Water process lacks transparency

My family is voting “NO” on Measure I. We are deeply troubled by the fact that such a huge, untested and expensive water project will be built without sufficient time, trustable information and reliable analysis. Before the property owners have to vote on the issue, there should be a comprehensive and alternative water conservation program so the real water needs of the city can be more accurately assessed.

We are convinced by the arguments that the deep aquifer water is adequate in both quantity and quality to sustain the city over the next years, that we meet our wastewater discharge requirements now and do not need the surface water to do so, and that we will not lose the water permit to Sacramento River water.

At the same time, we are not persuaded that the Sacramento River surface water is of any better quality than the one of the deep aquifer. Where do the agricultural runoffs drain if not in the Sacramento River? Where is the chart comparing the water quality of the Sacramento River surface water and the deep aquifer water of Davis? The water intake for the Woodland-Davis plant is precisely where the water is contaminated with agricultural runoffs drains.

We are convinced that defeating Measure I is important to give us, the voters of Davis, time to work out an affordable and environmentally healthy plan with West Sacramento when and if it is necessary. A truly affordable plan is essential for us and the large number of student renters already faced with huge increases in costs for education.

Lastly, the convoluted formula for future water rates was determined from last year’s water use history compiled without the consumer’s informed consent regarding the city’s intention of using these data to charge us in the future. If this type of information is needed, then people should be notified in advance of the intention and calendar of the data compilation. We are dismayed by the lack of transparency of the whole process.

Linda and Stefano Varese

Davis