Letter: Customers deserve honesty from SLV Water District
Apr 17, 2014 | 2655 views | 6 6 comments | 72 72 recommendations | email to a friend | print
EDITOR,

So the great power masters of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District have declared "the existence of a water shortage emergency in the San Lorenzo Valley."

These are the same geniuses that are able to determine what everyone’s individual daily usage should amount to.

They have also determined that "under current conditions they may not be able to satisfy all the demands."

I have one question for them. If that is the case why are they currently building a pipeline to another community to provide them with a water supply? Simple question.

A simple and reasonable answer would be nice. Don't just give me "love thy neighbor" crap.

The City of Santa Cruz owns Loch Lomond reservoir and could have provided a much shorter pipeline and much more water.

Scotts Valley has determined it has no need for water restrictions. Why didn't they provide a pipeline to Lompico? I believe that SLV Water District owes its longtime financial supporters an answer. 

Elwin Haddix, Ben Lomond

 

Comments
(6)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
Bill Smallman
|
April 20, 2014
Mr. Haddix, Lompico has enough water, it is only because of this drought that it may need additional water from SLVWD. The same fate will occur to other existing higher elevation wells in your district, and move down to lower elevations until something is done to restore the Santa Margarita groundwater basin. SLVWD owns rights to water in Loch Lomond, so by owning Lompico, it may benefit to install a pipeline to provide water for all of SLV during droughts. Lompico is bordered by SLVWD, saying that the City or Scotts Valley should help Lompico sound like something from a person who always wants things done for themselves by others.
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.

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.

Bruce Holloway
|
May 26, 2014
Rick Rogers, Operations Director at SLVWD, told me later that the raw water pipeline actually goes along Newell Creek to Glen Arbor Road, then down the east side of the river to Felton before reaching the pump station at the corner of E. Zayante and Graham Hill Roads.
Claire Smith
|
April 18, 2014
This is EXACTLY the letter I was going to write! Thank you Elwin for writing it for me!

Question for the San Lorenzo Valley Water District:

Why are you declaring "EMERGENCY WATER SHORTAGE!!!!" while at the same time accepting state and federal grants for building pipelines, and presently building those pipelines, to sell our water to neighboring districts which are on a building rampage?

Huh?

No sabe nada.
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.