I was feeling a bit down the other morning, likely due to reflecting upon the decades of concerted effort in acquiring Merced River Water for land development projects outside the legal Place Of Use – and how that pesky technicality was remedied with the plan of developing more very expensive groundwater wells in order to replace Merced River Water leaving the legal POU with groundwater. OK – but here is the problem I perceive with this 37+ year operating plan….  (ready?)

As if you didn’t already know after all these repetitive blah blah blahs regarding the subject? lol.   But do not fret, I am tired and beginning to understand such feeble attempts at public education on my part along with the sincere hope for intervention and correction have most likely been in vain.  Nothing is going to change, with the exception of course, as to how much more money will be required from the MERCED RIVER WATER ENTITLED CUSTOMERS of the subdivision to continue expanding this GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM for developers outside the POU. 

And when that day comes, which it inevitably will, and subdivision residents and availability fee paying absentee owners are screaming about the monthly service charge and water consumption fee and the big hike in “standby fees” being so outrageous for what they receive – if I am still around I will nod my head in agreement, smile and probably say something like “you can’t fight city hall” or “the special interests of greed always win”  while taking solace in the knowledge at least I tried.

So, once again – while I am still here to annoy you with obsessive repetition….I do not believe it is ethical to surreptitiously obtain the money required for this GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM from the innocent property owners of the Lake Don Pedro subdivision who were/are entitled to Merced River Water in the first place.  The subdivision and golf course were ALWAYS the intended beneficiaries of that MERCED RIVER WATER under water license 11395.  That is why that FORMER SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT  was constructed. 

[QUESTIONS:  Why didn’t the LDPCSD forming LAFCOs prior to 1980, consider why the original developer Boise Cascade had abandoned their many attempts at groundwater sources?  Inadequate production and poor quality water! 

Why would the LAFCOs still continue to greatly expand the LDPCSD District boundaries through speculative annexations thus creating a greater GROUNDWATER DEMAND on paper?  Remember the engineer’s MORE DEVELOPMENT TO JUSTIFY EXPENSIVE TREATMENT PLANT CAPACITY UPGRADES COMMENT? 

Were Tuolumne and Mariposa, and their respective county departments, commissions and officials also supportive of Pete Kampa’s return to Lake Don Pedro CSD – so he could assist in solving the GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROBLEM the LAFCOs had created? 

Trusting that Kampa, with his influential state connections and grant writing abilities, could obtain a PARTIAL GRANT SOLUTION to the substantial financial responsibility the counties had forced on the unsuspecting and innocent property owners of the Lake Don Pedro subdivision – a designated disadvantaged community?]

?

The concept of our special district providing water service to a particular group of customers, within a defined service area, and only for the cost required to provide that service, has been corrupted to the obvious benefit of land development interests

NOT ENTITLED TO MERCED RIVER WATER. 

This GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM should be clearly spelled out in district policy and disclosed in every title transaction involving Lake Don Pedro subdivision property where the owners are essentially mandatory LDPCSD customers and subject to this increasingly expensive special benefit. 

ANYWAY….

I was feeling a little down and a person I had just met commented on how there were different ways to look at things and offered an example with which most of us are familiar….

Is the glass half empty?   (negative perspective)

Or

Is the glass half full?        (positive perspective)

 

Though I had never heard or thought of such a response before I quipped –

but isn’t the issue more of “what” is in the glass?

After reading about how the Piney Creek area was annexed into the LDPCSD service area as an “island of future district service” (generally discouraged by LAFCo policies) in  exchange for the transfer of Water Rights – which turned out NOT TO EXIST,  I caught myself thinking about that whole concept of Water Right “give and take”, for what purposes, and foreseeable outcomes by those involved.

[Three components to a contract:    OFFER,  CONSIDERATION (something of value)  and ACCEPTANCE.  In the Piney Creek annexation mentioned above, the “consideration” [valuable water right being transferred] turned out to be non-existent – so why was the property still annexed?  Or in the alternative, why not now “detach from the district” along with all the other purely speculative and decades old annexations which have never received water yet represent a continuing and expensive GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION LIABILITY for the  <MR WECs> of the subdivision?]

Does it seem ethical or right for the MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT to

• be a party to LDPCSD annexation agreements
• where the MID receives another valuable Water Right (possessed by the “to be annexed property”)
• contingent upon the LDPCSD furnishing future water service,
• to properties STILL outside the legal Place of Use under water license 11395 ——
• [which is held by the MID and
• used by the LDPCSD to pump MERCED RIVER WATER from Lake McClure [for the intended purpose of subdivision and golf course consumption],
• ——  which must therefore be provided groundwater through an extremely expensive GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM (with the additional costs for ARSENIC and OTHER CONTAMINANT removal, monitoring, state reporting, etc.) ,
• which is paid for by the originally intended MERCED RIVER WATER ENTITLED CUSTOMERS (of the Lake Don Pedro subdivision) even though,
• such annexations were intentionally concealed from the <MR WECs> of the subdivision
  
• by both LDPCSD and the “property annexation approving LAFCOs” through such means as a
• coordinated avoidance of required district Municipal Service Reviews which would have made such “slumbering annexations” known to the <MR WECs> of the subdivision and general public?  

Let’s put our thinking caps on….

Who are the beneficiaries of such annexations?  At first blush I would imagine…..

1. The Merced Irrigation District receives another water right,
2. Land developers outside the legal place of use for MERCED RIVER WATER receive a special benefit GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM which increases their profit margin;
3. Real estate associated interests benefit due to the “increased inventory” of properties with quality water,
4. The respective counties are relieved of the financial and logistical burdens of providing water to thousands of acres of drought prone property within jurisdictions,
5. For profit district management companies such as KAMPA COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS llc, (KAMPACS) and their traditional sub contractors benefit with treatment plant re-configurations, upgrades, line extensions further outside POU, groundwater well development, etc.
6. and County and State entities receive increased tax revenue from the improved lands  … so many benefit from such a “foothill water empire” based on an expensive and unreliable GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM!!!

 

 

 

 

Q: But who is injured, incurs additional expense, and/or liabilities for this diversion from intended water service?

 

 

 

A: The past, present, and future property owners within the Lake Don Pedro Owners Association subdivision who must subsidize a special benefit GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM for outside third party land developers demanding cheap quality water.

So, is it just a matter of perspective ……

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

“ANYTHING VALUABLE REQUIRES PROTECTION”

My best to you and yours, Lew