last of the "Old Guard" Directors, will be ejected from his "Gravy Train" ride...

OCT 08
   With reference to the OCT 07 report below, reliable sources state that the District will also check well water for coliform bacteria, which was recently  detected in domestic South County wells.  The District has yet to divulge the contamination levels to these well owners. 
OCT 07
South County Domestic Well Owners:
     Have you received your"Free Well Water Testing" mailer from the District yet?  Read On!
  Free Water Quality Testing Program for South County Private Domestic Well Owners
(From CEO Bulletin for the week of 9/23-29)
 (EL-9.7: Other)
             A district survey of well owners conducted in 2010 indicated very strong support for water quality testing.  Testing will be available for private domestic well owners in groundwater charge zone W5.  The District will collect samples for nitrate, bacteria, hardness, and electrical conductivity.  Each participant will receive a copy of the laboratory results along with information on additional actions they may want to take.

            Through this pilot project approved for Fiscal Year 2012, the District will collect up to 1,000 water quality samples from South County residences served by private domestic wells.  This testing will provide information on nitrate and other contaminants, will help the District better protect groundwater resources in accordance with Board policy.  This information will also provide basic water quality information to domestic well owners in order to help them protect their health.

            Mailers announcing the availability of the program were sent out the week of September 26th, 2010.  Testing will be available on a first-come, first serve basis and will be be available until April 2012 or when funding is completed, whichever comes first.  Interested residents can contact the District using the Access Valley Water link located at: www.valleywater.org or by calling the Groundwater Hotline at (408) 265-2607, extension 2300


SEPT 17
If THIS doesn't get your attention, perhaps you don't understand the situation...
$2.6 MILLION "Golden Gazebo" opened Friday in Director Santos' district, Alviso.  Funny that there wasn't any publicity prior to this "Grand Opening".  Especially relevant are the reader comments following the article. (Scott Herhold, San Jose Mercury News)

So, why did it end up costing $1.2 MILLION MORE than the original ridiculous $1.4 MILLION?
AUG 28
SJMN slams the "Golden Spigot"
  Sunday's "Internal Affairs" brings attention once again to the greed of the Water District Board of Directors of $26.00. 
(NOTE:  This link to the SJMN typically disappears by the end of the week published)
AUG 26
No Surprises here...
District BOD vote against Compensation Decrease
Director Gage - Are serious?  " You gotta go with the majority"?  Really? Isn't that just what has been going on all these years before we voted you in to prevent that? What a waste, and disappointing...
Get a  BACKBONE, Don!
JULY 28
Residents Conservation results in Rate Hike
"Yikes!  Then should I use MORE
 to reduce my rates??"
  "You can only see Major Major when he is out"
- Joseph Heller, "Catch-22"
JULY 08
$110M Anderson Retrofit to be funded by Groundwater Production Charges

JUNE 24
Carcinogen detected in recycled water

JUNE 22
Prop 218 delays Palo Alto water rate hike vote

MAY 25
BOD votes 7-0 for Water Rate Increase
Surprised? Nahhh!
MAY 15
Siravo Out, Alvarado In
New "Communications Manager" to get $143,063 annually from "The Golden Spigot" plus full benefits.
MAY 09
Delta Water Plan Leaky as a Sieve
"$13 Billion of pork"

MAY 04
Protest Vote Numbers Released
MAY 03
Conflict of Interest?
(Shhh, It is a secret!)

Director Schmidt comes clean.

 2011 Protests Falls Short
Most likely primarily due to apathy.
  Suppose instead of voters mailing letters to PROTEST a rate increase, voters had to mail letters IN FAVOR of a rate increase.
Would the result be the same?  Extremely doubtful.
  Isn't this how it should be done?

It seems the District has the rate hikes "stacked"
in their favor by default. 

MAY 01
Angry San Martin Resident Writes
A letter to the Morgan Hill Times about Water District Mismanagement issues.
APR 29
Water District HQ is a
Vegas-like Tourist Destination!
Come visit us today!
No entrance Fees!
Free Covered Parking!
Every Santa Clara County Resident has a lifetime membership to this public facility!
Tour Vegas-Style opulent excess - at taxpayer expense!
Beautiful picnic grounds all around - Spend the day!
Bring the kids, the dog, the grandmother!
What happens in HQ stays in HQ... 
One Convenient Location!
 5700 Almaden Expressway
-No Reservations required-

Well Tax Protest Fails

There is always next year...
APR 26
Water Sales Evaporate
 In the "real world", incompetent management results in having to find a new occupation -  apparently this rule does not apply to "public servants".
APR 15
Los Altos City Council Concerned About Water Rate Increase

  Is there something broken here?

    "Water rates must be INCREASED due to DECLINING water usage."
                    - Darin Taylor, 'Senior Project Manager'
                                 Santa Clara Valley Water District
Did I miss something?
 Water rates will decline if we all use more?
Who are these monkeys, anyway?
Sorry guys, but you don't get it 'both ways' the way the water ratepayer is getting it ALWAYS...

drought = rate increase
"wet year" = rate increase
conservation = rate increase
aging infrastructure = rate increase
increased district staff = rate increase
annual pay hikes = rate increase

APR 13
District denies Mann's Claim
Duh!
APR 04
SJMN Editorial:
Drought may be over, but California still has water woes
APR 02
It is that time of year again...
Protest the proposed Groundwater Production Rate Increase!
  Public hearings begin at the April 12 BOD Meeting at 10:00AM at District Headquarters, 5700 Almaden Expressway, San Jose, CA  (Agenda Item 2.2).Additional Hearings are scheduled for:
April 19, 7:00PM - Morgan Hill Council Chambers
  17555 Peak Ave., Morgan Hill, CA
April 26, 10:00AM - District Headquarters, 5700 Almaden Expressway, San Jose, CA

Formal Protests MUST be received prior to the end of the April 26 meeting! Click on the Formal Protest Letter Link to create and mail
YOURS Today!

MAR 18
San Martin Well Owner Prevails in
Prop 218 claim against District

Could this be the 'beginning of the end' for the District's coercive and extortionist practices?
Hats off to Mr. Coney!  Congrats! 
Where can the rest of us sign up?

MAR 16
Wasteful Spending While Raising Rates
Morgan Hill Times Editorial
Cy Mann ( again??) wears "many hats"

MAR 15
Cy Mann "Dishonest & Irresponsible"?
Naaahhh....
  "Untrustworthy"? Well, You Decide.
  Perhaps Mr. Mann can answer a few questions to clear his previously impeccable reputation:
 1.  Why did you transfer your Hale Avenue property to your wife's name in 2005? 
  2.  How could a married couple NOT know anything of their spouse's legal claims?
  3.  Is the "ranching business" not doing well?
  4.  While we are on the subject, what is the name and nature of your "ranch", and where is it specifically located? Hale Avenue, perhaps?
  5.  Do you deny the statements published and made public by the District?  If not, all this could have been avoided if you had paid your bills like the rest of us must.  Your tax returns might be interesting reading too - just guessing.
 
  These unfounded claims appear to be at least "sour grapes" , vindictive at best, and indicative of poor judgment.
  Perhaps he stepped into  a large pile of
 Bulls*@t from his "ranch".


MAR 12
Ex-Director Mann Files Claim
 Against Water District
     The March 22 Special Meeting Agenda Item Number 3.7 specifies the (5) claims filed by Mann:

The District received a claim from former Director Sahib “Cy” Mann on February 11, 2011. The claim alleges:

 (1) Damages for Public Disclosure of Private Fact-- regarding disclosure of certain information related to Mr. Mann’s water bill payment;

(2) Libel—related to the same disclosure;

(3) False Light Privacy—related to the same disclosure;

(4) Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress—related to alleged attempted intimidation and theft; and

(5) Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress—related to the same attempted intimidation and theft.

 The District conducted an internal review, found no cause of action and recommends that the claim be denied.

MAR 11
"Social Meals" compensation eliminated for BOD
  The newly elected BOD members are cleaning up the mess created by decades of abuse by prior "regimes". Santos was the lone dissenting vote on this issue.

What - not gettin' enough, Dick?
It appears Estremera could afford fewer lunches...
 
Kudos to Chairman Gage, Director LaZotte!
Keep up the fine work!

FEB 27
Water District is literally
 "Feeding at the Public Trough"
  Click on the SCVWD website link above then  select the FEB 22 BOD meeting. Scroll down to the bottom of page 2 (of 3) and have look at the District's breakdown of current meal costs for EACH meeting (of 43):
Breakfast & Lunch for BOD and Staff:  $480.00
Potential catered dinner service:  $600.00

Q:  Exactly what is being served here?
        A:  Pork Pie...(yes and no)
     Notwithstanding this abuse and total disregard for fiscal "trustee responsibility of public funds", the primary question is:
 Why is John Q. Public buying meals for the District at all? 
-Not to mention "staff" too???  (WTF?)

 School District "staff" are not fed, or paid overtime - yet make do  with what little they have.  Just think what  more they could accomplish with Water District waste...

  Keep in mind, that the District has a reputation for inflating numbers...at taxpayer expense.
 (whether unfilled job positions, project expenses, or budgets)

     All constituents expect  our newly elected Directors LeZotte, Schmidt, and Chairman Gage to put an end to such irresponsible behavior.
     Directors Judge,Santos, and Estremera may already be too far gone...

FEB 25
District Meetings Time Change
JAN 19
Seismic Problems at County Reservoirs
...And construct the Gold Street
"Educational Center"?
JAN 18
Morgan Hill Times Editorial:
Can Don Gage Rescue the Water District?
He can only make it better!
JAN 13
SJMN Editorial:
  AT LAST NEW LEADERSHIP for SCVWD

 JAN 12
Don Gage is Elected SCVWD Chair
  Finally, a major shift which may steer the District towards a respectable reputation and accountability.  Many thanks due to Don Gage and other newly elected Directors.
  Appears the party is over for the "Old Guard"!
 
GO   Gage / LeZotte / Schmidt! 

Mann not nominated to CFCWAC
  The vote to approve Cy Mann's application for nomination to the Coyote Flood Control and Watershed Advisory Committee was delayed for approval because of at least two other recently submitted applications.  This agenda item (#24) on the 01/11/2011 BOD meeting agenda will be re-visited at the 01/25/2011 meeting.

JAN 10, 2011
SJMN Editorial:  Water District needs Reformers in Control

Old Guard -  OUT NOW!
"Throw the Bastards out!"
 - oh - 
"And keep 'em out!"

Ex-director Mann applies for nomination to the Coyote Flood Control and Watershed Advisory Committee
  Ex-Board director Cy Mann (Yes, the same that was appointed to the SCVWD Board in 2010, then exposed in Aug 2010 to be in arrears in paying his SCVWD water bills,  then being unelectable, withdrew from the re-election race, then the MHUSD School Board race.  He also made the news when he "expensed" an iPad to the District last year.) is scheduled on item 24 of the 01/11/2011 SCVWD Meeting Agenda to be approved for nomination for a two year appointment to the Coyote Flood Control and Watershed Advisory Committee!
  Is this a joke? If it were not true, it would be funny. Mr. Mann has shown his stripes in various forms.  The District would be doing itself no favors approving, or appointing Mr. Mann to any position.
Gold Street Project also on 01/11/2011 Agenda
Just for fun
    Click on Agenda Item 13 and download the associated .PDF file detailing the progress (NOT!), expenditures (LOTS!), and inept project coordination.

JAN 07,  2011

WHY should Olin be paid anything for creating this mess? South County Director Kamei was totally ineffective...Perhaps the SCVWD Staff requires closer scrutiny as well... (Beau Goldie & Darren Taylor)
  What a slimy racket - stinks like the Cardinalli towing scam)
I want MY money back!

HELP US, Don Gage, and Bill Monning!!

NOV 10, 2010
Water District BOD up to it's "usual tricks" once again...

NOV 03
Don Gage wins Water District Seat

Congrats and well done, Don!

OCT  26
Three Contenders for Nov 2nd South County Water District Seat

MH Seeking  Downtown Flood Control

 OCT 19
South County Water Rate Increase?

Here we go again...

OCT 13
SJMN Recommends Gage, Lazotte, Schmidt, and YES on Measure C

Changing of the SCVWD BOD "Old Guard"
 waaay past due...
 
OCT 9
Julia Hover-Smoot withdraws from November Race - throws her support to Adam Escoto

Is Cy Mann is wanted anywhere?

OCT 2
SCVWD Staff recommends no Mid-Year Groundwater Charge Adjustment for FY 2010/11
Below is Agenda Item #12 for the October 12
BOD meeting:

12. Mid-Year Groundwater Production Charge Adjustment for Fiscal Year 2010-11 - Water Utility Enterprise.
Recommendation: That the Board not take action to adjust groundwater production charges for Fiscal Year 2010-11.

SEPT 25
Throwing Good Money After Bad
Tragic, Regrettable, and totally unnecessary Folly
The Gold Street Bids are in with some
(unexpected?) surprises.
SEPT 19
MANN:  Race Card Again?
The "Nuts" & Bolts:  "Dissension in the ranks"
Begs the question:  Is Mann suitable to hold
 any elected position?
AUG 23

PROPOSED ORDINANCE PROVIDING FOR INCREASE IN COMPENSATION OF DIRECTORS OF SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT

  At the public hearing on October 12, 2010, the Board may vote to adopt the ordinance increasing per diem compensation for 2011, keep the per diem at the 2010 level, or establish a rate somewhere in between.

 The proposed ordinance language contained within the Notice of Public Hearing reflects the five (5) percent increase per calendar year allowed by statue, which would authorize the per-meeting and day’s service compensation for the Board to be increased up to $286.03.

  If the Board approves the maximum allowable increase for each day’s service and each Director attends the maximum ten (10) authorized meetings per month, the financial impact will be an increase of $10,920 for Fiscal Year 2010-2011 to fund the increased rates for the period January 1, 2011 through June 30, 2011.

Last year, the decision of the BOD was based on the then-current status of the economy - which to date has not significantly changed.  Perhaps they should consider this point on October 12...

AUG 12
Mann will NOT be running unopposed

  In what Mann likely assumed as an "easy win" with no other contenders just yesterday, the Santa Clara County Board of Education ballot fills with two additional viable contenders.
  Very doubtful Mann can win against Julia Hover-Smoot, a very active participant in south county schools for many years...
Perhaps municipal dog-catcher?

AUG 11
Director Mann pulls from Water District Race


 30% of Polluted Bay Area Creeks are in Santa Clara County
...So remind me why every parcel owner in Santa Clara County is currently paying $51.58 annually for "Safe Clean Creeks"?  With numbers like this, where are all those annual millions of dollars  actually being spent since enacted in November 2000?

  "Improving the quality of water in the county's creeks and bays and the natural features of stream corridors is vital to Santa Clara County 's quality of life, and are key components of the District's watershed approach."
 -SCVWD Website
Can't do better than this in TEN years?
What an abysmal failure...

AUG 09
South County Well Owner
takes on Water District

Go Get 'em!

AUG 7
Filing Deadline Extended for Water Board Candidates
 
  Mann undecided whether to run for Water District or a seat on the Santa Clara County Board of Education.

"Just what we need in public office - an indecisive, opportunistic "feeder" at the public trough..."

Why not just save everyone the time, trouble,
and ink, and sit this one out, Mr. Mann.




AUG 5, 2011
A Rush of District Candidates
AUG 4
Director Mann has History of not Paying Water Bill on Time


Presented with evidence, Mann states he is now undecided about running against Don Gage in the November race.
Decision deadline is Friday, 8/6/2010.

Mann flirts with playing the "race" card
"I hope you are not singling me out for the color of my skin because it is starting to look that way."
-Director Mann, Tuesday, Aug. 3,2010
Never an issue.
Same rules apply to everyone.
Now get over it.

AUG 01
District Approves Permanente Creek Plans

"He hasn't run a a race in 16 years, and now he wants to unseat one of the directors who has done more than anyone else. Good luck."
 -Appointed District Board member, Cy Mann
 on County Supervisor Don Gage,
seeking Mann's seat in November
NOTE to Mr. Mann -Doing something is far cry from actually accomplishing anything...

Don Gage has many accomplishments in his years as County Supervisor

JULY 28
District BOD votes to add Term Limits on November Ballot
-Paul Rogers, SJMN
Perhaps this should have been the program from the beginning...
JULY 27
District to Discuss Term Limits Today
-Paul Rogers, SJMN
South County District Race begins simmering
-Scott Herhold, SJMN
Click HERE for a current district map and candidates
-Scott Herhold, SJMNJULY 25
Water District Needs Ethical and Responsible Candidates
- San Jose Mercury News Editorial -

Four BOD seats open for election:

 Rosemary Kamei
 Larry Wilson (not running for re-election)
 Tony Estremera (running unopposed, to date)
 Cy Mann
The time to "clean house" is long overdue!

JULY 23

07/27/2010 BOD Meeting Agenda

Agenda Item #14, CEO Bulletin (07/09-15)

Kamei

Collection of perchlorate fees from District reserves

Staff is to investigate Director Kamei’s request to collect perchlorate fees included in the South County groundwater charges from District reserves or ad valorem property tax funds.

Beginning in 2003, perchlorate response costs were financed by a loan from Water Utility fund reserves. Under the adopted groundwater production charges for FY 2010-11, roughly 45% of the perchlorate response cost reimbursement will be paid for by 1% ad valorem property taxes via the open space credit for South County Agricultural groundwater. Alternatively, the District could pay for the entire perchlorate response cost reimbursement with 1% ad valorem property taxes over a 6 year period. This alternative would require transferring $1.2M of 1% ad valorem property taxes from the Watershed Stream Stewardship fund in FY 2010-11, instead of $348K as budgeted. Roughly $830K would need to be transferred from the Watershed and Stream Stewardship fund each year thereafter to pay down the perchlorate response loan balance (including future interest expense) over a 6 year time period. The Watershed Stream Stewardship Fund operating and capital reserves would be reduced by roughly $5.3M over the next 6 years, which may be a significant impact depending on the ability to secure a new revenue source after the sunset of the Clean Safe Creeks special tax in FY 2015-16.

For further information, please contact Najon Chu at (408) 265-2600, extension 2225.

Taking bets on which way this will go...


JULY 20
The Port of Alviso?
Apparently, the District has nothing better to do these days..Another "Gold Street Boondoggle" in the works.
District contributes $60,000.00 of $360,000 for study by consultant.
"There is zero chance, it is too impractical, it is too expensive, it will become a regulatory nightmare."
-Citizens Committee to Complete the Refuge

"Pure Folly, and a total waste of resources"

                       - Rick Callender, referenced in the linked SJMN article, is one and the same from the Measure B "Clean Creeks" court case of November 2000:
From the Fair Political Practices Commission website:
www.fppc.ca.gov/agenda.php?id=359

  Fair Political Practices Commission v. Committee for Clean Safe Creeks, Susan A. Pino, and Rick L. Callender; FPPC No. 2000/793. Staff: Senior Commission Counsel Deanne Canar and Investigator III Dan Schek.

 Defendant Committee for Clean Safe Creeks was a primarily formed committee supporting Measure B on the Santa Clara County ballot in the November 7, 2000 general election.

 Defendants Susan A. Pino and Rick L. Callender were co-treasurers of  Defendant Committee.

The defendants failed to:

            1.  Timely file a pre-election campaign statement, disclosing $170,995 in contributions and $65,668 in expenditures, in violation of Government Code section 84200.5, subdivision (b)

            2.  Timely disclose $20,000 in late contributions in properly filed late contribution reports, in                         violation of Government Code section 84203(a)

            3.  Report sub-vendor information for a payment of $49,795 on a pre-election campaign                              statement filed after the election, in violation of Government Code sections 84211(j)(6) and 84303

            4.  File an amended statement or organization within ten days of a change in the primary                 activity of Defendant Committee, in violation of Government Code section 84103(a).

 

 The parties stipulated to a final judgment in the case by the Santa Clara County Superior Court.

As provided in the stipulated judgment, the defendants are going to pay a civil penalty of $24,000.

  Final Judgment Pursuant to Stipulation

Stipulation for Entry of Judgment (In Favor of Plaintiff Against Defendants)

FPPC v. Committee for Clean Safe Creeks -- Complaint for Civil Penalties under the Political Reform Act of 1974, as Amended


JULY 09
Term Limits for District BOD?

  It may be long overdue - "the Good 'ol Boys" mentality must go...
JULY 07
July 2010 Grand Jury Report rips Director Santos a new one
(Click on the link above, then select the link on the displayed list)
Report focuses on Santos' conflict of interest issues concerning Alviso, with emphasis on his substantial real properties holdings, and the wasteful $1.4M Gold Street Education Center.
This document is a MUST READ
Santos subsequently writes,"I support the requested Special Meeting to quickly discuss the 2010 Grand Jury report.  As the report directly names me, I have an interest in a quick and expedient response for both the District and myself.  A Special Meeting should move this matter along in a more expedient manner.
Note: expedient 2x, quick(ly),2x

Special Meeting:  Friday, July 9, 0930

San Jose may sell water system

JUNE 22
Director Santos Responds to ethics violation accusation

Los Altos and Mountain View residents oppose flood basins pushed by Water District

JUNE 21
District Chair Santos accused of state law ethics violations
  Santos rationalizes decisions with "I won't benefit personally..." although his Alviso family assets will. Fortunately, November will arrive soon...Any questions?

JUNE 18
Director Mann "needs" 64GB iPad
  Director Mann also thinks his current compensation is inadequate - an "interim" position for which he applied, interviewed, and obtained.  Fortunately, November will arrive soon...If Mann wants to retain any sense of self-respect, he will not run.

JUNE 16
Full Reservoirs, but mandatory
 conservation remains
  The District Board of Directors rejected staff recommendation for voluntary conservation and
instead voted for a new 10% mandatory plan.

JUNE 14

District to proceed with wasteful $1.4M Gold Street Gazebo Project

  Despite the recent opening of the Alviso Marina County Park boat ramp, the SCVWD is intent on squandering $1.4 million when they vote for final approval of a proposed $1.4 million dollar gazebo at tomorrow morning's meeting...

16.          Approval of Plans and Specifications and Advertisement for Bids for Construction of the Guadalupe River Outdoor Classroom (Gold Street Educational Center Project), Project No. 30154028 (Alviso).  (K. Oven)

Recommendation:

A.         Adopt the plans and specifications and authorize advertisement for bids for the construction of the Guadalupe River Outdoor Classroom (Gold Street Educational Center) Project per the Notice to Bidders; and

B.         Authorize the Designated Engineer to issue addenda, as necessary, during bidding.

MAY 28
Gilroy Chamber wary of new
District legislation
Doesn't the district have too much power as it is?

 MAY 21
District Chair Santos comments on map process
MAY 17
District Ignores Gilroy & MH Mayors
"Mann no friend to South County"
Gilroy to consider reinstating Lawsuit
 MAY 15
District Map Fiasco Resolved?

None of this would have occurred with a
competent Board of Directors...
MAY 12
District to redo gerrymandered map fiasco
"Yes, I did vote for this map...It was a poorly informed decision.  It was rushed.  It was wrong...that map was ridiculous:"
- Director Joe Judge
     Most observers of the May 6 BOD meeting would agree that Chairman Santos rushed through the agenda, as he tends to anyway...This is no way to operate a government agency with a $300 million annual budget.
     District discussion on new boundaries will take place at District Headquarters at 6:00 PM Thursday, May 13 and Friday, May 14 at 1:00 PM.
  You can attend, or observe live streaming from the District website.

MAY 7
District's Gerrymandered map must go
Newest Director Mann has "soiled" himself

 MAY 6
District faces legal trouble due to redistricting map debacle
Did they really think they could just
 "make up their own"?

MAY 5
Protest Vote Fails
APRIL 30
Successful Protest Vote Doubtful

Transparency Disappears

 April 29
Redistricting Splits South County
APRIL 26
Protest Count may take Days
APRIL 20
Redistricting maps Submitted
APRIL 9
City of Morgan Hill should Protest
-Not ask for fee reduction
APRIL 2
Time to Unite in Protest
MARCH 30
Well Tax Protest Goes "Grass Roots"
MARCH 25
District's Letter Confounds Recipients
MAR 18
Each Well Owner Gets One Vote

Have YOU Received Your Protest Letter From the District?
MAR 10
Opportunity to reject Water Rate Increase Approaches

Water District makes presentations in Morgan Hill on Thursday, March 11
FEB 19
Water District Leaves 2010-11
Rates Unchanged
FEB 15
Water District Must cut Fat, Not Services
FEB 14
South County Requires Fair Representation in Redistricting
FEB 12
Kamei Quits Board of Supervisor Race

Water District Sues San Martin Well Owner
FEB 10
"Cy" Mann voted into vacant water Board seat
FEB 5
Water District fires Zlotnick
FEB 3
Protest Forms to be mailed February 26
'scare tactics' included
JAN 22

Resolution Adopting Procedures for the Imposition of Groundwater Production Charges Including Majority Protest Procedure

JAN 15
Agricultural Water Rates May Increase

JAN 13
District Dips into Reserves to Fund Flood Project
JAN 12
District seeks to Fill Position
 JAN 08,2010
Well Owners Can Protest Well Tax
JAN 07,2010
The Golden Spigot is at it again
 DEC 24,2009
Water District makes Power Grab
DEC 16,2009
At 89, Sig Sanchez retires from 55 years of public service
DEC 15
Despite Ruling, District expects Payments

DEC 8

Yet Another Ratepayer is "Mad as Hell" at the Water District.

  Read Lisa Pampuch's

Open Letter to the Water District

NOV 30

WATER DISTRICT OWES $4.6M REFUND

NOV 30

  It appears that the Water District has squandered yet another opportunity to spend taxpayer's dollars wisely.  Cannot imagine why they decided to go with the costly Gold Street "Educational Center" when this perfect synergistic opportunity is available...

NOV 20

Water Rebate in Limbo

NOV 18

Parties Await Ruling

NOV 17

Water District Disputes Charges

District Lead Counsel to "retire"

Lead Santa Clara water District Lead Counsel Debra L. Cauble plans to retire from her position at the SCVWD.  Ms. Cauble leads a group of (5) attorneys plus support staff for the District.  She began working for the District in May, 2004, after departing her 6 years as Assistant County Counsel for the County of Santa Clara.  She studied for  her J.D. degree at Stanford University of Law (1975-1978), and a B.A in Sociology at the University of the Pacific (1971-1975)

(Perhaps they could use fewer attorneys if the District could stay out of trouble...)

NOV 14

Water District Denies Double Dipping Charge

NOV 10

Double Dipping by the Water District

The Court Case: Part II

NOV 01

Hot-button gazebo project gets water district's approval

OCT 29

Great Oaks Water Company Seeks $5M from SCV Water District

Private well owners likely due funds too.

OCT 27

BOD Meeting Notes

  After lengthy (and mostly speculative) discussion, and disagreement on numerous related issues, a motion was made and carried (4-2, Santos recused himself) approving the Gold Street Education Center at the Gold Street, Alviso location.

  Commendably opposed to this motion were Chair Sanchez, and Director Wilson voicing their strong opposition to the excessive and inflated associated expenses for no measurable incremental benefit. In addition, Director Wilson commented that "perhaps this project should never have been started in the first place"...

  Directors Estremera, Judge, Kwok and Kamei, voted in favor of the motion based primarily on the funds, time, and studies already expended.  Their intransigence and insistence on "moving forward with this project" - a 'damn the torpedoes attitude' is very disturbing.

  While viewing this 'hearing' this writer's opinion rests firmly upon the posit that this project was a 'done deal' among these four prior to this date.  Kamei made her usual "I wonder what" comments while not actually stating anything, Kwok made numerous nebulous statements further clouded by an obvious language barrier, Judge had nothing to add, and Estremera's consistent long-winded "off-the-cuff blustering" spoke of "commitment to the community" which in this case can only be interpreted  as 'committed to wasting taxpayer dollars'...

OCT 14

New law reins in "wild" District

  The passage and signing into law of AB466 - (Coto, D-San Jose) imposes numerous long overdue reforms on the Santa Clara Water District in an effort to prevent repeats of its indiscretions described in various Grand Jury Reports.

  Read the details HERE.

OCT 12

  The District's "Comparison of Cost Estimates for Educational Center Options in Alviso" is available on the Districts website under "Supporting Documentation" for the October 13, 2009 BOD meeting, Subject:  Gold Street Educational Center - Report of Project Options.  Take a close look at page 2 (of 4), and Table 1.  Click HERE for more information.

OCT 02

Board to consider raise for Water Directors

by Michael Moore

Morgan Hill Times

 SEPT 19

SEPT 22 Meeting Agenda Item 5.

Gold Street Educational Center Options

Recommendation:

1.  Receive information from staff regarding recent Board direction to explore opportunities for installing educational elements at the Alviso Marina County Park (County Marina); and

2.  Take one of the following actions:

     a.  Direct staff to pursue County Marina option, or

     b.  Formally approve the Gold Street Education

          Center Project as proposed on July 28, 2009;

          or

     c.  Direct staff to take other action.

 
AUG 18

 Just In

  According to reliable sources, the next portion of the District vs. Great Oaks has been delayed from September to November or December of this year.

  Originally planned for this September with the statement,"That there is not much new evidence to present", the brief delay will enable preparation for the presentation of "Significant additional evidence which has come to light."(Refer to this page, JUNE 22)


State Ponders Reshaping

Tenuous Water System


AUG 7

Wet Winter on Tap?


AUG 2

Trying Times for the Valley's

Golden Spigot

(A fig leaf for Rosemary Kamei?)


JULY 30

SCVWD receives $44.1 million

in federal stimulus money


JULY 28

SCVWD BOD MEETING

Agenda Item # 6

SUBJECT: Resolution to Adopt Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration and

Approve Project - Gold Street Educational Center, Project No. 30154028 (San Jose)

 

RECOMMENDATION:

1. Consider the potential environmental effects of the project as discussed in the Gold Street

Educational Center Final Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) (Attachment 2).


2. Adopt the Resolution adopting the final Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration and

Findings of Fact; and Adopting the Mitigation and Monitoring Program (Attachment 1).

 

3. Approve the Project.

 

Read the project details:

Click here, then:

 - select the 07/28/2009 meeting date in the left pane

 - scroll down to Agenda item #6, and click on it

 - click on the “Supporting Documents” list

 - click on the “all pages” .PDF file to download

  Read SJMN Columnist Scott Herhold’s "pre-meeting" comments from his column this morning:

More pork at water district


  Read Morgan Hill Times columnist, Michael Moore's "post-meeting" Tuesday  article:

Water district to consider controversial project


July 28 BOD Meeting Notes:

 If you were (un)fortunate enough to see, hear or attend the District BOD meeting this morning, you would have been astounded once again.

  Discussion on Agenda Item #6 (Gold Street Educational Center) wandered aimlessly for over an hour and a half on various unresolved issues which should have been discussed long before today’s vote.

  The kicker during this tedious ordeal is simply that in addition to an estimated (by district staff) $700,000.00 spent on consulting, research, studies, ad nauseum, the Water District never once previously considered the Alviso Marina County Park as a viable alternative site until this morning!  Why was it ignored? It is less than 1 mile distant from the proposed site!

  Director Wilson initiated the conversation steering the discussion towards Alviso Marina County Park, suggesting it as a more practical and cost effective alternative.

  Director Kwok pointed out that perhaps This county

park information should have been researched at the outset several years ago, before expending the $700,000.00 taxpayer dollars (so far), and asked staff many probing questions, most of which they were obviously ill-prepared to answer.

  Director Sanchez remarked several times that the proposed project appeared very costly, and indicated that staff return with more information concerning alternatives available in conjunction with County Parks and Recreation for the Alviso Marina site, and explore the chances of obtaining grant money for the Gold Street site.

  The Board voted in favor of accepting the related Gold Street site Environmental Report, but decided not to vote in favor of the Gold Street project itself until the requested additional information is made available.

  Staff and the other members of the Board appeared “stuck” on the Gold Street location most likely due to the time and money already invested in the project. 

 

Points of Interest

From the July 14 BOD Meeting

- District Response to the June 16, 2009 Grand Jury Report.

- Resolution nominating director Wilson to the Region 5 Board of the Association of California Water Agencies  (ACWA).

- Discussion of nominating a District Board member to the position of ACWA President or Vice-President.

- Consider CEO request to fill the unclassified position of Deputy Administrative Officer for the Office of Human Resources.


JULY 12, 2009

Read the District Initial Response to the 2008/09 Civil Grand Jury Report


  JUNE 18

12:22pm:  Several calls placed to the District today with regard to 2009 Water Production Statements  resulted in the following statement from the "Water Revenue" office:  "The case is in the courts, and the District has no intentions of making any changes at this time."


Can you say,

"Open Space District Class Action Lawsuit?"

(The Class prevailed, incidentally)

JUNE17,2009

2009 CIVIL GRAND JURY REPORT

 Santa Clara Valley Water District accused of being awash in cash while County and Cities drown in red ink

A scathing report just out Wednesday, June 17, 2009 by the Santa Clara Civil Grand Jury accuses the Santa Clara Water District of overspending, poor financial management, and in need of more oversight transparency and accountability.  The report continues with, ”Given the pervasive nature of the lax attitude toward any kind if fiscal control, it will take much more time and leadership from the board of Directors to make the needed impact on capital and operational spending”.

 

 * Read the entire online article:

 

  Take a few minutes to read these revealing reports.  You will be unpleasantly surprised.


Civil Grand Jury Reports

http://www.sccsuperiorcourt.org/jury/GJ/html

then select the report(s) that you want.
Report summaries are available on the
2009 Civil Grand Jury Report page
 
APRIL 23

 Great Oaks Water Co. vs. Santa Clara Valley Water District  Superior Court of the State of California Statement of Decision- Great Oaks Water Co. v. Santa Clara Valley Water District.

APRIL 24

Judge rules against Santa Clara Valley water fee 

SAN JOSE, Calif.—Water customers in Santa Clara County could be in for a refund after a judge ruled against Silicon Valley's biggest water provider.

-Associated Press

 Judge rules Silicon Valley water fee illegal; customers could get refunds 

Water charges illegal, judge rules

SCVWD arrogance uncovered in Court Loss

Read the District's response to the ruling


Excerpts from

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

GREAT OAKS WATER CO., Plaintiff, v. SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT, Defendant

Case No. 1-05-CV053142

Filed April 23, 2009

STATEMENT OF DECISION

 

1.    The District violated Proposition 218 by not securing

     proper voter approval.

 

2.  …the Court was convinced by the declaration and live

     testimony…that the District abused its discretion, and

     violated Section 26.3 of the District Act, when fixing

     the Plaintiff’s groundwater charges.

 

3.    The evidence also demonstrated that the Plaintiff was

     overcharged because of subsidies made for treated

     water and discounts given to agricultural water users.

 

4.   In support of the conclusion that the District incorrectly

     calculated Great Oaks groundwater charges was the

     independent audit  (Plaintiff’s 128) of April 2000 which

     indicated that the “District’s cost of service calculations

     may no longer be valid especially with respect to

     servicing North vs.  South County…the revenues

     recovered from one or more of the District’s  customer

     classes may be subsidizing those from other

     classes…the District should review its agricultural

     water pricing practice for adequacy and fairness.”

 

5.    The District did not change its policy in spite of the

     audit.

 

6.    The declaration and testimony also supports the

     determination that the Defendant abused its discretion

     with regards to spending.

 

7.    The District improperly used groundwater revenue for

     activities not within the scope of Section 26.3 of the

     Act.

 

8.    The District unwisely commingled groundwater

     revenue with other monies.

 

9.    The Defendant over-budgeted for employees, cost of

     equipment, and water contract purchases to the

     detriment of Great Oaks by placing the excess money

     in its reserve fund, thus the Plaintiff  was overcharged

     for groundwater fees and not credited back when

     appropriate.

 

10.   The District violated the District Act by improperly

     calculating the Plaintiff’s groundwater charges and

     inappropriate spending activities.


The entire District Act is available at:


 


ValleyWaterWatchdog.org
Morgan Hill, CA
95037

Content copyright . ValleyWaterWatchdog. All rights reserved.