Other Views: Hillcrest water conversion fair and equitable?

Yuba City has two Hillcrest water regions. Region 1 serves county residents. Region 2/3 serves some county residents. Region 1 citizens actively promoted conversion of Regions 1, 2 and 3 to surface water. It is not clear as to whether Region 1 or Region 2 new development will be required to pay any other fees, such as impact fees, to the city's water enterprise fund or share in any future expansion costs for the city's surface water treatment plant. It appears, that new development will only pay the same water rates the city residents pay. If so, who really benefits here?

Excessive arsenic and nitrates were the major issues used to convince Hillcrest water users to convert to surface water. According to the recent 2008 "Yuba City Water Quality Report," Region 2/3 arsenic was high, 9.3 ppb, but within EPA standards. However, Region 1 was 6.6 ppb — well within the EPA arsenic standard. Nitrate levels for Regions 1, 2 and 3 as reported in the 2007 and 2008 reports were well within the EPA standards.

City surface water arsenic levels were non-detectable in the 2007 report. In the 2008 report, arsenic levels averaged 1.38 ppb with a range to 3.1 ppb. What isn't generally known is that the city is using a well located at its surface water treatment (SWTP) to supplement its shortages of surface water. This well contains arsenic which is blended with surface water. At present, the city plans to drill one more well at the SWTP. How much will this increase the arsenic level? How will the city meet its goal for arsenic free surface water?

Some Hillcrest well water users complained about the odor of their water. In the 2007 and 2008 reports, none of wells nor surface water met the EPA odor standards. Yet this was a big issue for converting to surface water. In a city-produced flier sent to Hillcrest water customers titled "It's in Your Hands," it states that the city's water has less odor which was misleading based on either the 2007 or the 2008 report.

In the Lincoln East Specific Plan (LESP), a planned development just west of Sanborn Road, the question is raised about water availability. In the LESP's Water Supply Assessment (WSA), it was concluded that the city does not have enough secured surface water and ground water pumping capacity to meet future demands over the next 20 years during normal water demands. The LESP WSA suggests the use of well water in this development until sufficient surface water is available.

Throughout the Hillcrest protest, the city insisted it had sufficient water to meet its water needs. When questioned at a council meeting about replacing the Hillcrest well water supply with surface water, it was stated that the city had plenty of water - that it even sold water. As it turns out, this statement was misleading.

It appears that the city's intent is to keep the wells and use them as backup to the city's surface water supply. The city stated that the Hillcrest wells were of no benefit to the city. In fact, the wells were said to be such a problem that the city threatens to sell the wells to a private company. Was this just a calculated bluff to get the Hillcrest residents to submit to the surface water conversion at Hillcrest residents expense? Who benefits here?

According to the WSA, for planning purposes, the capacity of the groundwater system is assumed to be 3,600 AFA for Regions 1, 2 and 3. Recently it was reported that water could sell for as much as $275 an acre foot. Based on this, Hillcrest annual well water production could be valued as almost a million dollars per year. The amount and value of water from the other unused Hillcrest was not been discussed. Who benefits here?

If you feel that you have been misled and that it was not fair to be charged more than other city residents for your water, please contact Yuba City City Council.

Don Kessel is a resident of Yuba City's Walton area.