To the Editor:
The theme of the recent League of Women Voter Candidate Forum should be “excuses, excuses”. We heard the following statements from the two incumbent candidates Ralph Fernandez and Bob Gonzales:
“Previous councils spent millions but left us nothing”
“No one would buy our bonds”
“We went to Washington but were turned down twice”
“The Brown Act makes it hard to be transparent”
“The people are becoming complacent”
“Recycling water is hard and expensive”
“United Water is raising rates”
“We did the best we could”
“Not enough money”
Let’s just look at these excuses:
If previous councils spent millions, as quoted by Councilman Gonzales, why did the council during the 2007-2008 period ignore this research? Of what did it consist? Over what period were these millions spent?
Councilman Fernandez claims that no one would buy Santa Paula bonds, but can he produce documentation showing that Santa Paula asked for a quote from a registered bond underwriter?
The Washington trip must have been depressing. Where are the trip reports showing whose offices were visited and why the refusals? Was the Wall Street firm Alinda Capital involved in these trips?
The Brown Act was designed to force governments into transparency, so why is there so little reference in council minutes about bond transactions, for example? Why is there no information about the “five year buyout” of the water treatment plant to which both council members Gonzales and Fernandez refer?
Yes, recycling water is hard and expensive, but the problem in Santa Paula is compounded because no one planned for recycling water and reselling treated water, so at this point there is no plan. The State of California just passed AB 2067 which Governor Brown signed mandating a complete overhaul of the state’s groundwater management. All urban areas with more than 3000 meters are required to participate or fines will ensue. Both private and public water sources must be included. Usage must be reduced 20% by 2020. The only way to accomplish this goal is to reuse water and Santa Paula has no plan.
The city has budgeted approximately $600,000 for the United Water Conservation District which amounts to less than $10.00 per month per bill, so there is absolutely no way to blame high water bills on UWCD like the city council has been communicating for the last two years. Even a 20% increase would only amount to a few dollars per bill. This was confirmed by the city’s own consultant at the last public water meeting. The high bills come from budgeted expenses of $18.6 million for the water and sewer operations, which was also confirmed by the city’s own water rate consultant.
Council members repeatedly said “we did the best we could” or “we got the best solution”, but the citizens realize this is not true. The bills are too high, the plant is over designed with excess capacity and we have no clear path to water reuse.
And, yes, there is very little money in the General Fund, which is barely in the black. As far as I can tell, the council has spent the last ten years raising expectations that big box stores and huge residential tracts will bring the city new found financial freedom. This is farther from the truth as the future of both new housing and new retail construction is unpredictable at this point in time due to changing demographics and an erratic economic recovery.
Santa Paula’s time for excuses is over. The city cannot re-elect incumbents who justify their actions with defensive excuses.
Compare these excuses with Ginger Gherardi or John Demers. Ms Gherardi managed and delivered big ticket projects and budgets for Ventura county during her 18 year tenure as Executive Director of the Ventura County Transportation Commission. John Demers built major infrastructure projects in the Middle East including a water treatment plant and now manages a multi-million budget for the Port of Hueneme as the Chief Operating Officer.
New ideas and no more excuses: the time for Santa Paula’s incumbents to exit gracefully and let the real problem solvers take the helm.
I look forward to voting for Gherardi and Demers.
Sheryl Hamlin
Santa Paula
Ginger Gherardi for City Council
To the Editor:
I had the pleasure of working with Ginger Gherardi for a number of years in the effort to unify Santa Paula’s Elementary and High School Boards into a single Unified School Board. Now, Santa Paula’s families with children have one common school calendar and more money to spend for students and teachers. This years-long process first required the selling of the idea of unification to parents and the City Council, and then getting the approval of the Ventura County and California Boards of Education for permision to put the issue on the ballot for Santa Paula’s voters. Ginger Gherardi proved she had the understanding, patience and the perseverance to see this complex and worthwhile effort succeed. I believe she has what it takes to represent us on the Santa Paula City Council.
David Kaiser
Santa Paula
Santa Paula’s Measure F
To the Editor:
When California passed AB 109 because of jail overcrowding things changed. There were thousands of inmates released form our prisons, some thought that people were being sentience for too many years. Santa Paula has a large County Jail with about 800 inmates. Many prisoners we paroled locally resulting in an increase demand on our police services. Most of us voted for ‘three strikes and you’re out’. Voters wanted repeat offenders off our streets! The crime rate went down and the prisons filled. Today the crime rate in Santa Paula has gone up and the number of inmates incarcerated has gone down. The city has grown but the number of officers has not. We have a great police Chief, Steve McLean, that is doing the best he can with a very small budget. He can not afford to pay his people a competitive wage with other cities in this county. Santa Paula had nine murders during the last year and a half, seven of the offenders were apprehended and imprisoned, two offenders left the area. It takes more than police work to solve this sort of crime and a lot of detective work to apprehend these kind of cases. A lot of overtime for detective work was required. Help Santa Paula Please - vote for Measure F.
David Kaiser
Santa Paula
Clueless about Drought
To the Editor:
After attending last Monday’s city council meeting and trying to give constructive comments under Mayor Cook’s new 2 minute rule, I have concluded that City Manager Fontes and the majority of the city council are clueless about the consequences of this drought to Santa Paula. Nor do they want to listen.
I think that Governor Brown and many top county officials would disagree with Mayor Cook’s disingenuous statement categorizing a few uninformed people that think “the sky is falling.” Informed people know this drought is real and unprecedented. Informed people know the Santa Paula aquifer rapidly losing capacity.
It was pointed out in the meeting that the Santa Paula aquifer is at is second lowest level in history (within 5 feet) which was 1990. Today, we are in the driest years in county history. The big difference between 1990 and now is that Santa Paula is poised to build 1700 new units including low income requirements related to East Area 1 plus a shopping center in East Area 2. This increased water usage could accelerate the decline of the aquifer if the drought continues.
I urge everyone (including the city council and all city council candidates) to read the flawed East Area 1 and East Area 2 EIR water reports for themselves. These water reports use recycled water to offset potable water. This diverts city water to future developments. Instead, because of the drought mandate, any recycled water should be used for current residents to comply with the 20% statewide water reduction. Also, in EA1&2, the litigated unused water allocations should be eliminated because that water exists on paper only. No more smoke and mirrors.
If this city manager and city council blunders Santa Paula into a water crisis it will be no surprise to me. A year ago last summer, the planning commission heard United Water’s sobering report and unanimously voted to recommend the council put United Water on the televised city council meeting agenda. To date, this has not happened. Why not?
If you study drought histories, the fight will be between big money interests vs. water. This council majority appears to be on the side of big money. The decline of the Santa Paula aquifer presents a regional crisis between cities, developers and agriculture. An informed city government would protect water interests over special interests. Santa Paula needs to pause and reassess our priorities based on United Waters aquifer yield study.
In the next 5 years and the drought continues, the Santa Paula aquifer could lose another 15-25% of it’s capacity. There needs to be a moratorium on all development until we get sufficient rain to refill the aquifer. So far, I have not seen any city council candidates who are strong on drought issues. The only council persons who understand the drought are Martin Hernandez and Ralph Fernandez. But they are out numbered. They will continue to stay outnumbered if voters elect pro development or special interest candidates. John Wisda
Santa Paula
