There has been a great deal of talk about HWS customers and property owners basing their protests on misinformation.

We have attempted on this page to outline some of that misinformation.

Our Response

An old statement, reassuring people on private wells and septic systems that they would not be forced to connect to the Hillcrest water system (HWS) and sewer, is now being used by opponents to claim the City said it would not charge a connection fee for conversion from the HWS to surface water.

During annexation of the Walton area, it was incorrectly rumored that annexation would result in people on private wells and septic systems being forced to connect to City water (a.k.a the Hillcrest Water System) and sewer. In response to this, the City said "No water or sewer hook-up is required upon annexation or thereafter."

The "not to exceed" fee of $3,570 we are being quoted is less than half that currently being charged to developers. The City is currently charging developers $7,562 to $10,796 for new connections. If anything, it is the developers that are subsidizing us.

Delivering sufficient water to serve Hillcrest 1, 2 and 3 customers requires the construction of a new pipe. The proposed project includes oversizing the pipe from 22" (what we in the HWS require) to 30" to provide for future development. We are only being charged for the portion of the pipeline project that benefits us (about 54%). The City will pay for the balance and pass this cost to future developers as they connect to the system. Sharing the cost of pipeline construction results in a savings of over $450 per Hillcrest customer as compared to building a 22" line that would only serve our needs.

Additional, but less dramatic savings result from sharing the cost of the water storage and pumping facility that is also part of this proposal.

The conversion fee will not exceed $19.80 per month. The City checked existing metered Hillcrest Region 2/3 groundwater customers to determine what their water usage bill will be on surface water. Their average bill will increase about 93 cents per month based on 2007 data. Average water bills will be about $40 - $45 per month including the conversion fee.

See what two real customers are paying.

This number is based on faulty numbers and simple math that ignores the differences between the two projects.

The two projects differed dramatically in both the size of the projects and the number of people served. For example, 4,000 HWS customers need 22” of a 30” water line. There were only about 1,000 TB residents but that project involved a 36” water line. Another difference was the TB project involved building two water storage tanks with a total capacity of 4 million gallons. The HWS project involves building a 3.5 million gallon storage tank.

TB customers paid their fair share (about $3,600 if they needed a meter and $3,400 if they already had one). Tierra Buena conversion fee payments work out to $26.70 per month if they needed a meter and $25.31 per month if they already had one. Tierra Buena didn’t have the advantage of a 2.3% loan.

This solution is not legal.

The City has hired attorney Michael Colantuono to advise them on the Hillcrest water matter. Mr. Colantuono has explained in some detail why the HWS and the City's surface water system (SWS) must be viewed as separate legal entities.

He has also said, "... we conclude that a court would be unlikely to allow the City to spread the cost of converting HWS customers to the City's SWS across the City's existing SWS customer base. Because Proposition 218 requires fees for property related services, such as water service, to reflect the "proportional cost" of serving each customer, those who are not served by the HWS cannot be required to subsidize the cost of converting from it."

While it is true that the City does have inter ties connecting the two systems, the amount of water that can be delivered through these pipes and connections is not sufficient to meet the demands of Hillcrest customers.

This solution is not legal.

Moreover, this solution is not fair.

1. The problems with arsenic, nitrates, low water pressure and murky water have nothing to do with the City's purchase of the system. No matter who purchased the system, we would still be faced with paying to fix it. This statement is just a strategy to get someone else to fix our problem.

Tierra Buena residents, who were in an almost identical situation, received no subsidy when they converted to City surface water.

2. It is only because of the City's purchase of the Hillcrest water system that we now have this very viable, long term solution to the Hillcrest water system's problems. This is an option that would not be available if the system were still owned by the Hillcrest Water Company.

Blending, as envisioned by opponents is not cost effective. However, being able to have blended water during drought conditions makes sense and has been studied extensively.

In case of a water shortage, the City is currently able to blend water at the water treatment plant. That is a more practical solution for blending water (cheaper and provides better water quality to Hillcrest customers). It will be less expensive to drill new wells in the north Yuba City area than it will be to set up the Hillcrest system for blending as opponents propose.

This solution is not legal.

The State of California, Department of Public Health regulations do not permit this type of solution.

Doing nothing is not an option.

This is especially true in the Hillcrest 2/3 system where one well is off line because of an unsafe level of nitrates. Filtering out arsenic results in a 20% reduction in plant capacity. These two factors have resulted in low water pressure and murky water especially in the Hillcrest 2/3 region.

This last summer during peak demand, the surface water system was subsidizing the Hillcrest 2/3 system with over 1 million gallons of water per day. Mr. Colantuono, the attorney advising the City on this matter, has said that the City cannot force the customers of one system to subsidize the customers of the other system.

Anyone who doubts the City's willingness to sell the system should talk to a member of the City Council. 822-4601. You decide if it's just a bluff.

The current proposal provides clean, safe and reliable water at less than half the cost that is being charged to developers. What reasonable person would risk losing that on someone's guess that the City is just bluffing?

This statement reflects either a level of brinkmanship or of misunderstanding that is frightening.

You might want to ask Colusa residents who are part of the Del Oro Water Company's Walnut Ranch District how they feel about P.U.C. protection. This is a small water district that was formerly owned by the Hillcrest Water Company. No one is trying to say that we will face rate increases in the magnitude of Del Oro customers, but it is obvious that a sale of our water system will result in us receiving the same, poor quality water we get now at a greatly increased rate.

If people can't afford the $20 cost of conversion, how are they going to afford the water if the Hillcrest water system is sold to a private company? A private company will likely charge over $50 per month and we will still get lousy water (will still need a water softener, will still buy bottled water).

The City has a master water plan and this has been incorporated into it. The City has also spent about 6-8 months meeting with the opponents of the conversion to surface water. It developed a stack of documents that is over a foot thick in responding to various concerns, requests and suggestions. It is now time to start fixing the problem instead of just talking about it and patching it. Further delays will likely result in higher costs.

It might be more appropriate to worry about how many toilets are flushed in the Hillcrest water service area. There are approximately 2,500 homes in the Hillcrest area that are on septic tanks. Those homes generate about 600,000 gallons of wastewater every day. That wastewater goes right back into our ground.

We have two choices. We can convert to City surface water and get a meter (average water bill about $25 per month) or we can stay on the current system without a meter and watch our water rates soar when the City sells the Hillcrest system to a private company.

All water districts are required to install meters, and bill on them by January 2010 for homes built since 1991. Homes built prior to 1991 must be metered and read by 2025.

Is Hillcrest water safe to drink?

YES. HILLCREST WATER IS SAFE TO DRINK AND MEETS ALL FEDERAL AND STATE SAFETY STANDARDS.

Keep in mind that Hillcrest water meets Federal and State standards only because the City has taken some short term measures to keep the water in compliance. One well in the Hillcrest 2/3 area is currently off line because of an unsafe level of nitrates. The whole Hillcrest system has it's water chemically treated to reduce arsenic to meet safety guidelines. Neither of these actions provides a viable, long term solution to the problems of the Hillcrest system.

"When you have the facts on your side, argue the facts. When you have the law on your side, argue the law. When you have neither, holler."