- Home
- News
- Opinion
- Letters
- Sports
- Prospecting
- Essentials
- Obituaries
- Real Estate
- Comics
- Gallery
- Classifieds
- Advertisers
- Coupons
- Contact Us
Share Article
422
833422833
EID ENGINEER Daryl Noel explains the plan for replacing Flume 41 with concrete flumes and removing boulders from the bank above it. Currently under construction are road improvements that will provide access for construction equipment when this flume is rebuilt next year. Democrat file photo by Krysten Kellum
All of five members of the public showed up Wednesday evening for a preview of the five-year capital improvement plan for the El Dorado Irrigation District.
Thirteen staff members were on hand to add clarification as EID engineering chief Brian Mueller presented the $85 million plan for 2013-2017.
That figure was down from $141.9 million in 2011-2015.
Annual expenditures planned in 2013-2017 are $18.8 million in 2013, $17.78 million in 2014, $21 million in 2015, $15 million in 2016, $11 million in 2017.
Mueller said actual expenditures are generally 70 percent of CIP estimates.
This compares to peak years of 2005, which saw $41.2 million spent, $50.6 million in 2006, $46.8 million in 2007, $60.4 million in 2008 and $48.1 million in 2009.
A portion of those previous big expenditures included catching up with state regulatory requirements, particularly for wastewater treatment plants.
“I think we’ve got over the big hitters and are ramping down,” Muller said.
The plan Mueller presented Sept. 26 is a draft, “a planning document.” It will be presented to the Board of Directors Oct. 9 for possible adoption, which will guide the engineering and other staff in project planning for the next five years and more intensively for the calendar year 2013.
Actual projects have to be approved individually by the board before expending money, including capitalized staff time, or soliciting bids.
The three most expensive areas for 2013 are $4.1 million for water, $5.2 for wastewater and $7.4 million for hydroelectric.
In the water CIP the major projects are $1.5 million to convert Reservoir A Water Treatment Plant from chlorine gas to safer liquid bleach and $520,000 to recoat the inside of water storage tanks.
In the wastewater CIP the major item in 2013 is replacing another section of the Mother Lode force main with plastic pipe. The concrete pipe installed in 1979 has been eaten away with hydrochloric acid.
In response to a question from John Jakowitz of El Dorado Hills, Mueller said the plastic sewer line will last 50 years.
The big item in the hydroelectric CIP for 2013 is $5.3 million to replace 600 feet of deteriorating wooden Flume 41 with concrete flume along with removing threatening boulders and anchoring the hillside above with geotechnical material.
The hydroelectric portion of the capital improvement budget includes a water delivery system that provides one-third of the district’s water (15,080 acre-feet) and an additional 17,000 acre-feet of water. The rest of the water is sent through the 21-megawatt Akin Powerhouse, which last year brought in $8 million in revenue.
“Why not use pipe?’ asked Bob Luca of El Dorado Hills.
Mueller responded that the 22.3 miles of trapezoidal shaped flumes and canals can carry more water than a pipe. Engineer Cindy Meggerdigian added that a few years ago the engineering department had studied that and it would have required fusion welding to make pipe follow the mountainside right of way. Also not mentioned are the seven creeks and streams plus the major one of Mill Creek that spill into the canal and constitute water rights established in 1856.
Over the next five years the biggest total planned expenditures among the $85 million total is $40.3 million for the hydroelectric category.
“Is there a light at the end of the tunnel when this (flume replacement and upgrading) ends?” asked Greg Prada from Cameron Park.
“We have four (flume) sections listed as high priority. It levels off after that,” said EID General Manager Jim Abercrombie.
EID acquired Project 184 in 1999. It consists of four alpine reservoirs in three different counties, a diversion dam on the South Fork of the American River near Kyburz and 22.3 miles of canal, flumes and tunnels ending in Forebay Reservoir, from which 15,080 acre-feet of water is sent to water treatment plants and the rest is sent down a penstock to the powerhouse and then returned to the river. It cost the district $1 to buy from PG&E, which offered $17,000 to take it. After objection from TURN, a consumer advocacy group, the California Public Utilities Commission cut that figure down to $15,000.
Abercrombie was El Dorado District manager for PG&E at the time.
“PG&E was about seven months from selling it to Idaho,” he said.
“EID needed to buy that asset to ensure its water supply,” Abercrombie said.
George Osborne, the only board member in attendance, added that Texaco and Enron were also interested in acquiring the project back then.
“One of the most important things is that it is pre-1914 water rights,” Osborne said.
“What’s the risk of canal failure?” Abercrombie asked. “Most customers don’t want a water outage.”
The Mountain Democrat does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy
Greg PradaSeptember 27, 2012 - 1:48 pm
EID's proposed new CIP may be "down from the 2011-2015 plan" but it's still going to take $60 million more new debt to fund these projects. Fifty-five percent ($46.5 million) of the proposed CIP spending is for Hydro/Project 184/FERC which, when added to the $103 million EID already has spent on Hydro/Project 184, is easily TRIPLE what Directors Fraser, Osborne and Wheeldon saw coming back in 2001. Why weren't these directors (who call themselves a "great, nearly perfect Board") "on top” of the financial consequences of their increased funding approvals every year since 2001? Project 184 provides 15,000 of EID’s 65,000 total acre feet of water and EID currently sells just 29,000 acre feet annually. So before another $46.5 million is approved for Project 184 by EID's Board, 38,000 regular ratepayers deserve a “to completion” funding projection from Management as to how many more tens of millions of dollars will be required to get Project 184 infrastructure fully "up to snuff". In the meantime, why aren't PG&E, the developers, the City of Placerville and agriculture customers getting charged any of the increased costs for these costly Project 184 fixes when they are far bigger beneficiaries than the 38,000 regular EID ratepayers who get stuck with the $3.5 million additional annual costs for debt, depreciation, engineering and overhead? On October 9th, ratepayers deserve far better from their incumbent directors than another open-ended "rubber-stamp"/ “stick it to the regular ratepayers” for $46.5 million more Project 184 spending.
Jon JakowatzSeptember 27, 2012 - 2:49 pm
Let's get a few things straight... "...five members of the public showed up..." The EID "Public CIP Workshop" took place at EID's HQ building in Placerville at 6PM on a work-night. This is not EID's ratepayer population center; that would be more like Cameron Park or further west. Would a 7PM start time have attracted some working folks? While the draft 2013-2017 CIP document is five pages of one line per project entries, something less than twenty of these projects were actually covered in the presentation. The CIP document was less than easy to find on EID's newly minted, customer-friendly, website. Matter of fact, it was tucked away in the Board packet for the Sept 11 Special Board meeting. The detail sheets of each project are most elusive. Why doesn't EID post the full draft document in plain sight on its website, including detail project pages, where public has easy access it? When will the full CIP document be made available to the public and Board so it can be reviewed and digested prior to the Oct 9 Board meeting where it will surely be rubber stamped approved? A couple of details/facts in Mr. Raffety's story need attention: - A more relevant comparison of the 2013-2017 CIP would be to the 2012-2016 CIP which totaled $86.5 million for 5 years. The comparison to 2011-2015 in the article creates the illusion that EID has made huge cuts in the $85 million 2013-2017 CIP. One only needs to look at the measly $11 million planned for 2017 to see that there may be no decrease at all. - 2013 replacement of a section of the Mother Lode force main - this project originally appeared on the 2011-2015 CIP and was a no-show on the 2012-2016 CIP. According to staff on hand at the meeting, it was discovered earlier this year that the existing pipe was deteriorating into "paper mache" and had to be replaced. Without any discernible action by the Board, the$1.2 million project was reborn and is going before the Board on Oct 9th for approval of a $1 million construction contract to be awarded to Veerkamp Construction. With a 75 day work schedule starting in October, most of this project will be completed in 2012. The 2013-2017 CIP actually shows $275,000 for the project in 2013. - Regarding the "purchase" of Project 184 - PG&E actually paid EID $15 million, not the $15,000 reported. And, "...selling it to Idaho" sounds like the State of Idaho was wanting to purchase this money pit. Not exactly... a private company located in Idaho was the potential buyer. - Lastly, I was approached by Mr. Raffety to clarify the spelling of my name. I printed it on a page of his notepad and checked with him to make sure my printing was legible. Sadly, another detail missed. If the reader has got to this point, they may wonder what the point is. The point is that EID and Mt Democrat reporters play fast and loose with details and facts. This inattention can and frequently does result in the public not getting the true story. The public deserves better from both. Jon Jakowatz El Dorado Hills www.FixEID.org
Evelyn VeerkampSeptember 27, 2012 - 3:41 pm
Jon Jakowitz: You're right. EID has not yet posted the documents for the meeting of 9/26/2012. I thought public agency agendas had to be available prior to meetings. How did you get a copy of the CIP document?
Jon JakowatzSeptember 28, 2012 - 12:14 am
Evelyn - The Draft $85 million 2013-2017 CIP summary is part of the 9/11/2012 Special Board meeting packet. A slightly different paper version was available at the 9/26 meeting. How much will the document change when it comes out as part of the 10/9 board meeting packet? Will EID live up to its claims of transparency and put the complete draft document (including individual project sheets) on its website by 10/1 to give ratepayers time to digest it?
Greg PradaSeptember 28, 2012 - 6:12 am
EID’s Wednesday night workshop was like Clint Eastwood talking to FOUR empty chairs...four empty chairs for the FOUR EID directors who “thumbed their noses” at their fiscal oversight responsibilities to come scrutinize every one of 136 proposed capital projects that will require $60 million of new debt and more double digit rate hikes. EID Directors again have proven contemptuous disregard for fiscal prudence and their duty to protect the wallets of ratepayers. Since 2003, the Board majority has spent more than $900 million in capital and operating spending, wasting $100 million…so apparently they think “what’s another $85 million?” Meanwhile, the thirteen EID staffers in attendance are no fools…they came in force to sell their $85 million jobs program/$15 million per year deficit spending program. They also were there to protect their six-figure salaries and obscenely lavish benefits which together average more than $170,000 annually for these particular thirteen.
Evelyn VeerkampSeptember 28, 2012 - 7:14 am
Jon: 9/11/2012 Special Board meeting packet is not online. Presumably copies were handed out at the meeting?????
Evelyn VeerkampSeptember 28, 2012 - 7:15 am
Greg: Which chair was NOT empty?
ObservationSeptember 28, 2012 - 7:48 am
Seems like EDH types will be happier once they had total control of everything. Maybe it is time to start your own water district for your own city, elect those "knowledgeable and engaged" followers to run the show. Oh, that's right, then they would be insiders, good ole boys, accountable and held up to scrutiny from the public at large. Then they would find out about the myriad of state regulations driving everything from low income housing to sewer processing, but they are still accountable to everyone and public floggings and nasty comments can be part of their daily lives.. This all depends of course on being able to get elected. Unlikely....
Jack RousseauSeptember 28, 2012 - 8:44 am
Prada & Jakowatz appear to have a bizarre agenda. I'm a 30-year+ native of EDC, and I've never seen such a willful effort to misunderstand the process of public utility asset maintenance and replacement. You gentlemen do a disservice to the west county area. All the information I need to understand the situation is on EID's website. The CIP workshop, by the way, was not a Board meeting. See calendar item here: http://www.eid.org/index.aspx?recordid=208&page=19 I've been a ratepayer for years, gentlemen, and your manufactured crisis is full of dissembling interpretations, misinformation, and what appears to be lies. Worse than that is your apparent incompetence in understanding finance and budgeting.
Evelyn VeerkampSeptember 28, 2012 - 9:05 am
Jack Rousseau: Thanks for the link.
Greg PradaSeptember 28, 2012 - 9:35 am
To those interested in Evelyn's question: The Director in attendance Wednesday night was George Osborne who was swept into office in January 2001 via recall backed by Developers who rebelled against then EID Director Bill Bergmeister who initiated Measure K. Bergmeister felt the public should have the opportunity to vote before EID took on new debt. The Developers, of course, didn't like this because it interfered with their business model to get the public to finance added water and sewer infrastructure to enable new home building and make Developers rich. But when Measure K results were in, over 70 percent of voters agreed with Bergmeister and wanted to vote each time EID wanted to raise new debt. Through recalling Bergmeister and inserting their advocate George Osborne, the Developers got their man. Thanks(?)to George Osborne's now eleven year leadership, EID's bonded debt has increased from $110 million in 2002 to $380 million in 2011. And now, because EID has run out of money to continue their $15 million per year deficit spending, and because EID wants $60 million more debt that benefits most everyone BUT current ratepayers, George Osborne attended Wednesday's meeting to defend Developer and other special interests that feed off double digit rate increases to EID's 38,000 regular ratepayers.
Emily P. EDC ResidentSeptember 28, 2012 - 10:57 am
I have been reading Prada's comments for a long time now, and I'm noticing a disturbing trend. I will not pretend to understand all of the costs and regulations that EID has to deal with, so I will only comment on his statement where he says of some EID employees - "protect their six-figure salaries and obscenely lavish benefits which together average more than $170,000 annually for these particular thirteen". My direct question to Mr. Prada is this: "How much do you think it should cost for knowledgeable, well trained people to deliver you clean water that is a necessity of life, in a safe and regular manner?" We all seem to take it for granted just to turn on the tap, don't we? It appears that Prada keeps complaining on how much EID's employees make, and complaining about this and that - but he never comes up with some CONSTRUCTIVE solution - does he? I don't think he understands the complexities of the water/sewer business - so how could he be constructive?. Who is this guy? Is he some sort of board retiree with nothing better to do? I'm just grateful that EID's employees work hard to provide a safe and reliable service to the community. If anything, I'd rather pay top dollar to someone like that who knows what they're doing to provide a life giving service.
Jon JakowatzSeptember 28, 2012 - 3:11 pm
For Evelyn - try this link Draft2013-17CIPSummary - if it doesn't work, copy/paste this URL into your browser http://www.eid.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=3047
Evelyn VeerkampSeptember 28, 2012 - 4:31 pm
Jon: Excellent! Thank you.