Fortuna Exchange

What the engineer said

2011-10-16T12:01:00.000-07:00

Simple sloution

2011-10-16T11:52:00.000-07:00

Should Water Revenue Bonds be spent on this new tank?

2011-10-15T17:27:00.000-07:00

Many of us have home loans, the repayment of that debt is guaranteed by the house. Bonds are debt. To sell the revenue bonds we had to show we had the revenue to make the interest and principle payments. This debt is guaranteed by payment of our water bills. The Council passed Resolution 2006-25 telling us what the bond money would be used for. In general terms, here is how staff explained it--

In one sense the proposed tank is a replacement project, but is it an improvement without consideration to future development? This is a storage project, so the question is, do we need the storage? If the answer is no, then this is not a necessary improvement to the existing system. To answer that question requires a little knowledge of the system.

The water system is divided into pressure zones, shown as different colors on the map. It is also divided into two main sections. The schematic on the right is a cross section of the system showing the wells at the lowest elevation and the storage as gray rectangles at differing elevations. The colored lines match the map colors and show the movement of water to the storage. The turquoise line goes to the Campton Heights water tank, which serves the three zones that until the late 80's was served by a private water system. This is the southern section of the water system.

There are 5 zones in the northern section. This schematic does not show the Holman tank. A new waterline will soon allow Vancil reservoir to replace that tank and provide storage for the Home Ave area. At that point water storage for the northern section will be in two tanks and Vancil reservoir. The new project would replace two tanks now at the Stewart Street site. Do we need a 2 million gallon tank there?

Here is a graph showing the recommended storage and the storage with the new tank. It also shows the storage if Vancil reservoir is used instead of building a new tank, which would be the current storage without the two tanks recommended for replacement in the 2007 Preliminary Design Report. Ironically Vancil has enough storage to meet current and future needs.

At the time the Fortuna City Council decided to move the proposed tank to the Stewart Street site at least three Councilmembers expressed the belief that the Vancil reservoir was built as emergency storage in response to the 1964 flood. It was built in 1963. It was built up the street from the existing tanks serving the downtown and was part of a water development program that also extended waterlines.

At an August 2008 "Workshop" meeting the consulting engineer was asked if Vancil could be used for Zone 1 storage. He explained larger pumps would be needed at the Stewart site and there would be higher pumping costs. When asked if this would effect fire fighting, he said there are 5 million gallons in Vancil. He recommended another waterline be built.

During the fall of 2008 staff and consulting engineers looked at several alternatives to the Rohner Park site. They also looked at the possibility of using Vancil reservoir. Although a May 2008 memo states that the pump station at Stewart street requires some storage to pump to Vancil, the conceptual plan investigated was with both tanks removed. The elimination of storage, using a wet well, created operational problems.

When the Council voted in January 2009 to proceed with a new 2MG tank at Stewart Street it was based on two Staff Reports. The January 12th report stated "it is staff's opinion that the elimination of storage within Pressure Zone #1 would not be prudent at any potential cost savings." The January 19th Staff Report stated the two tanks were failing.

A study in 2000 looked at leakage at Stewart Street and found that the rectangular tank leaked. It suggested that the round tank might leak at times from upper levels not normally in contact with stored water. In 2002 new telemetry, or equipment for a remote control system, was installed somewhere at the Stewart Street site. Does this control the water level and prevent leaking?

A 2003 city document, a Request for Proposal, states "the round tank is still sound."

A power point slide at the August 2008 "Workshop" indicates one tank is leaking.

In May 2009 a consulting engineer wrote, "The circular tank appears to be in relatively good condition. Although we did not conduct a detailed inspection, we understand that previous inspections have revealed little cracking and/or structural distress in the concrete sidewalls."

The alternative of using Vancil with storage at Stewart Street was never presented or considered by the Fortuna City Council. In January 2009 the Council decided to build a new 2 million gallon tank at Stewart Street. Councilmembers Berti, Whitchurch and Glaser stressed the importance of maintaining Vancil as emergency storage and providing fire protection.

The proposed tank was sized to allow 1/2 million gallons of fire reserve storage. At the January 12th meeting the Fire Chief referred to a recent fire in Eureka and said, "It would not be hard to imagine putting a million gallons on a fire downtown."

Vancil currently provides backup storage for Zone 1. In the fall of 2008 staff was discussing a new larger waterline between Vancil reservoir and Stewart Street. And in October, as Vancil was being relined, it was decided to enlarge the Vancil water outlet "in order to provide flexibility for future water system configurations". So the future use of Vancil with storage at Stewart Street is a possibility.

However, the engineer recommended a redundant waterline to downtown via an alternate route. Whether for emergencies or maintenance, two ways to get water from storage is critical. This waterline via Christian Ridge Road would also make Vancil storage directly available to Zone 1, eliminating the need for 2 million gallons of additional storage.

For whatever reason, the alternative of using Vancil was not considered by the Fortuna City Council. That alternative would make distribution improvements to use existing storage, which can provide the current storage need, 1 million gallons of fire reserve storage and 2 million gallons for future development. And it would save bond funds for other needed improvements.

The 2009 decision was based on assumptions that facts now show were incorrect. Before committing us to a contract the Council should know the condition of the round tank at Stewart Street and have an estimate for the distribution improvements needed to use Vancil. Then they can make an informed decision to use the bonds as promised to make improvements to use existing storage. As luck would have it, that decision should meet our needs for years to come.

Oral comments, May 16, 2011 City Council Meeting

2011-05-17T13:12:00.000-07:00

I want to share with you information regarding the Stewart Street Replacement project. First, based on city records, it looks like the total cost of this project is at least a $4.5 million and could exceed $5million.

It is important to remember that the money for this project is from the 2006 Water Revenue Bonds. One of the reasons we raised water rates was to guarantee this $7million bond debt.

The 2006 City Council passed a resolution telling rate payers that specific projects had been identified by a 2005 study.* The Stewart Street Reservoir Reconstruction project had an estimated cost of $2.1 million. Where is the rest of the money for this project coming from?

The resolution told us that the bond debt was for projects “that are required to fulfill the City’s current operational responsibilities.” A 2007 Report* identified the citywide storage needs, and the need in each pressure zone. I have a chart for you based on that report. The chart reflects the two parts of our water system, with 3 pressure zones served by storage in the southeast and 5 zones served by storage in the north.

When you look at this chart it is important to remember that the 2006 Council resolution told us that the bond debt was for improvements to our existing system only and “are not driven by future development.”

I remind you that up the street from the proposed tank are 5 million gallons in Vancil reservoir. For 45 years, less than 1of its 5 million gallons has been utilized. I respectfully suggest that a project to make the piping and pumping improvements to use this storage is a more appropriate use of the bond debt. Of course we are concerned about the future, but the storage in Vancil can meet current need and provide for future development.

I remind you that the Stewart Street Replacement Project will soon go out to bid and you will be asked to authorize the signing of a contract to build 2 million gallons of additional storage down the street from Vancil reservoir. I ask, is this project an appropriate use of the money rate payers were told was for improvements to our existing system, not for projects driven by future development?

I hope the information I’m providing is useful in helping you answer that question.

* 2005 Water Hydraulic Study; Resolution 2006-25; April 2007 Preliminary Design Report

Trickle down economics have failed

2011-04-14T12:43:00.000-07:00

2010-12-29T14:58:00.000-08:00

Friendly Fortuna at it's finest...

early days of General Plan update

Another wonderful example.

River Lodge filled again to make sure a tank didn't go in Rohner Park...

Last year was a different story...

(thanks Doug for trying)

The project they decided not to discuss?
A new tank down the street from Vancil reservoir, where twice the storage of the proposed tank is sitting unused.

However, rules are rules,

so here's two years of information gathering whittled down to three minutes:

Why are we building a new tank?

Planning for the future is great, but first there's an obligation to spend the money as promised.

I think Mr. Glaser has forgotten about Resolution 2006-25 passed and adopted by the City Council in 2006 to justify the rate increases. It says the money's for

"projects that are required to fulfill the City's current operational responsibilities and are not driven by future development."

Vancil reservoir was built in 1963. We've spent more than $1/2 million to reline and upgrade it, but a new pipeline and larger pumps are still needed.

Isn't it time we use it?
Ironically Vancil has twice the storage we need today.
So this reservoir can also provide for future city needs.

The Council needs to know we are concerned that money raised for current needs is being spent on a project we may not need for 20 years or more.

The Council needs to hear from you.

The facts behind what we were told

2010-09-09T13:40:00.000-07:00

Click image to view documentary

The Coffee Party

2010-03-04T20:40:00.000-08:00

There was this email, "here's something you might enjoy," with a link.
But I was in the middle of something, two somethings actually.
One was the latest in the seemingly-never-to-end public records saga.
The next was a way to communicate what I had learned from that hopefully-soon-to-end public records saga.

A couple days later, the time was right. I did enjoy it and so here it is for anyone who happens by:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/02/us/politics/02coffee.html?em

A new movement, the Coffee Party. The slogan is “Wake Up and Stand Up.” The mission statement declares that the federal government is “not the enemy of the people, but the expression of our collective will, and that we must participate in the democratic process in order to address the challenges we face as Americans.”

I had overcome my anger, disappointment, an intense desire to just give up and had maintained civility. Thanks, Mr. Rogers for: What do you do with the anger you feel?

So I can take the pledge:
As a member or supporter of the Coffee Party, I pledge to conduct myself in a way that is civil, honest, and respectful toward people with whom I disagree. I value people from different cultures, I value people with different ideas, and I value and cherish the democratic process.

With this caveat: I can only thank the sender of the email privately, which I believe may be systematic of a breakdown of the democratic process here in Fortuna. "When in the course of human events..." that happens it is very hard to remain pleasant, but it is a worthy goal. Don't you think? Hopefully it keeps us moving forward.

Back to those two somethings...

Jan 18 meeting

2010-01-15T10:00:00.000-08:00

If you saw Doug Strehl at the Dec 7th Council meeting suggest to the Council a public meeting on the tank issue, give him a call and thank him. Even if you didn't see it, call and thank him anyway. The difference between a hearing and a workshop is that the rules for public participation are more relaxed. It appears to me to have been a valiant attempt to provide a time to actually look at the tank issue, to hear what people think about it.

The Mayor agreed with the idea, even suggesting extensions of time could be allowed. He then asked the City Manager his opinion, and it looked like a go. They didn't ask the other three council members. But that isn't necessary because the City Manager, consulting with the Mayor, sets the meeting schedule. That task is delegated to him. Somehow, somewhere the idea got dropped. At the early January meeting, it was back to making both decisions at one meeting (to certify the negative declaration and approve the next step in the process). When the final agenda came out it is now just one agenda item. That means only one public hearing. What a wonderful time saving idea. I called and checked. There will be no extensions of time for speakers, no electronic images, and no expressing the opinion that the new tank isn't necessary. Anyway, that's the rules for the public. Except the last one, that one violates the Brown Act.

In any case, Doug Strehl deserves our thanks for trying to open the process up. Please call him, serving on the council shouldn't be a thankless job. He's in the phone book. I would save you the time, but I fear those little webby information gathering devices would pick up the number and put him on some call list.

If you have a bit more time call another member of the council and ask what their views are on public participation. Ken Zanzi, Mel Berti, Pat Whitchurch and Dean Glaser are all in the phone book.

Monday is the meeting. I know that one voice carries no weight, especially when that voice is saying something they don't want to hear. But I'll be there, a martyr to free speech and public participation. Please don't pity me, I hate pity. Understand that I believe in it. It actually can be fun. Come on down Monday, I could use some company. Oh, yes. It is at 6pm at the Courthouse.

Here is the link to my visual presentation I won't be showing. I checked the box for no sign-in required, hope it works. If you would like a hard copy leave that in a comment. I'll try to have one for you at the meeting. Also, I'll be giving a hard copy to the Council members, so it should be available at City Hall after the meeting. This is about the project, because that is what is on the agenda. The city reservoir at Vancil is not on the agenda.

Wondering what this is all about?

2010-01-15T09:50:00.000-08:00

Heidi sums it up nicely.

Reply to comments

2009-10-26T09:53:00.000-07:00

From Thursday's post: Whatever happened with the records that the city was keeping from you? After you got them, were you able to point out the error of their ways?
. . . Have you stopped that unnecessary water storage, the one you have proven is not needed and duplicates what we have?

Unfortunately I am trying to do two things, always a bad idea for me. While I am convinced that the possible savings justifies taking a look at avoiding unnecessary costs, I still had a couple questions: possible additional savings on an alternate plan for storage, and the impact on the water fund. These required different information than I asked for before. As the city controls the information, I find myself again struggling to get information through a pubic records request.

Anything you can do to get our water bills lowered would be wonderfull. Mine have tripled!

As I child I remember once having to do my homework by candlelight. I was told not to talk about it to my friends, their power had not gone out. I remember also the trips to pay the water and electric bills. Sending a check in the mail was not possible, my mom was paying cash and did not have enough to pay them all. So to each office she went to tell them she intended to pay and negotiate a payment for that month.

I wish I could say the City could lower the bills. But realistically, I fear the best we can do is work to control further increases.

Water/sewer rates have gone up, but triple? Wow, ours have not tripled, but there is one less of us at home and we cut back on watering. Of course, perhaps your usage may have changed with the addition to your household of a baby. Or, in this economic times, people have opened their homes to unemployed family or to provide care for elderly family.

I am not familiar enough with the rate increases to know if a bill would have tripled if usage remained the same. For a while, I think we all assumed that any increase was due to the rates going up. But please go to City Hall and ask them to check your usage. You may have a leak which may be effecting your bill. It is amazing how those drops add up, it may be outside and you are not aware of it. Despite my public records concerns I have found that most of city staff are helpful and often very friendly.

And this comment from an email: But, what with water shortages and fights over water plainly occurring in CA, with more - and worse - to come, it is hard to be opposed to an extra storage capacity.

I have also heard that water supply is a concern for many communities. From what I've read, I think that at some point in the not too distant future we may also have a supply issue. We will reach the limit of Fortuna's supply, the ability to pump water to storage, because of limits to our water rights.

The immediate question for us is water storage for Fortuna's largest pressure zone. Here the issue is whether we spend money on building extra storage in the north while there is a shortage of storage in the south. There may also be other deferred projects needing attention. This new tank is at least a $4,000,000 project which could be possibly be done for $600,000 if we use the existing city reservoir on Vancil Street. There are extra operating costs, but it could take 50 years to spend as much as we will spend on building costs and interest for this new tank.

Another concern which has been expressed to me is emergency storage. I agree we have to plan for emergencies. The required 4.5 million gallons of storage provides for maximum day usage and fire flow. If we decide we need 8.25 million gallons of storage, is it wise to put 7 million gallons of if on one ridge line in the far north? Is putting 7 of our 8 eggs in one basket a good idea? And those northern hills, did you know that Fortuna was called Slide at one point in our history? If the decision is made to build a new 2 million gallon tank to preserve the 4 million gallons as additional emergency storage will the City Council back up that action with policy to so preserve it?

It is important to remember that without the new tank we would still have 6.25, possibly as much as 6.75, million gallons of storage.

There is more on this at Fortunacitizen, hopefully I'll get back to update it soon.

2009-10-22T08:20:00.000-07:00

I remember our first computer, it started with this hokie video welcoming you to the wonders of the machine before you. Our son was so excited, I wondered how it would interfere in our magical relationship. The next day I was out tending some new plantings and a plane flew over. I thought, this is how some farmer felt at another point in time -- this is wondrous, but I think I love my life as it is...

Truer words were never spoken, but it is a handy little gadget.

Quick comment on court decision

2009-06-19T10:53:00.000-07:00

I am concerned about spending over 4 million dollars on a new water tank when we have Vancil reservoir. I tried to obtain records to understand the water system in general and about the possibility of using Vancil in that system. That is our right under the Public Records Act.

Though I tried to avoid it, I had to file a lawsuit to obtain those records. Unfortunately, the city decided to fight to the bitter end. They could have settled for $15,000. The judge decided to award $22,000 for attorney fees and costs.

The city got its day in court. I have gotten what I was asking for, access to public records. My attorney should to be paid for his work as provided for in the law. No records would have been released without his work.

You can see the released records: on using Vancil The Water System Schematic

For me, it's back to the question of using Vancil...

Quick update

2009-04-29T09:29:00.000-07:00

Thanks for the emails and referrals. Last week the number of visitors went down, but the number of new visitors has gone up, and they are not stray visitors from South America looking for another Fortuna. If you wish to remain anonymous don't worry. Google analytics doesn't tell secrets, I still don't know who you are.

The data of what people click on shows a continuing interest in the lawsuit. I didn't quite understand that, until someone asked why the lawsuit is still on the Council Agenda. So here is the answer: there needs to be a settlement of attorney's fees. Last I heard my attorney was waiting to hear from the city's attorney. I hesitate to call again as every phone call adds to attorney's fees and therefore costs the city.

My concern is that although I have left 'lawsuit land' where you aren't allowed to talk except through your attorney, the City Council is probably still stuck there. Hope they find their way out soon.

As for using Vancil instead of building a new tank, my heartfelt thanks for this comment: "Godspeed on your stamina and ability to keep up all your good work even when it gets tiresome." I have taken some time off on this project except for some reviewing/reflection time. I don't imagine I'll have any news until the end of next week or so.

The two Fortuna (and nearby) Native Plant Society walks were well attended and enjoyable. Many thanks to Carol and Larry for coming down to lead the walks.

What Now? -- poll results

2009-04-20T11:28:00.000-07:00

Thank you to the 13 readers who participated in the poll. For a small unknown blog, I'm please. I'm also pleased that there is a core group of people that are visiting this site and fortunacitizen. And if the Google Analytics is correct this site is visited more often, to more pages, for longer and with fewer bounces than social activist sites of similar size. Here are the poll results:

Keep going, using Vancil will save money for other projects -- 7 (53%)
Stop, staff & Council know best -- 1 (7%)
Keep going, public participation is important --12 (92%)
Keep going, it's entertaining --2 (15%)
go to Poll comments (5)

For those who doubt that Vancil will save money, I want to share my surprise at looking at the preliminary records and finding that a lot can be saved, and that the water system would be better as a result. The 'weak link' in the system is not storage in the north part of town and I am convinced that using Vancil is a better project. So far the City is in decline to comment mode on the finacial analysis. I am pursuing second opinions and will share with you any corrections which need to be made.

Of course, I am only one person and the Council appears willing to do no more than set quietly for three minutes while I do a 'Lone Ranger' act. And though a few poll participants find it entertaining (and I'm glad you do), quite frankly I'm a bit tired of the Lone Ranger bit myself. So it is time to enlarge the support network. I'm asking you to send me an email, fortuna.sunshine@yahoo.com, even if it is to say that you wish to remain totally anonymous. I've learned that I can list 10 email addresses to recieve comments as they are posted, I'll put you on the list if you wish. I'd love to hear about your participation in public life. I'd love some offers of help.

And if you don't wish to send me an email, send some emails to others telling them about this site and fortunacitizen. While there is a loyal following, Google Analytics says there are fewer new visitors compared to similar sites.

Time to visit City Hall, I have some papers to pick up. Great day for a walk, hope you are enjoying it.

fortuna.sunshine@yahoo.com

Solar in Willits

2009-04-10T11:01:00.000-07:00

A while back Mayor Madrigal of Willits told me they were working on getting information on their solar projects up on their website. Thought I'd have a look see how that was coming. And what fun! Besides information, there are two animated pages showing the energy being produced and were it is going. The links to the solar array animations are at the bottom of the page. Of course it only works during daylight. When I checked one was producing over 200% and one 300% of demand. The Weather Channel shows Willits right now as mostly cloudy, 52 degrees.

Can we save millions?

2009-04-09T10:12:00.000-07:00

Perhaps we can...Here is the link to a comparison of costs of new 2MG and using Vancil.
Please note that this has been given to the city, but was not prepared by the city. This statement is not meant to imply anything negative about staff. As has been pointed out in a poll comment here, the staff has many projects they are working on. I would add that staff was never asked to prepare information on Vancil, as far as I know. Of course there are some remaining unknowns and you need to know that the person who prepared this is neither an accountant nor an engineer. The important thing is that there is now a draft comparison and hopefully soon a definitive cost comparison.

What now?

2009-04-02T14:25:00.000-07:00

Hopefully, the attorneys are wrapping up Egger v City of Fortuna. I went into this with an understanding with myself: I believe that the city is trying to provide information and be more open, but we had a serious disagreement over the interpretation of two parts of the California Public Records Act.

We disagreed about whether all preliminary records can be withheld from the public and if the City can reject a request without an attempt to help identify records. I have received the preliminary information used to prepare the Vancil portion of the staff report and the City was able to provide it without a specific list from me (how could I know what information they used to prepare their report?). I feel receiving the information shows that the City has rethought its interpretation. Having been told that I can make further requests related to this, if needed, I have confirmed my wish to end the lawsuit.

My attorney, Paul Boylan, asked what I would do next? I've thought about that a bit and decided to take another friend's advise and do a poll. Look to the right and you will see it under "What Now?" It is part tongue-in-cheek fun, part real curiosity. Check as many boxes as you wish.

But first, if you have a chance, please check out fortunacitizen, where I ask, "Why don't we use Vancil?" The lawsuit, remember, was to aid my work looking into the possibility of using Vancil reservoir instead of building a new one nearby(possible savings: 2.5 to 3 million dollars). Much of what I've found is there, organized roughly by the questions I asked as I went along. Take a look, and don't forget to come back and let me know what you think.
thanks.

PS here is a preview of the questions at fortunacitizen:

Where does Fortuna store it's water? Not counting the 2 failing, there are 4 reservoir/tanks.
Does Fortuna need more water storage? Possibly in the south, not in the north.
Is there enough emergency storage? Yes, even without the 2 failing tanks. A remaining question: what is the weak-link in an emergency?
Are there alternatives to spending more than $4 million on a new water tank? yes
Didn't City staff conclude that using Vancil was "not prudent at any cost savings? Yes, now they need to support their conclusion.
What information did staff use to come to their conclusion? There is not a lot of documented information collection.
Wouldn't using Vancil risk relying on PRV valves? The city uses PRV valves.
Do the Water Revenue Bonds require building a new reservoir to replace those at Stewart Street? No.

Go to fortunacitizen for more information.

Change, one step back, two forward

2009-04-02T13:25:00.000-07:00

I want to thank Mayor Whitchurch and Linda Jensen. Yes, Mayor Whitchurch because although he flicked the switch he stopped short of actually stopping me from speaking at the March 9th meeting. Can this mountain be a molehill again?

Linda Jensen deserves grand kudos for defusing the situation at the beginning of the March 16th meeting. Back in August as I handed the Council information before a meeting, Mayor Campbell asked if I had a copy for staff, which I did. Between then and last month I switched at Mr. Rigge's request to leaving information with staff to give to council. I sometimes had a few extra I put on the table with the agenda copies. On March 16th I noticed something in the minutes. I assumed only a Council member could take the minutes off the consent calendar so I typed up my thoughts. Before the meeting I confirmed with Mr. Rigge the process and then gave him a copy. As I moved to hand copies to the Council I was told I had to have copies for everyone in the room or could not give anything to Council. As I hesitated, wondering at the moving target of Council process, Linda Jensen got up and made some copies. I finished giving the Council their copies and life goes on. Thank you!

FYI dear readers here is CA Gov Code 54957.5.(b):(b) Writings that are public records under subdivision (a) and that are distributed during a public meeting shall be made available for public inspection at the meeting if prepared by the local agency or a member of its legislative body, or after the meeting if prepared by some other person.
So, while I was technically correct, I apologize that due to a shortage of time and ink I did not have copies for the other members of the public at the March 16th meeting.

Editorial: Dissent takes beating in court - Sacramento Editorial | Sacramento Bee

2009-03-31T22:46:00.001-07:00

here's that article I mentioned.
Editorial: Dissent takes beating in court - Sacramento Bee
Posted using ShareThis

Get elected, loose your freedom of speech; odd bit of judicial reasoning. Californians Aware's website was one of the resources I used when I was trying to communicate with City staff about preliminary records and where I found my attorney, Paul Boylan, when they refused to respond.

I've been working on FortunaCitizen; adding links for printable/readable versions of the documents I photographed. And here, added a chunk to the discussion of Council meetings.

Out of town

2009-03-21T07:08:00.000-07:00

I'm leaving laptop behind. Check back at end of month; hopefully there will be more news re lawsuit. In the meantime check out fortunacitizen. I've been working to make it more 'user-friendly.' The lawsuit, remember, was to aid my work looking into the possibility of using Vancil reservoir instead of building a new one nearby. Most of my work is there, organized/linked by the questions I was asking as I went along. Take a look, let me know what you think.
Interesting editorial in this morning's Time Standard. I couldn't find it online, perhaps because it came from another paper, Sacramento Bee, I think. Was of interest to me because of the citizen participation angle. In this case it was a citizen who was on the board. ta ta for now

OK, Maybe I was a little optimistic about change in Fortuna

2009-03-17T16:29:00.000-07:00

March16, 2009 Fortuna City Council Meeting

Agenda Item: Oral Comments from the Public

At the last City council meeting those watching on TV did not hear my
closing remarks. At the time, the Mayor had indicated I only had one
minute left, then after a bit I noticed a movement and thought to
myself, “Is the mic still on?” But I continued because I
had worked long and hard to gather the information and then try to
condense it down into 3 minutes. Also, I could have just
misinterpreted what I saw. By the end of the meeting, after several
gracious acts by the Mayor allowing others to speak out of order, I
felt that probably I was mistaken about what I saw.

When I was told that in fact the mike was off at the end of my comments, I
laughed. So,the Mayor doesn’t appreciate my endeavors, he has
control of the switch, I was out of order; really just a minor
disappointment in my life right now.

But when I saw it on TV, it gave me a different perception. I no longer
saw it as a personal problem. The question became what do people
think when they watch this happen? Would they feel welcome to come
speak at Council meetings? Is public participation, especially by
those with a different perspective, welcomed?

When someone is ruled out of order, it is government regulation of speech.
It is at times necessary to insure that you can get done what needs
to get done, but the regulation needs to be applied evenly. And I
would not want such tight regulation that the praise of Mr. Rodriquez
would have been ruled out of order before it had a chance to be given
or that the question at the end of the meeting could not have gotten
a response.

We have a governing principal. It says, “We May Disagree, But We
Will Be Respectful of One Another, All Comments Will Be Directed to
the Issue at Hand, and Addressed to the City Council, Personal
Attacks are Unacceptable.”

I respectfully suggest that this be the guide for ruling people out of
order.

I would like to now restate what was not broadcast two weeks ago.

I hope this information provides you with a clearer historical
perspective as you continue planning for the use of our water rate
revenues.

My apologies for going overtime and thank you for your patience.

Note: The remarks of March 2nd are posted as Historical Summary at fortunacitizen.

Not so public, after all

2009-03-14T11:43:00.000-07:00

My apologies if you tried to view the released records yesterday and found you needed a google account to view. When I tested it, the link worked like a charm, but of course I was logged on to my google account at the time. Sigh...

I tried scribd.com, no luck. So, at this time the options are: create a google account (easy); send an email to fortuna.sunshine@yahoo.com, subject: released records (easy for you, I'm happy to send); or go ask for them at City Hall (great if you are out for a walk, you can look at or pay for a copy thanks to City Staff)

Let the sun shine in

2009-03-13T14:46:00.000-07:00

Now available to the public, the records that took a lawsuit to get released.

Awhile back Anonymous at SoHum Parlance wrote "Please explain in a bit more detail exactly what was withheld from you; I'd really like to know." It was quite frustrating, but I had to write, "my counsel instructs me not to say anything about the case for now." Seemed like an odd response from someone asking the City to be more open. But that is what happens when you enter lawsuit land.

I so wanted to avoid uttering those words that I spent hours researching and then writing a letter to explain to the City that the California Public Records Act, State Constitution and the courts all agree that they should share with me the information they were gathering on using the underutilized Vancil reservoir instead of building a new tank 1/4mile away at Sewart Street . The final response: "we do not know of any reports or items held or retained by the City as requested."

Despite my derisive "lawsuit land" comment above, I'm proud to live in a country that has a court system that allows for challenges to questionable practices by government officials. Perhaps one sticking point was that the City didn't understand what I meant by "consultant or staff reports regarding the investigation of using the existing Vancil Street reservoir for zone1 water storage." All I can say to that is I'm glad I have a sense of humor and a belief in the ability of people to change.

Now, back to those public records. All this was so that hopefully I would be the last to hit a brick wall at City Hall. The writer mentioned above is right not all city records are public, but most of them are.
And I was so happy about making whatever was in that envelope I picked up last Friday available to the public I immediately went over and had them scanned into a pdf file. Joke was on me, I discovered I couldn't post a pdf file directly on FortunaCitizen, or at least if it is possible I couldn't figure out how. Luckily, after much trial and error, I talked to my son. He pointed me in the right direction and after more trial and error the records are there, where ever 'there' is. And you can see them, too because they are public records.
The link requires a google account. Don't have one? It is easy and free, or fortuna.sunshine@yahoo.com will be happy to email pdf file to you; please use "released records" for email subject.

Anticipated litigation

2009-03-10T12:31:00.000-07:00

Happy to see some new faces at last night's special meeting on the 5-year CIP. Trying to stay in my 3 minute time slot, I delivered a quick thank you for the release of the preliminary records that are the subject of my lawsuit. Also gave the Council (and Planning Commission since it was a Joint Session) the happy news: No need to worry about litigation if they decided not to build a new 2MG tank. I cautioned them, of course, that they should check with their attorney to make certain. Seems a stretch that someone would sue because the city decided to spend $2million to use theVancil reservoir, instead of $4million to build another down the street, but there were some litigation concerns expressed.

Back at the January 12th Special meeting we heard the sobering news. It came toward the end of the meeting, after the public comments, just before comments from Council members, as I remember. The news that because of wording in the bond papers the City risked a lawsuit if they dared to do anything besides build a new 2MG tank .

I thought it odd at the time, usually such news is delivered in Closed Session. But no, the news came at the well attended Jan 12th Special meeting in the River Lodge. I think I remember some caveat, that because the City doesn't often do the bonding thing (borrow money) there could be some unremembered protection. Well, the good news is it looks like a case of faulty memory, that the City Council has the ability to decide the best way to spend the bond money. That is as long as it is specified in a Certificate of the City (someone must know what that is). I've posted some of the bond wording and a link to the whole 144 pages on FortunaCitizen.

I may need help, though. The Cover contains this dire warning:

Official Statement is submitted in connection with the sale of the 2006 Bonds referred to herein and may not be reproduced or used, in whole or in part, for any other purpose.

I hope an acceptable purpose is informing those who are going to pay the interest and redemption (principal) payments.

p.s. a bit of city financing info from the Jan 9, '09 agenda packet, pages 35-37:

The envelope, please

2009-03-07T08:01:00.000-08:00

A pretty simple, wonderful thing. I walked in, told her I thought there was an envelope I was to pick up at the front desk and she handed it to me. Or at least she tried to, I then asked if she would mind a picture. With some understandable hesitation (I am not found of pictures, myself) she happily agreed.
Only as I was leaving did I think to ask her to thank Mr. Rigge, I hope she did because I am truly thankful. I could have many bones to pick with him, but he is the City Manager and he is responsible for making public records available and yesterday he did his job. Isn't that what we want from City employees? Cheerful, without a hassle, that's very nice, too.

I took a look in the envelope yesterday evening. Of the 62 pages 26 are the staff report; 11 pages listing (identifying) articles/ sections/ chapters of Title 22---the drinking water regulations; and 4 pages with copies of sections. All very confidential stuff. Silliness. I should edit some of this out for the sake of kindness, but I need it; it shows that sometimes finding nothing is very helpful. Or in this case just a little bit.

I now know that they did do some investigation of using Vancil. As I remember, the Council asked about Vancil at one meeting but made no comment. So I think it is a fair assumption that the City Manager has a lot of discretion or was getting direction from Council outside of public meetings. Either way, I am thankful to find some investigation. I will have to do more than a page count to see if there is anything here to qualify as a show stopper. It was fun to note a star next to a section of the law I had been looking at. Competent minds think alike? I am aching to check my notes to see if we were looking at the same time. But on to other things. If I can, I'll post what I picked up at fortunacitizen In the meantime, check out some of the historical info there.

Please join me at the upcoming workshop on the Capital Improvement Projects for the next 5 years. If I understand correctly, this is the process to approve spending money on the Water System. It is this Monday, the 9th, 6pm, City Hall. For more information, click here: friendlyfortuna.com Pass it along.

Photo by Susan K. Campbell

Change

2009-03-06T10:10:00.000-08:00

I am so happy I can hardly type. In a few minutes I'll be going to City Hall to pick up a packet of information that will, hopefully, fulfill my California Public Records Act request. I am very hopeful that this is, indeed, a sign of change. The reason I am so hopeful is that I understand that there are only 50 pages. To me this means that there are no games being played. The game one would expect is the city copying everything remotely (or not) related and thus burying any useful information, wasting both staff time and my time.

Is there a chance that something may have been overlooked? Yes. But that can be easily remedied with a future request.

To all those who helped bring this happy result, both the decision maker(s), the record gatherers, and copiers: A very warm thank you. Have a good weekend.

Let the sunshine in!

Change in Fortuna--solar power?

2009-03-02T00:57:00.000-08:00

Back at the May '08 meeting, where the overflow crowd made clear their concerns about cutting a hole in the Rohner Park Forest for a water tank, there were public comments asking City staff to explore using alternative energy for pumping water. The staff at that time was quite dismissive of the idea. Information was given to the Council. By the January 12, 2008 Special meeting staff had made some progress, acknowledging that in fact solar does work in Humboldt County. However, staff stated solar was only used in the private sector and by homeowners, then questioned if and how cities could use solar.

A couple weeks ago it was so pleasant to receive a thank you email from the City Manager after I forwarded an email from Mayor Madrigal of Willits with this information:
Our solar program with the City of Willits was somewhat unique. Rather than buy the system ourselves, which is cost prohibitive we contracted with another company to purchase the eventual energy at a set amount below market rate. The company secured the financing( no cost to the city), constructed the project ( no cost to the city) and handles all the maintenece. We buy the electricity from them at a rate that will always be less than what we would get from PG&E. The system is located at our Water Plant and feeds directly into the grid.

Mr. Rigge went on to say he had been in Willits in January and made contact the Program Development Director of the Renewable Energy Development Institute there. He also indicated that there would be follow-up on the information from Mayor Madrigal and exploration of the information with the Redwood Coast Energy Authority, which Fortuna is a founding member of.

Maybe there will be report to the City Council soon?

Change in Fortuna 2

2009-02-26T23:20:00.000-08:00

I attended last night's informational meeting "to describe the anticipated design and construction process for the Stewart Street Replacement project" (formerly the Tank in the Park). The paper didn't mention it was a neighborhood meeting, but no one seemed to mind that a few non-neighborhood folks showed up. I want to note that the fact that it was publicly noticed is a positive change for a neighborhood meeting in Fortuna. Last spring the Friends of Rohner Park "crashed" a meeting on Stewart Street when they heard about it through the grapevine. Three months or so ago a Council member remarked "now that the cat is out of the bag" he'd like to hear how the meeting with the Vancil neighbors went. I'd say things are getting better, thanks city staff.

At the beginning of the meeting the neighbors were told staff was trying to understand the issue as if they were neighbors and at times it was acknowledged, "I truly hadn't seen it that way before." This seemed to come when some of the prepared response seemed to miss the mark, but some credit goes to the neighbors as they did a good job of repeating and rephrasing until their concerns were acknowledged. Hopefully after the clarified concerns have been "considered" the dialog will continue or at least they will receive a more definite response. But compared to the cold shoulder the Friends of Rohner Park got this was refreshing.

I have to say I felt a bit uncomfortable at times when the staff spoke for the "ratepayers" to remind the neighbors that the cost of their requests needed to be considered. The neighbors' concern that the switch from the park meant the construction impact cost shifted from the many to a few seemed legitimate to me (the speaker noted no ill-will toward those concerned with the park). But of course I'm biased, this ratepayer requested they make changes to the project which would have reduced both the project costs and the impact on the neighbors substantially so I have little sympathy for staff speaking on behalf of ratepayers interested in costs. But, I'll give staff the benefit of the doubt that I'll soon see the error of my logic when I review the preliminary records.

Anyway, back to changes. The Friends of Rohner Park struggled through seven months of meetings tentatively set and then canceled and requests to know results of investigations, or to have an explanation of process, ignored or denied. What a true joy to see a written "Anticipated Chronological Project Task List" handed out. Had I had such a list perhaps I could have met the city's illogical demand that I ask for specific records in my requests for information on using Vancil reservoir. This list is a positive change.

And lastly, there have been meetings, on the General Plan and last August on the tank issue, where no public comments were allowed. I have heard that city staff and some council members attended a Brown Act training last fall. I would bet last August was the last meeting to allow no comment. That's positive change. And those records? Any day now.

Change in Fortuna

2009-02-25T16:02:00.000-08:00

Good news this afternoon. Got a phone call from Paul Boylan, the attorney handling the Public Records Act case. He called to let me know that the city may be ready to give me copies as early as Friday. This is wonderful news.

I am a bit apprehensive, as the word is they are copying the whole Stewart Street Reservoir Replacement Project file. It goes way beyond what I asked for and could take a lot of time to sort through. But I agreed to that as a compromise assuming that otherwise staff time would have to be used to sort through it, and it might need to be someone with some familiarity with the project to distinguish which records were pertinent to my request.

A week ago the city released the first record, which was part of the first request I made back in September. Having finally figured out how to make it more readable than the earlier pages I posted on FortunaCitizen today.

For a little background on this read comments at Sohum Parlance

2009-02-23T19:03:00.000-08:00

Rate Chart Provided by the City of Fortuna.

Came across this website, thought I'd share it. Here is how the owner described it in an email:

Although your blog and my website represent the way the current city counsel governs without consent, the blog and website have very different purposes. My website serves as a protest to the rising water rates and also serves as a warning to those considering moving into the area. If anyone googles Fortuna Water Rate, an estimate of the cost of a the monthly water bill they will have to pay can be seen. This is useful information for people planning a budget.

My website also shows how the city budget was in the black, which the current city counsel branded as the, "pay as you go" system. Now, for the first time, Fortuna is in the red by tens of millions of dollars of debt, and a portion of our water rate money that we pay, and our local tax dollars go to pay interest on the debt that our current city council put us in. This is why our water rates keep rising, and are scheduled to keep rising. We could have funded water projects slowly over time, without getting our city into debt. We get nothing for the interest we now pay out to municipal bond holders.

And my two cents: I remember there were those who felt we didn't need to borrow money (issue bonds) to repair the water and sewer infrastructure. Perhaps we should have heeded the warnings back when the bonds were issued.
Now we need to make sure the the money is used wisely. Unlike the Tank in the Park, which is simple to understand, talking about the water system is harder for people to get excited about. But building a new 2 million gallon reservoir is at least $4million project and we need to look at it closely. My investigations point to using the existing Vancil reservoir and spending more on piping/pumping improvements. But there are other ideas floating around...

New 2 million gallon water tank?

2009-02-20T11:00:00.000-08:00

Gathering signatures on the No to Tank in Park petition I noticed three types of people: 1- those with questions/comments who then signed the petition, 2- those who said, "put it in the park, we need the water" and 3- those who signed without a word and then in response to my "thanks, they can find another place for it" said, "we don't need it."

After looking into this a bit more, I'm pretty convinced that a 2 million gallon tank is not needed at Stewart Street and that there are more pressing needs. Some of what I've found is now at FortunaCitizen.

Anyone interested in using money wisely? How about investing in solar and fixing the weak links in the water system?

Using springs for water supply?

2009-02-19T17:55:00.000-08:00

Comment from Fortuna Citizen: I have heard and I don't know how true it is - that there are MANY underground springs in this area why can't the city tap into that resource?
janelle: The area was once known as Springville. We have springs on our property and I remember there was a comment at the public meeting on the tank back in May, but I don't remember who made the comment. That's all I know. If you remember who you heard it from, maybe you could find out more?
Reply: I am sorry - I do not recall where I heard that information. I would it is on record somewhere in the city as to where and how much flow could be garnered from these springs?
janelle: Anyone know more about this? If there is a record, would need a bit more information to find it.

Left out of the process

2009-02-19T17:03:00.000-08:00

This blog was created in response to this comment to a post on Fortuna Citizen.
"I run into a lot of citizens who feel as though they are left out of the process. You are really onto something, as there are several huge issues coming down the pike and citizens can debate different perspectives on the issues."

I started Fortuna Citizen as a place for information. I think that sources of information need to be identified so I felt a need to moderate it more than I think is healthy for open discussion. So here is a place for frank, candid, outspoken, straightforward discussion. There are many reasons to remain anonymous so do so if you wish. However please don't use anonymity to be abusive to others making comments.

Poll comments

2008-04-01T14:11:00.000-07:00