Diana Jensen, principal civil engineer with the Davis Public Works Department, shows Elaine Roberts-Musser corroded pipes and sediment from Davis' water wells after a community meeting Thursday on proposed utility increases. Wayne Tilcock/Enterprise photo

The proposed water rate hikes and surface water project are about long-term planning and “risk management,” city officials said Thursday night at an informational forum in West Davis.

About 35 people attended the forum, which kicks off a series of meetings planned for different neighborhoods over the next few weeks, and the tenor in the room was one of inquisitiveness. Questions included:

* Other than sourcing river water, what are the city’s options for complying with water regulations?

* Is it possible to minimize the cost impact to ratepayers by stretching the rate increases beyond five years?

* What would happen if ratepayers succeed in stopping the rate hikes with a majority protest?

* Can the city delay the project until the economy picks up?

Utilities manager Jacques DeBra said it is a risk management game. The water rate increases, expected to nearly triple over the next five years, will fund the design and build-out of the Woodland-Davis Clean Water Project.

Upon completion, which is slated for 2017, the project would pump surface water from the Sacramento River to be treated in Woodland and piped to homes and businesses in both cities.

Davis’ cost share of the estimated $325 million project is about $160 million.

The cities historically have relied on groundwater, but increasingly stringent state and federal regulations prompted local leaders 20 years ago to look into developing a more reliable and sustainable long-term water supply system.

It is about getting the most value for the money.

“Cost is important, but it’s also about having a flexible system over time,” DeBra said.

In other words, the choice is to invest a big chunk of money at the front end or pay for less expensive Band-Aid fixes and delay the switch to surface water.

The latter choice ultimately may cost more for several reasons, he said. Construction costs and interest rates are currently very low, and may be much higher in a few years. Additionally, if water quality stays the same, the city may be in violation of water discharge regulations in 2017 and likely will incur fines.

Payment of fines may be postponed five years — but not waived — if the city makes a good case for why it was unable to comply, Interim Public Works Director Bob Clarke said. However, Clarke said, an official at the Central Valley State Water Regional Control Board told him fees are typically deferred for communities that are smaller and less financially capable than Davis.

According to the official, he said, the fact that Davis has a plan in motion to source surface water demonstrates the city is well-situated to complete the project.

“We would have a tough argument to make,” Clarke said.

Ratepayers can try to stop the fee increases by submitting a written protest to City Hall by Sept. 6, which is the date the City Council has set for a public hearing on the subject. If there is a majority protest of all ratepayers in Davis, the city cannot impose the higher fees.

If the fees don’t pass, the council will have to decide what to do, Clarke said. The city likely will need to start a new Proposition 218 process, which is the law that allows ratepayers to protest fee increases, to pay for the basic operations and maintenance costs of the “status quo,” Clarke said.

The City Council may decide to drill more wells to maintain supply and meet water quality regulations, which could cost $20 million to $50 million over the next few years, he said. Wells are not a long-term reliable source because the city has to continually dig new, deeper wells to find acceptable-quality groundwater, he said.

“There will be a cost increase. It’s just a matter of whether it’s a long-term solution or will it be short-term solution, which will have a cost to it,” Clarke said. “It’s a complicated jigsaw puzzle.”

It is possible to stretch the rate increases beyond five years, but that would affect the cost and make the project more expensive, DeBra said.

Other than sourcing surface water, another way to meet discharge requirements is to treat the used, lesser-quality groundwater using a reverse-osmosis system. That option would be significantly more expensive to build and operate, Principal Civil Engineer Diana Jensen said.

It also means ratepayers would not be able to enjoy the benefits of softer water, which would come from sourcing quality water in the beginning of the use cycle.

The Clean Water Agency has set up an information hot line to respond to questions at (530) 405-3500. Community members also can attend any of the city’s informational forums scheduled through July. Each meeting starts at 7 p.m.:

* June 30: Tandem Properties Building, 3500 Anderson Road, North Davis;

* July 14: Redwood Park Meeting Room, 1001 Anderson Road, Central Davis;

* July 21: Fire Station 33, 425 Mace Blvd., South Davis; and

* July 28: Wildhorse Golf Club Clubhouse, 2323 Rockwell Drive., East Davis.

— Reach Crystal Lee at [email protected] or (530) 747-8057.

water2bW

Diana Jensen, principal civil engineer with the Davis Public Works Department, shows Grazia Jaroff a large sample water bill during a community meeting Thursday on proposed rate increases. Wayne Tilcock/Enterprise photo

water2aW

Michael Lindquist, senior civil engineer with the Davis Public Works Department, talks about wastewater treatment upgrades during a community meeting Thursday at Stonegate Country Club on proposed water rate increases. Wayne Tilcock/Enterprise photo

water1aW

Diana Jensen, principal civil engineer with the Davis Public Works Department, shows Elaine Roberts-Musser corroded pipes and sediment from Davis’ water wells after a community meeting Thursday on proposed utility increases. Wayne Tilcock/Enterprise photo

Comments

comments