[Sosfbay-discuss] Santa Clara Valley Water District Board Hearingon Wednesday.

[Andrea Dorey]

I would be interested if they also cover small private water  
companies that seem to be so far UNregulated in the amount of water  
they remove from the local water tables.
Andrea

On May 3, 2009, at 3:27 PM, Caroline Yacoub wrote:

> I agree. We really need to get somebody on the Water Board. We need  
> to find someone who is interested, and they need to start going to  
> meetings.
> Caroline
>
> --- On Sat, 5/2/09, Eric A. Meece <eameece at sfo.com> wrote:
> From: Eric A. Meece <eameece at sfo.com>
> Subject: Re: [Sosfbay-discuss] Santa Clara Valley Water District  
> Board Hearingon Wednesday.
> To: "Green Discuss" <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org>
> Date: Saturday, May 2, 2009, 1:13 PM
>
> Good points. I think another basic problem with the district is the  
> way they
> charge us for water. It matters very little how much you use, in  
> relation to
> how much they charge. With the great need for water conservation,  
> you'd
> think they would charge on that basis like other utilities do. I  
> guess they
> claim special needs and priviledges, but I don't buy it.
> Eric the Green/Eric A. Meece
> former Treasurer, GPSCC
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Wes Rolley" <wrolley at refpub.com>
> To: "Green Discuss" <sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org>
> Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2009 9:04 AM
> Subject: [Sosfbay-discuss] Santa Clara Valley Water District Board  
> Hearingon
> Wednesday.
>
>
> > The Santa Clara Valley Water District held a special meeting on  
> Tuesday,
> > April 28th.  The purpose was to review the Annual Report on  
> Protection
> > and Augmentation of Water Supplies for 2009 and Recommended  
> Groundwater
> > Production Charges for Fiscal Year 2009 - 2010.  Copies of the  
> report at
> > http://tinyurl.com/c52q73
> >
> > The assumptions  on which the water  district report is based are
> > seriously flawed. They cite a snowpack number of 90% and the actual
> > reading last week was ~60%.   There are other problems, but that  
> is the
> > most obvious.
> >
> > Then, a circuit court judge in Santa Clara County has declared  
> that the
> > Water District's entire process of charging the owners of wells for
> > pumping water out of the aquifer is unconstitutional.  I have not
> > reviewed this decision in it's entirety, but it is of interest for
> > Morgan Hill, which acquires it's water from wells, pumping from the
> > aquifer that is recharged from water district maintained   
> percolation
> > ponds.
> >
> > The process of water governance is broken in California, maybe  
> more so
> > than the physical infrastructure (e.g. delta levees that have not  
> been
> > repaired in 50 years).
> >
> > The Water District will hold another review in Morgan Hill at the
> > Community Center on Wednesday Evening.  I would like to see a good
> > turnout.  This is not just a Morgan Hill issue... so come on down.
> >
> > More than that, I believe we need to have more Greens become  
> actively
> > involved with the Water issues.  As we look at elections in 2010, it
> > would be great to have Greens running for one of the seats on the  
> board
> > that are up for re-election.  Given the seriousness of the issue, we
> > also need to make sure that this becomes an issue for those  
> Supervisors
> > who are up for re-election or replacement (Don Gage is term limited
> > out... Pat Dando rumored to be interested in running.)  The Board of
> > Supervisors appoints 2 members of the 7 member board and that is a
> > determining factor in maintaining the status quo.  Currently, the
> > appointees are old politicians like Sig Sanchez who need to be  
> reclining
> > in their rocking chairs at home rather than sleeping through
> > presentations at board meetings (as has been described to me.)
> >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> > sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> > http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
>
> _______________________________________________
> sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss
> _______________________________________________
> sosfbay-discuss mailing list
> sosfbay-discuss at cagreens.org
> http://lists.cagreens.org/mailman/listinfo/sosfbay-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cagreens.org/pipermail/sosfbay-discuss_lists.cagreens.org/attachments/20090504/31f8e8d1/attachment.html>