Theryl McCoy
|
April 21, 2014
Perhaps SLVWD can sell mitigation rights using all the wetlands their rotting tanks are creating.
Bruce Holloway
|
April 20, 2014
SLVWD does have a right to Loch water and there's already a pipeline down E. Zayante Rd. then left to the Graham Hill treatment plant in Santa Cruz. SLVWD could tap that pipeline in Olympia or Felton or Scotts Valley with or without Lompico. SLVWD and Lompico both treat stream water and ground water but would need to spend millions to treat Loch water, which has more organic contaminants. As for anyone using Loch water as an additional source during drought, the City of Santa Cruz is already releasing less into Newell Creek and shortchanging fish because they have none to spare.
TherylMcCoy
|
April 20, 2014
Bill, first you say Lompico has enough water, then immediately you say Lompico needs additional water. Also we are in a drought now, so how can Lompico provide water to anyone? Are you saying we SHOULD build a pipe from Loch Lomond to Lompico? And finally, if you're putting down the letter writer for being a person "who always wants things done for themselves by others" then why aren't you an advocate of Lompico working it out on their own and not having SLVWD do it for them? Thanks.
TherylMcCoy
|
April 20, 2014
Perhaps that is why there is an emergency? Because SLVWD had a plan to help a brother out.


We encourage your online comments in this public forum, but please keep them respectful and constructive. This is not a forum for personal attacks, libelous statements, profanity or racist slurs. Readers may report such inappropriate comments by e-mailing the editor at pbeditor@pressbanner.com.