Community Meeting this Thursday Night at 6:30 at the Rolling Hills Fire Station

This Thursday there will be a presentation by Bakman Water Co to explain his proposal.  I will be posting my personal thoughts, on my personal blog, regarding the proposal after the meeting.

Update on 10/11/17

I’ve been getting a lot of inquiries from residents wondering what is going on with the water system; after our majority vote for Calwater on 9/7/17.

Cal Water   120

Bakman Water 43

Madera County   9

Delay the vote    8

Any Private company!  2

After requests from Bakman Water for 30 more days to assess the water system.  Supervisor Frazier agreed he would give Bakman Water 30 days, after our last meeting to submit a proposal. What I have heard is that Bakman has turned in a draft to Supervisor Frazier, but is still finalizing his numbers.  He plans to meet with Frazier and discuss the plan.

This is all the news I have.  We are waiting to see what the plan entails and when the Supervisor plans hold a meeting.  At this time, the only thing we can do is wait and call our supervisor.  He is having a townhall meeting in the Ranchos on Thursday October 26th at 8:30am at the Ranchos Cafe. If you want to ask him in person.

Update on research...

With the big meeting on the horizon, residents have been doing their due diligence through research, and forwarding it to me. There have been a few discoveries I would like to share with you.  First, I would like to share a concern related to the Madera Ranchos Water Company Inc.   Second, I would like to share the two most recent financial reports for Calwater and Bakman Water Company.

It has been brought to our attention that a privately owned water company called Madera Ranchos Water Company Inc. was sold to Madera County approximately 20 yrs ago. The Ranchos Independent, has an article printed in 2014, explaining the history of the Ranchos water system (Link), and the article states that in 1996 the county purchased the water system from the Madera Ranchos Water Company Inc. for $350k.

On a document registered with the SOS, (link) it shows Francis H. Ferraro as the CEO of the Madera Ranchos Water Company Inc.  A concern has been brought up regarding a connection with Francis S Ferraro who retired as an officer of Cal Water in 2016.  He is now a Manger of Special Projects, and has represented Cal Water in meetings regarding the Rolling Hills water system. This publication shows the current officers and directors of Cal Water. (Link)  

I contacted Francis S. Ferraro by email to inquire about the connection. Mr. Ferraro expressed that he has never been involved in the operations of Madera Ranchos Water Company Inc., however, his father was.  He shared that his father sold the system, but had to take it back after it was sold when the new owner did not operate it correctly; he then proceeded to sell it to the county.  Additionally, Mr. Ferraro stated he would be available at the meeting to answer any questions.

My analysis is this, regardless to who was involved in the Madera Ranchos Water Company 20 years ago.  Calwater is not one person, it is large corporation, with a strong accountable history. (Link)  In this financial report it shows there are many directors and officers, and over 1000 employees, they provide water to over 2 million customers and to over 100 communities. The company is profitable and shows a profit of over $40 million per year. (Link to CPUC website 2015 Annual Report). (Link to Financial Report)  Bakman on the other hand, who is a great guy, is only showing a profit of less than $9k for the year ending 2015, according to this financial report found on the CPUC website, and other years at a negative profit.  (Link to Financial Report 2015 on CPUC website) (Link to 2010, 09, 08 report found on CPUC website)

Below is a Statement from an Association Member, who asked me to add this to the Pros and Cons.

"I believe Bakeman is going to be running Riverstone Development, 

Riverstone is how I think his business is doubled in the past 12 month.

We can not tie together with Riverstone unless we pay many thousands in hookup fees per home.

This is because Riverstone would have to cut the number of homes in their subdivision to be able to give us water.

That leaves us where we are right now 335 connections paying for infrastructure wells and the whole mess.

CalWater I believe will be operating the water system for Gunner Ranch subdivision.

Gunner as part of a settlement in a legal action does not have to count any water they provide to either Rolling Hills or Children's Hospital against what they can pump.

Stability is one of the drivers in my decision.

If Bakeman dies where are we. Calwater could lose a dozen employees and another would step up.

Property values:

I refer to Calwater as the PG&E of water companies.

If I am selling my house and the buyer wants to know who provides my power and I say PG&E, end of discussion

If I am selling my house and I tell them I get my power from AAA power Company, I will be providing documents all week." 

Below is an Interesting video of Calwater just in case your interested.

Update on Meeting this Thursday Sept. 7th at 7:00pm

Basically all RH residents have the same common goal:

We want a reliable, stable, and trouble free water system at a fair price.  We want these problems related to water delivery, to be a thing of the past, and we do not want to hear about the details of why our water system doesn’t work, or that we need to raise more capital to repair or improve our water system.

We want to “Re-Green” our community and increase our property values back to where they should be, if we had a reliable and trouble free water system.  Or we at least, want a company that we can trust and hold accountable to keep our water system in good order.

We want a company that knows what they are doing, has the capital ready to fix the problems immediately, when they arise, and we don’t want hear about the details.  We want a company that has their management in order with extensive experience, a good reputation, reliable, and has the financial resources to keep us in water.

Below is a table showing what arguments have been vocalized either for or against the proposed options.  These are arguments people have expressed, and may not be 100% accurate.  These are the arguments I have heard; which is hearsay...  This is why it is important that you attend the meeting on September 7^th to hear from the presenters, and decide for yourself what you think.

Again, please be warned, this comparison has different opinions and viewpoints. I tried to be fair to all sides, however I have a vested interest, and therefore a strong belief in what path is best for our community.   It’s important you are at the meeting to get first-hand information from the companies themselves.  Please remember the vote this Thursday is non-binding, it is only to give our supervisor an indication of what path the rate-payers want the B.O.S. to pursue.  Basically the vote is between two options Calwater and Bakman; I have not met one person, who would consider "staying with the county" not even "The County Employees Recommend It"

Options	Pro Arguments	Con Arguments
County Owned	1.     They can’t raise rates without a 218 election.	1.     Proposed 7.7m additional bond needed, resulted from the engineering study 2.     Their track record with the RH Water System, has multiple failures. 3.     They cannot make major improvements without raising more capital and holding a 218 election. 4.     All the costs of any improvements must be financed by the 335 RH rate payers only. 5.     They can, and have before sued homeowners who refused to vote in a rate increase.  http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/article19537395.html
CalWater	Some Proponents Claim: 1.       Combining our water system with 6,000 rate payers in the Selma water system, which would disperse the cost of capital improvements among 6335 rate payers versus the 335 in Rolling Hills Only 2.       CalWater is willing to make a substantial investment in our water infrastructure and has committed to do so in writing. 3.       CalWater has pledged to investigate the lowest cost solutions applicable first, however willing to spend the higher proposed amount; if necessary. 4.       Low income Program LIRA, as high as 50% deduction in the monthly rate. 5.       CalWater has the resources to invest in improvements when an emergency occurs. CalWater has more than 509,000 customer connections, more than $400 million in annual revenue, and more than $1.5 billion in gross utility plant assets. 6.       CalWater has teams of engineers, who work on water quality issues daily, they have more experts who can find solutions to our water quality issues. 7.       They have the legal experts, on call and already on retainer, who can find solutions to difficult legal problems; as they did with the existing county bond debt. 8.       They have been working with county council to find a solution to the requirement of retiring the current $3.7m bond.  These solutions required considerable time and investment by Calwater.  It is highly unlikely this type of solution would have ever been discovered without Calwater’s investment. 9.       They may acquire additional assets in the close vicinity, which could interconnect our water system with others for redundancy 10.   Calwater states that Bakman Water is also regulated by the PUC, therefore follow the same rate setting guidelines in relation to a percentage over investment. 11.   The proposed unmetered rate of $118 month is fair and with the low income program it could be substantially less for those who qualify.	Some Opponents claim: 1.       CalWater is guaranteed a 9% profit by the state, therefore they are incentivized to spend more money on improvements then necessary, in order to raise rates & increase their profits. 2.       Calwater will not look for the most efficient solutions, because they make more by spending more. 3.       Calwater is a big corporation with massive overhead, which will costs rate payers more than a small company, with less management. 4.       Some residents don’t want to be tied to the Selma water district, whose rates are based on smaller parcel sizes.
Bakman Water & Investment Group	Some Proponents Claim: 1.       Bakman Water Company and his new investment partners.  Would find more efficient cost effective solutions.  Which would save ratepayers money by spending less on improvements, therefore charging less in water rates. 2.       They are not guaranteed a profit by the state public utility commission, because they are a smaller company, which will cause them to be more efficient in finding solutions. This would result in them investing less in capital improvements, therefore saving us money in lower rates. 3.       Bakman’s thinking outside the box, and thrifty solutions will be more efficient, and take less money. They are faster solutions, and these creative solutions could get us off water restrictions faster than CalWater will. 4.       They are local and they are customers love them 5.       Bakman Water Company has doubled in size during the past 12 months	Some Opponents claim: 1.       Bakman Water Company has substantially less financial resources: According to this CPUC 2014 audit of financial year ending 2010 (The most recent financial report I could find). The company had 2500 customers & less than 5 million in Assets, $1.7 m in revenue, ending in a total operating loss for 2010 of $112k 2.       Bakman and his New Investment group may be less stable, there is no track record showing this new proposed ownership structure and their ability to effectively work together in the long-term. 3.       The Bakman Plan would leave us, under the same structure as we are now, having 335 rate payers absorbing the capital improvements versus 6335 rate payers under the Calwater plan. 4.       There is more capital, experts, redundancy, and more stability with CalWater, and the proposed rate is fair; in addition there is the low income assistance program. 5.       If they are growing that fast, there are usually growing pains, with hiring many new employees, training them and etc.  Furthermore if they doubled in size, they are still small, in comparison.

Save the Date (Sept 7th) for the Water Vote

Save the Date!  September 7^th at 6:30pm (stay tuned for more details)

Chester will be sending out more details soon, we are waiting on the finalized agenda from Supervisor Frazier’s office.  However I decided to get this out now, to give a heads up.  There will be a big association meeting on Thursday September 7^th at 6:30.  It’s critical that everyone tries to make this meeting; regarding the future of RH Water.  We will hear about our 3 different water options and we will take a vote at the end of the meeting.  This vote is not a binding vote on Madera County.  However, it will be a vote to demonstrate the direction our community residents want our supervisor and the B.O.S. to pursue.  Supervisor Frazier wants to get a strong sense of what direction the community desires.  

At this meeting you will hear about the three options: 

1) Stay with County 

2) Support of County to Sell the System to CalWater 

3) Support of County to Sell the System to Bakman Water and his investment partners

Again, It's Important that you attend!

Overview: Basically all RH residents have the same common goal: (My Opinion)

We want a reliable, stable, and trouble free water system at a fair price.  We want these problems related to water delivery, to be a thing of the past, and we don’t want to hear about the details of why our water system doesn’t work, or that we need to raise more capital to repair or improve our water system.

We want to “Re-Green” our community and increase our property values back to where they should be, if we had a reliable and trouble free water system.  Or at least, a company that we could trust and hold accountable to keep our water system in good order.

We want a company that knows what they are doing, has the capital ready to fix the problems, immediately, when they arise, and we don’t want hear about the details.  We want a company that has their management in order with extensive experience, a good reputation, reliable, and has the financial resources to keep us in water.

June 29th Update on Water

Update on 6/29/2017

I’m sure everyone is wondering what the status is on our water system:

On June 19^th, Calwater issued a letter of interest to Supervisor Frazier expressing their interest in taking over our water system.  They mentioned normally they wouldn’t be interested in a system of our size, however due to all the development in our area, they are willing to take on our system and the deal would be kept separate from any other acquisitions through Madera County.

·        The rates are projected to be somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 to $125 per month, depending on if you use a lot of water.

·         Their projection of an average household use for our area, based on lased year’s usage, was 21,000 cf per household.  Therefore on their proposed rate schedule (which is the same as Selma’s) the average monthly cost (based on last year’s use) would be approx. $102 per month. 

·         Of course some months higher some lower, that is the estimated average.  They said they could offer a balance payment plan, for those who prefer more consistent monthly payment.  In addition, they have a low-income program for discounted rates to those who qualify.  For example, if you qualify for the PG&E low income program, you should qualify for Calwater's.

·         In a meeting with Calwater, they plan to make an investment in our water system of up to 2 million, if needed, to replace the arsenic treatment facility and upgrade infrastructure to make our system reliable.  By reliable, I mean IN FULL COMPLIANCE, You can water your lawns, your property values will go up!  You can sell your home, honestly, if you so choose to.

·        Calwater's attorneys believe we should not have to pay off the bond debt to sell the system, contradictory to what the county council advises.  Therefore presently, the county council is reviewing the legal requirements and reviewing the citations of Calwater’s attorneys.

·         We will have a public meeting when this is figured out. Please keep in mind, even if we stayed with the county for water, they are pushing for a rate increase (similar, or more than the amount Calwater is projecting here), and I believe they would not contribute as much as Calwater is willing to; towards the capital improvements. (Nor correctly).

In addition, there is still hope that we might get a backup well connection from the Gunner property, they were testing it last week and the output is over 1000 gallons per minute.  Supervisor Frazier thinks the county might start working on making a connection to this well, to our system; soon.  They are waiting on test results now.  All that prep work we were seeing on lanes bridge and 10, might have been for us; so we need to be appreciative of that; and cross our fingers we can have access to this well; if the water quality tests come back accordingly.

Right now we are still in a wait mode.  I will let you know as soon as all is ready for community discussion.

Update on Calwater Evaluation

Here it is about 3 weeks after our big association meeting, where the members who were present unanimously voted to pursue a partnership with a large water company, with financial strength, such as Calwater.  I am sure many of you are very concerned and are wondering if any progress is being made about our water situation.  It can be uneasy sitting on the sidelines waiting for answers to such important questions.   Questions such as: what is happening in regards to our most precious resource; a resource which we all so desperately depend on?  You may be wondering is anything being done to fix this problem?  As I promised at the meeting, “I would be all over it,” and I would keep in frequent communications with Calwater and the County, on the behalf of our community.

The purpose of this post is an attempt to reassure you that the wheels are turning and there is a strong possibility that we can once again have our neighborhoods green, with beautiful green grass for our mature landscapes, and the healthy trees we would expect from our wonderful Rolling Hills.  For the first time, in a long time, I have hope we may find a possible solution to our water problems; in a relatively quick fashion.   In addition, we could have a company with resources, who knows what they are doing at the controls.  When I say relatively quick, I mean by next spring.

Lets face it, and I think we all came to this very realization at the last association meeting, we cannot take chances on our water system, and time is of the essence.  Some members at the association meeting expressed, “what good is it to try and save money, while our trees are dying and our landscapes look like deserts?” What is our community worth, and what are our houses are worth, if we cannot use the water we need for ourselves and our landscapes?

Since our association meeting, there have been three meetings between Calwater and the County.  Which I had the honor of sitting in on.  On Wednesday May 24, Tuesday May 30, and Monday June 5^th.  At the first meeting between Brett Frazier, Norman Allinder, and Bill Cambell, the county reassured us they are sincere about possibility releasing control of the water system.  Calwater would not usually consider taking over a system, as small as ours, by itself.  However they are seriously considering taking us on, because of the additional growth surrounding us, and a few projects they are looking at which are not too far away.   The county shared there may be other county systems available for transition to Calwater.  However, it was re-affirmed that Rolling Hills is of the highest priority and the county as well as all stakeholders understand; we want to keep our system agreement independent; not dependent on any other system acquisitions.

At the next meeting on May 30^th the Chief Executive Officers of Calwater came down, drove the neighborhood and then met with County folks at Mr Fraziers office.    CEO’s from Calwater asked questions to feel out the county’s intentions.  I was at the meeting, it felt as though the executives were satisfied with the answers and somewhat interested in taking on this project.  However they are concerned about the condition of our system, and the financial debt our system has.  This appeared to be an initial exploratory session; where the exec’s were evaluating the opportunity and future area opportunities.  They were taking this time to evaluate if this is and avenue they would consider pursuing.

At the most recent meeting, on Monday June 5^th, Calwater sent out its engineering team to meet with county public works staff; they traveled to each well site at Rolling Hills, and their engineers took pictures and asked questions to county staff about the operations of the system.  Now they will write up an analysis of our water system, and submit and evaluation to Calwater exec’s.  They will use this report to explore the needs of our rolling hills waters system; both current and future.  Then they will make a decision in regards to if they are willing to take on our water system or not?

As I mentioned, I will keep everyone informed of any new developments and I will stay on top of this situation; as I have developed some solid relationship with the decision makers involved.

Below is an example of the rates Average, High, and Low usage (prepared by Eric Olsen) Based on Calwater's proposed rate schedule.

Last Night's Association Meeting

Thank you to everyone who attended the meeting last night.  It was quite a bit of information!  The county's public works director was there to remind us that we are still on water restrictions, because well 3 is still having Arsenic treatment problems. They are ramping up their citation efforts. If there is any good news, it would be they did get well 3 back online Thursday at just under ½ its rated output.  At the meeting we also learned from Eric more about the Budget and the many problems of unexplained expenses, increased operating costs, and unaudited financials.  John also presented some options with Tri-County Bank to pay off your bond debt early and save money.

 

At the meeting we presented 3 options to the association:  Calwater, Create Our Own Water Company, or stay with the County.  The members present were unanimously in favor of pursuing an agreement with Calwater.   Bill from Calwater spoke about his Corporation and how they operate.  He said they are regulated by the PUC and can only set rates, so they can see a profit of approximately 9% above their capital expenditures.  This means 9% above what they spend on our water system infrastructure.  Not, 9% on top of the routine maintenance.  Calwater has the resources and deep pockets to come in and make the capital improvements we need.   Bill from Calwater mentioned when making capital improvements they are generally less expensive than cost of a county project.  Bill states, when their is a problem, they fix it.  Its cheaper for them to fix it, then to have complaints and fines from the PUC.  Plus they have their reputation to protect, they do not want to devalue their stock.

Members spoke about their dissatisfaction with our current conditions, dead yards, devalued and ugly streets, their kids cant play outside because its full of stickers!  Many members are disgusted and fed-up with us having water restrictions; especially in a record rainfall, and surrounded by others who have the water to build new homes and water their crops.  Members say, they just cant understand what is happening to their once beautiful neighborhood. Other members spoke of their experience with Calwater and their relatives who have Calwater, as a water company, and their satisfaction.  Other members spoke of their extreme dissatisfaction with the county.  Not one person voted to stay with the county.  

I am in frequent communication with Bill at Calwater, Mr Frazier, and the Public Works Folks, and we will work on this tirelessly to get us a proposal within the next 6 to 8 weeks.  Bill says he needs that long to get his engineers out here to write up the analysis of our system and prepare an acquisition package.  Once we have this, your board members will let the association members know more details.  A realistic goal would be to get Calwater on our system correcting mistakes of the county by September and getting off restrictions by next spring.

PS  Some members expressed concern regarding the ones who pre-paid the bond.  Just to clarify,  Bill did answer on that.  There will be an equitable settlement for the ones that prepaid.  Most likely the 50 will get a refund, or some equitable credit.  Not to worry.  

Update: Monday 5/22/17 Bill tells me hes setting up a small team of engineers to come out within the next 2 weeks; ill keep you posted.

Continued Water Restrictions

On my last post, in early April, we were hearing we would soon get our, 2 days a week, watering allowance; as the Ranchos did.  In that post, I emphasized it would not be for sure, until we all received our letter in the mail from public works.  Apparently, we are not getting off stage 3.5 No outdoor watering, unless on drip.

I periodically inquired into when we would receive this notice, and I kept hearing.  It should be soon, they were in the process of doing some fine tuning or adjustments on well 3 and the Arsenic treatment plant, and as soon as that was done we should get our notice; approximately 2 weeks.

However, today I received news from Frazier’s staff.  They are having trouble getting the Arsenic treatment plant to work properly and the levels are too high to meet state requirements, therefore they cannot put well 3 back online. 

This means we are running our water system on just 1 well (well #2), and now they are panicked, because we had a low water alert on our storage tank, this Monday; we were down to 8 ½ feet of water on the storage tank.  Apparently, they claim that pump 2 is pumping 24/7 and was not keeping up with demand earlier this week.

I personally drove over to the tank this morning, and it appears the tank is full again.  However we are pushing the 1 well and pump we have online, hard; and we need to be aware of that. 

This is very upsetting.  There is a breakdown in communication between the people we pay to manage our water system and us.  These are issues that were not revealed, until now.  Once again, when we can’t keep up with demand and are experiencing a problem.  Now they are driving the streets in the morning to see water in the streets and finding people watering their yards.  They want to remind us that we are still on water restrictions, and they are doing everything they can to get water.

Please plan to attend tomorrow night’s Association meeting, to hear more about these issues.  Brett will not be there, due to meetings in Sacramento.   However Ahmad from public works will be there to answer questions.  In addition, we will be sharing committee research information.

Water Restrictions

We are hearing from sources at the county, that we shall soon be allowed for outdoor watering two days per week again.   However it will not be official until you receive notification in the mail.  Some of the reasons for this are the county’s plans to make some adjustments on our arsenic treatment facilities; which should increase our capacity.  In addition, due to the strong snow pack and increased rain this year, the water levels are looking much better.  

The RHCA Board continues to explore solutions and welcomes volunteers to help research long-term solutions.  We also plan to be involved in the county’s rate study, once they have the study prepared for discussion.  We will keep you posted, once the details of this study are revealed.  We appreciate your patience, and welcome your involvement. 

Water and Volunteers? Are we still on restrictions?

Hello,

I am often asked by residents, "what is going on with our water?"  This leads me to believe many of you are wondering the same thing.  Therefore I would like to give you my current viewpoint on the situation, and encourage you to participate in potential solutions.  The Rolling Hills Citizen's Association is now looking for volunteers to participate in one of four committees (see the previous post). Even if you feel you do not have much to contribute, there is a committee you can join to help spread the word to the residents who live next to you. 

Here is my take on our current situation:

Are we going to get off stage 3.5 "No Turf Watering" by this spring or summer?

I do not see that happening, and here's why.  

Basically there are 3 alternatives:  

1) Stay with the county 

2) Privatize 

3) Sell out to a large water corporation.  

At this time we cannot get off restrictions this year with option 1 or 2 (details below), so that leaves option 3 as the avenue which would get us off restrictions the fastest. However many people are leery of selling out to a water corporation, losing so-called control, and most would want that to be fully vetted.  So that means no immediate solutions. Therefore the board is asking for volunteers to help with the vetting and to explore these options; including the county's financial management of our funds, and the water bond debt.  Will you please assist us, and join one of the committees? (previous post, scroll down this page)

Below I give you a more detailed explanation of we we are still in this situation (Water Restrictions):

1. The State Waterboard and the County will not remove the restriction, until we have a backup water source.  The state regulations say "community water systems, must meet peek water demand during our highest month of demand" WITH IT'S TOP PRODUCING WELL (SOURCE) OFF-LINE. This means that we have to find a backup source of potable water, before getting off restrictions.
2. The county states that our water system revenue is not high enough to make any capital improvements, (like another well) and we were already granted and emergency loan from the general fund last year to rehab a well and get us back on-line from one well to two. This loan helped us to get off the NO OUTDOOR WATERING (4) to Trees and Bushes only via drip (3.5). This loan is still unpaid, and there will be no more county loans until a rate study is completed and a rate increase is passed on our water system via a 218 election.  If there is no rate increase passed, we will stay on restrictions; furthermore if one of our current wells breaks down we will be back on No OUTDOOR WATERING (4); with no further emergency loans until a rate increase is passed by the voters.
3. As mentioned at the last association meeting in January, we can not privatize our water system from the county, without paying off the $3.1m bond debt first.  
4. The Gunner Well...  The gunner well option Brett spoke of at the January meeting is an attempt at negotiating an agreement with Richard Gunner to use that well (existing) as a back up source.  There are 2 issues with this: 1) References were made that if we were to gain access to that well, we may be required to approve the county to sell the system to Calwater.com; the company Gunner is negotiating with to run his wells.  2) Brett informs me that negotiations with Richard Gunner are currently at a stand still.  In my opinion, regardless of getting the Gunner well or not, the county wants either the rate increase, to manage the long-term improvements we need, or to get us over to a water corporation; and release themselves of the burden.  At this juncture, I don't see the majority of us ready to do either. 

Now It's time for all of you who want to help explore solutions, to get involved.  Please contact the board member below who is leading the committee you are best suited for.

Water System Research Volunteers Needed

Rolling Hills Citizens Association is looking for some ANSWERS!

Will you help us find them?

Will you participate in one of these groups?

GROUP 1- Where did our Water District money go?

The Financial Accountability Committee will examine the Water District financial statements Madera County has provided us. We are looking for volunteers with experience reading financial documents who can help us research the financial reports of our water system and discuss the details of the research with County Supervisors and/or their staff.

CONTACT ERIC OLSEN:  emolsen1@gmail.com or 559- 960-4285.       

GROUP 2- What are our Options for Water System Ownership?

The Options Committee will investigate water system ownership options, including privatization, water companies regulated by the PUC, and remaining under Madera County control.  These options will be compared and contrasted, in order to present those findings to the Board and Association members. We are looking for volunteers with experience in any of these areas: online research, phone research, business management, budgeting, or spreadsheets.

CONTACT DAVID FRISBY:   instructordavid@gmail.com

Or ROSEANN GALVAN:   roseroller@yahoo.com or 559-906-3696.

GROUP 3- How can we get rid of our Bond Debt?

The Bond Committee will investigate the documents regarding our 2008 improvement bond. We are looking for volunteers who have experience with loans, bonds, or with finance options.  Is the bond assumable? Can we find another way to finance our debt? Are their resources that individuals could use to pay off their share of the debt?  

CONTACT JOHN DAVIES:   559-438-8839.

GROUP 4- How do we get the neighborhood mobilized?

The Organizing Committee will build a network of relationships to communicate with RHCA members across the entire neighborhood and reach out to neighbors who are unaware or uninvolved. We are looking for volunteers who enjoy talking with their neighbors and want to see them involved in solving our water issues.   

CONTACT CHESTER GOODALE:  559-360-9432 or rollinghills.citizens@gmail.com

We hope to hear from you by March 5th!

That way we can begin working at our March 9th Board Meeting!

10/20/16 Update

***Update 10/20/16

Hello!

Interesting meeting last Thursday, and congratulations to our 3 new board members, Eric, Chester, and Roseann!  

I have some additional information regarding the Water.  I spoke with Kassy today. She thinks if we did form a Mutual Water Company, we could be eligible for a low interest rate loan of under 2% from State Revolving Water Fund.  In addition, she seems to think we are at a low risk for future legislation affecting our water system; in regards to water balancing (Water Sustainability Act)

She says systems approximately under 1000 connections are in the "White Area", and not required to meet as stringent water balancing requirements.  However some of the main concerns for any permit approval issued to operate a "private" Mutual Water Company" would be that our source capacity meet guidelines, our operations management be in order, sustainability: rates reflect operations and infrastructure needs, plan to meet the meter mandates, and conservation plan.   

Brett responded today that he will get us outstanding debt amount of CSA19

___________________________________________________________________________

Below are some links from the state water board and info on mutual water companies.  

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/drinking_water/services/funding/documents/srf/dwsrf_brochure.pdf

Here is the link to the information on the available funding.

It will take me a little more time to gather the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act information.  I will forward the information once I am able to determine answers to your questions.

Thanks,

Kassy D. Chauhan, P.E.

Senior Sanitary Engineer – Merced District

From: Ramsden, Bruce@Waterboards
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 10:35 AM
To: instructordavid@gmail.com
Subject: SWRCB DDW Links

David, nice talking with you this morning, and I hope I have answered most of your questions. 

IN the meantime, here are the links to pages we discussed today.

Below, is what I consider our “home” page, and it provides links to various topics we discussed (California Waterworks Standards Regulations) and most likely a lot we did not.

http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/drinking_water/programs/index.shtml

Here is a link to the specific page you were asking me about regarding, “what should a water system prepare for in the future that may impact water quality, monitoring, treatment and NEW regulated contaminates that systems are required to monitor for.”  It is a page about upcoming regulations (from home page to the quick link for Regulations and Statutes, then the link at the bottom, “Upcoming Regulations for Drinking Water and Recycled Water.”

http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/drinking_water/certlic/drinkingwater/Regulations.shtml

https://privatewaterlaw.com/2011/02/18/california-mutual-water-company-basics/

http://calmutuals.org/about-mutuals/

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=corp&group=14001-15000&file=14300-14307