After the many discussions I’ve had with city water system ratepayers, it’s become increasingly apparent that the overwhelming majority of ratepayers want the city water system to be properly operated and maintained, yet there is absolutely no faith that the Council or city staff is even slightly interested in competently doing so. The fact is that the Council has imposed huge, ham-fisted and horribly timed water rate increases in the almost total absence of properly detailed engineering information about the actual condition of the city water system.

All during the rate setting process, the Council consistently, ignorantly and arrogantly ignored important questions and suggestions from ratepayers, together with advice from water professionals living in the city.  Instead they chose to rely on “cherry picked” points from a consultant’s report which were then enhanced by a rate increase consultant’s firm.

Why did the city not hire consultants from companies in the well drilling or well maintenance industry to verify their consultant’s contentions? Why has the city steadfastly refused to eliminate or significantly reduce energy costs by exploring options for solar with the attendant grants which are available?

Major examples of the Council’s and staff’s glaring lack of consideration and competency include the following:

During neighborhood meetings held by councilmen Peterson and Bird prior to 2018, a ratepayer pointed out a multi-million dollar discrepancy between what the Council was telling ratepayers and what the graph used to justify the rate increase depicted. Jim Ernest, who was not a councilman at that time, to his credit acknowledged the problem after it was pointed out, yet no explanation or correction was ever provided.

In the same neighborhood meetings, numerous ratepayers expressed varying concerns about the basis of the rate increase and its impacts. Ratepayer comments, such as the need for the city’s management of the water system to undergo an audit/peer review were never documented and many questions, including important fiscal and engineering issues, went completely unanswered and have to this date been ignored.

The consultant report that the Council has repeatedly touted as justification for replacing major components of the city’s water system is almost completely devoid of adequately detailed engineering inspections. It is primarily founded on a surficial review of the water system and its components. Detailed engineering inspections of all major components of the city water system are necessary for determining their actual condition, and for determining whether repair or replacement efforts are necessary. NOWHERE in this report is there ANY evidence or statement that the city water system is in imminent danger of catastrophic failure as has been alluded to by some council members.

The Solano County Taxpayers Association (SCTA) provided a letter to the city council asking the city to provide proper justification for replacing some of the city’s relatively young wells, questioning the city’s well construction standards, and asking the council to address the issue of ratepayers in new parts of Dixon having to pay for water system rehabilitation in older parts of town. The Council never responded.

At the December 2018 council meeting, prior of the approval of the 300% water rate increase, a letter was read by a member of the Dixon Chapter of the SCTA, who is an engineer, an expert in water issues and wells, asked the city to provide proper justification for youthful well replacement, questioned the city’s well construction standards, and confronted the council about new homeowners having to pay for deferred maintenance. The SCTA also provided the council information on well rehabilitation measures that could potentially be used to economically extend the service life of wells. The Council never responded.

The Council’s indifference to ratepayers could be attributable to the fact that none of them are civil engineers and none of them live in the city water service area. However, after observing, listening, and speaking to them both during meetings and outside of them, it is quite apparent that it is their blind faith in city staff and consultants which is their primary problem.

As I explained to someone who was against the rate repeal and who works in the industry, it is not that we as users of the city’s water system don’t want to or refuse to pay more.  We simply want it done in the cheapest, most efficient manner. You don’t replace an entire system which was initially constructed in the 1970’s when systems typically last 100 years as do water wells. By the end of the conversation, he had changed his mind.

Let’s look at some facts. This council has consistently maintained that Solano Irrigation District should never have been removed as a partner. One of the duties of the operator of a water system is inspection. SID was removed as the operator in September of 2014. Water tank rehab work was done at one site with dump trucks of gravel having to have been removed.

Why was there no ongoing inspection of this holding tank? If there is a problem with the well casing, as at one well, where was the video inspection and where are the video inspections of all of our wells? If these are converted ag wells, as some on the council claim, why weren’t these wells upgraded to higher standards at the time they were converted to make their useful life what is considered normal?

Moving over to finances, would you rather pay cash for something you need or would you prefer to pay three times the cost by financing it with bonds or a loan? This is one of the primary reasons the rate increase was so drastic because it allows the issuance of bonds to pay for these debatably unnecessary projects.

At one of the meetings prior to the Covid-19 shutdown, the mayor directly asked the city engineer if he had looked into any of the alternatives suggested during the last two years and the engineer’s answer was “NO”. This is enough of a reason and a full demonstration of the animosity and opposition your city government has for citizen participation.

The mayor has contended that the State of California will take over the system and force higher rates on us. The council has never provided even a shred of evidence, such as state correspondence, that would happen.The consultant report makes no such assertion.  Simply show me one city where that has happened. The city of Atwater’s general fund and water enterprise fund are both in deficit and the State has done nothing.

Not everyone in Dixon will vote on this Measure. Those in the other water district don’t want the city to “subsidize” the city’s water system with general fund money. It can’t. The water fund could borrow using an interfund loan but it must be repaid.

So both the city and its former operations manager failed to do their job and their solution is for you to just shut up and pay more so they can do projects which they refuse to justify while ignoring addressing problems such as energy usage point by point.

Vote “Yes” on Measure S. If council and staff can’t or won’t do their jobs, it isn’t on us to do it for them …