Dredge the res? City Councilors say it's about time
RWSA chair Mike Gaffney (center): "If we decide to pursue a full-throttle dredging study, we don't want it to drag on forever."PHOTO BY HAWES SPENCER
Nine months after the City demanded as much, a giant March 3 meeting, bringing together both top government bodies and both waterworks boards, 22 people in all, inched closer to getting an actual dredging study–- but not without a fight.
"A dredging study for water supply only is an absolute waste of the rate-payers' money," said Don Wagner, the chair the Albemarle County Service Authority, the entity that pipes water to homes and businesses in the urban part of the County.
However, both the Albemarle Board of Supervisors and the Charlottesville City Council voted unanimously a few moments earlier to reopen the Request for Proposals, or RFP, that the Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority had been preparing last June until they were diverted by this same quadrumvirate.
The four boards–- three of them dominated by County interests–- had put together a committee to study dredging, and the chair of that committee, Albemarle Supervisor Sally Thomas, gave that report Tuesday, which called for dredging only for narrow purposes, such as recreation.
"I don't think water users should pay for rowing," responded City Councilor David Brown. "I don't think water users should pay for fishing."
"This is not a discussion of the water supply plan," said a perturbed Thomas.
Despite her plea and those of Service Authority board member Elizabeth Palmer, all five City Councilors expressed interest in dredging for water supply, something that was dismissed several years ago when an engineering firm suggested it might cost over $223 million.
"Dredging was not taken off the table because of its cost," Palmer told the group. "It was taken off the table because it didn't supply us what we needed."
Charlottesville Mayor/Councilor Dave Norris, however, has become something of a champion for dredging, something he sees as combining with conservation, to remedy some of the ills of the official water plan which would destroy a natural area, cost approximately $200 million, and–- critics allege–- cause water rates to skyrocket.
Lucky for Norris, the City owns the land in the natural area targeted for a new reservoir that's the centerpiece of the official plan; so, theoretically, Charlottesville can block the official plan.
"The City holds all the cards," Norris said, "and they know that."
The boards heard Tuesday from Rivanna Authority director Tom Frederick that the state will eventually require a bathymetric, or reservoir bottom, survey and that such survey constitutes about half the estimated $275,000 cost of a thorough dredging study.
"It's going to happen very soon," said Norris. "There's five people in agreement."
29 comments
Bravo Mayor Norris - WELL DONE CITY COUNCIL
Let the light of truth shine bright!
All city residents should give thanks for the responsible position taken by our councilors today to get the dredging surveys done for the water supply and once and for all find out the cost and feasibility of restorative dredging of the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir.
The current so-called plan is based on faulty information. It's way past time to get the facts and costs straight !
Thank you City Council for your principled stance to look out for the rate-payers both in the city and county
Many thanks to Mayor Norris and all the Councilors for their diligence. The people of Charlottesville are to be commended as well for their efforts conserving water over the past few years.
As a municipality, we need to be sane about where we're going and how we're going to get there. The days of overspending are over for the foreseeable future, and we must proceed with caution and wisdom. That means exploring every option available to us and not blindly holding on to last year's best idea for the sake of expediency.
Looks like one of those times where County residents owe a debt of thanks to the City Council.
Clearly a case of too many chiefs and not enough indians. What will it take for the county voters and landowners to wake up and realize that Sally Thomas, Ann Mallek, and David Slutzky are not the correct representatives for the counties best interests?
The dredging committee: a bureaucratic ploy to kill dredging, which failed. Their charge barred considering the one question that mattered: is dredging a cost-effective means of expanding water supply? Now ask yourselfââ?¬â?who convened a committee so it looked like the idea would get fairly considered, and then hamstrung them so it couldn't? Who wasted the time of a great many public minded citizens, just to try (and as it happens, fail) to give himself cover for his decision to build a ridiculously expensive dam. Charlottesville City Manager O'Connell? Ask--why?
As a civil engineer with over 30 years experience, I would like to weigh in on the water supply plan. My reaction to the initial cost estimate was that it was based on inaccurate information that was not available at the time of the cost estimate. A bathymetric survey is required to determine the volumes of dirt/silt that would be removed to restore the Reservoir to it's original shape. Without the survey, there are no accurate volumes from wich to apply costs. This was the first clue of faulty engineering and cost estimating.
The second clue was when it was learned that geotechnical reports uncovered rock fissures in the bottom of the proposed reservoir. The first thing that needs to be done in dam and reservoir engineering is to perform the soil/geotechnical borings to determine whether the underlying soil stata is permeable and to determine if the underlying rock strata is impermeable. A reservoir will not hold water if the soil is permeable and the underlying rock has cracks or fissures. In order to determine the costs of construction, soil reports need to be performed at the start of the planning process so that an accurate cost estimate may be prepared. The engineers did not do that. If I was in charge, they would not be working on this project. This was a major error!
There are pros and cons to both the dredging operation and construction of the proposed reservoir. At the moment, I do not think there is sufficient information to make a final decision.
It's high time we put the red herring of recreation to rest. No one (except Sally Thomas, I supose) has been suggesting that the reservoir should be dredged SOLELY for recreation purposes.
ââ?¬Å?This is not a discussion of the water supply plan,” said a perturbed Thomas."
Ms Thomas couldn't be more mistaken. The Water Plan will be discussed over and over again until this issue is resolved to everyone's satisfaction. If there is a less expensive alternative that will get us the amount of water we need, then we're going to do it.
Here's a little mystery that needs to be solved first. Who decided we'd need THAT much water, and what is their vision for Albemarle County? And what's the dad-blamed hurry, hm? I suspect that whatever they're planning, it'll make Biscuit Run look like a paradise by comparison. One thing's for certain, they haven't clued in their own citizens about this.
“A dredging study for water supply only is an absolute waste of the rate-payers’ money,” said Don Wagner, the chair the Albemarle County Service Authority, the entity that pipes water to homes and businesses in the urban part of the County.
Can anyone give an instance in which Don Wagner has demonstrated that he takes the cost to rate payers into consideration? It's sad that these people do not get that the many in the public are saying that the decision-makers have not come close to what they demand in decision-making. Has any of them ever made a statement as to whom he feels accountable?
When three of the four bodies are made up of county residents, it's time to dissolve and then reconstruct the water supply decision-making entity.
BTW, does anybody feel that Slutzky and Co. would actually abide by a referendum on increasing the local sales tax. As far as I'm concerned, his actions on the water issue has greatly damaged his credibility with me.
I'm just thrilled they all finally put the clamp on Ms Sally.Now she's just talking to the wall it appears. As I read her comment,she sounds as a spoiled child.Who is she to dictate what is discussed?
Sally found out she just doesn't hold the cards anymore. About time!
Insults to the politicians WILL not get the job done! Can we focus on the issues at hand, or shall we continue ranting like children?
The construction of nine miles of pipeline through streets, roads and neighborhoods will be a monumental construction project. Not to mention the acquisition of easements through County and City residents property. How are the easements to be obtained? What if one property owner refuses to grant an easement? Will the Service Authority take the land by eminent domain? These are all issues which have not been addressed.
As I said earlier, there is a lack of information from which to make a prudent decision.
People have simply HAD ENOUGH!
Funny,,, Sally herself is the one who has been caught RANTING and screaming. The public has finally caught on and is also sickend by her public display of manipulation! She has been a thorn in the whole process. Sally should RETIRE asap!!!!
So, dredging alone will not provide enough water, & almost everyone at yesterday's meeting agrees we need to move forward with the existing water supply plan. And everyone also agrees that dredging for recreational purposes shouldn't be paid for by rate payers.
Based one these conclusions from yesterday's meeting, I don't see the urgency of moving ahead with another study.
It's pretty obvious the cost of repairing existing infrastructure is immense, and building the new infrastructure is also expensive. Let's just get on with it.
Pop, Take a nap. I think you are ready for "sleepy time". We have already read the news, and ("we" THE PUBLIC) mostly disagree in going forward with the existing water plan. So, MOVE ASIDE and RESPECT OUR WILL.
Engineer you've provided very valuable insight into some of the problems with this plan. Do you think there are grounds for suing the consultants to get the over $5 million we've paid them back ?
At least that would more than pay for all the re-estimating of their wildly inaccurate costs. I still can't believe the board and staff kept paying them for 6 years and didn't pick up on any of these problems, or ask for a second opinion. We need people like you on the board !
I agree we need real experts instead of non experts manning the boat. The useless committees have got to go! My prediction, because City Council has finally put the foot down on the County, we can finally make progress. This move should have happened long ago. It is a no brainer that the County has bullied the city for too long. Look at the Parkway issue. Once again the County has manipulated some on Council for too long.It is the County that is driving this destructive project. Hopefully this situation will also change, as the city awakens to the realities. I know there is a rally planned in the Park. Saturday 10:00. These folks are serious, as they are willing to take the case to a higher court.
As far as the long lasting water debate, the public has certainly been HAD. I agree,Filing suit may need to happen. It is a real shame that citizens are forced to take legal action because some of our leaders ignore and also violate the rights of the people they represent. That is what has happened with the water issue and also with the Parkway piece.
SO, Why does Dennis Rooker think he has even a chance of winning re-election? He speaks over and over again about dredging for this and that. But it is all hot air directed at sensless arguments for dredging. In the end he votes with the rest of the Supervisors, saying I tried but! Bull! Dennis appears two faced. Please don't risk the county future by putting such people in charge! He just wante The Nature Conservancy to have a water park paid for by the rate payers.
SO, Why does Dennis Rooker think he has even a chance of winning re-election? He speaks over and over again about dredging for this and that. But it is all hot air directed at sensless arguments for dredging. In the end he votes with the rest of the Supervisors, saying I tried but! Bull! Dennis appears two faced. Please don't risk the county future by putting such people in charge! He just wante The Nature Conservancy to have a water park paid for by the rate payers. Ken Boyd appeard the same way, two faced!
I hope someone else runs for Rooker's seat. He and Sally are irritations now. I honestly trusted the two of them to stand consistantly firm in rallying for the environmment. Hasn't happened.
Lucky for Norris, the City owns the land in the natural area targeted for a new reservoir that’s the centerpiece of the official plan; so, theoretically, Charlottesville can block the official plan. ââ?¬Å?The City holds all the cards,” Norris said, ââ?¬Å?and they know that.”
Simply not true. If the city wants to play those cards, they can give a two-year written notice to the other three parties to exit the Four-Party Agreement it signed in 1973, work out a payment plan for whatever debt and bonds RWSA has outstanding, and compensate the county for infrastructure they helped pay for (mainly sewer system and central treatment facility at Moores Creek).
It is true the city leases its 3 reservoirs to RWSA for $1 a year. Saying the city is bound by a contract is meaningless given the city's history of breaking contracts, unilaterally not paying its portion of Solid Waste Authority for 5 years. If the city breaks another contract, I think it's open season for the county to break a few (illegal) contracts (revenue sharing).
It's also true that Ragged Natural Area was originally purchased for future water storage. It is reservoir land, and only a temporary playground for the selfish city elites.
Yes, the city has cards to play. But they are not holding ALL the cards. Click on my name to read the actual legal agreement, RWSA charter signed by Mayor Francis Fife on June 12, 1973. It's not on Rivanna's website. Not on "Citizens for a Sustainable Water Supply" website (CvilleWater.info) either. Hmmm, wonder why? I sent it to CvilleWater a month ago. Only interested in parts of the truth?
Thanks for info Blair. As a City resident, I'm a little put off by the city's recent posturing over this issue. We have a plan. A good one. Let's get on with it.
Jim, have you ever heard of calling something a plan if you don't have a clue what it would cost ? Would you let someone build a house for you without a budget? Well maybe you have a lot more money than I do.
Rate, have ever heard of demanding a more expensive bill for an incomplete product. That seems to be what the City and a few others are demanding. I, and my kids, would rather not go thirsty 30 years down the road. And we would prefer not pay more money for a guesstimated water solution cobbled together by a few anti-growth residents.
Jim, the fact that you can't discern the difference between smart growth and no growth make me question your judgment from the get-go.
Add to that the fact that no one has come up with a plan anywhere near as costly as the RWSA/Gannett-Fleming plan, and I'm forced to come to the conclusion that you're extremely confused on this issue. It's the RWSA that's proposing an incomplete and expensive plan based on a pipeline so non-existent, both its feasibility and costs are incalculable
The candidates running for office who will be responsible for water and sewer rate increases that will pay for our community water supply plan need to make their positions known. Norris and Taliaferro are on record for getting the cost information on dredging, the pipelines, and conservation data before proceeding with any construction at Ragged Mt. Slutsky and Rooker are on record to proceed with the RWSA dam and new up-hill pipeline no matter what the cost. Does anyone know where Szakos and Thomas stand on
this ?
Jim-
You said: "I, and my kids, would rather not go thirsty 30 years down the road. And we would prefer not pay more money for a guesstimated water solution cobbled together by a few anti-growth residents."
I understand your feelings - I'm as frustrated as you are. However, the reality is that IT IS THE RWSA/NATURE CONSERVANCY "PLAN" THAT 100% MEETS YOUR DESCRIPTION ... not the Sustainable Water guys' plan. (They don't have a plan, just 4 prospective solutions that they say cannot be fully evaluated until standard engineering data is obtained.)
The reality is, THERE IS NO RWSA PLAN. Tom Frederick, the RWSA head, has publicly admitted that what they call a plan is merely conceptual and that little engineering has actually been done.(This is why everyone was shocked at the tripling of the Ragged Mountain dam cost when they finally did the preliminary corings ... AFTER claiming they had a plan. Real engineers typically get corings BEFORE developing a plan).
Similarly, the huge pipleine required to pump water 9.5 miles and uphill has NOT been engineered and RWSA doesn't even know the route it will take. They don't even have horsepower and pumping calculations. IT IS THE RWSA PLAN THAT IS THE "GUESSTIMATED WATER SOLUTION."
Take into account that Kevin Lynch (former city councilor), Francis Fife (former Cville mayor), Kendra Hamilton (former city councilor), Richard Collins (former RWSA chairman), and others who have more knowledge than most of us have all been pointing this out for 2 years ... and trying to get the engineering studies and facts you seem to think exist.
Using Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, it has been clearly proven that the RWSA plan really isn't a plan, at least from an engineering and practical perspective.
As to your kids in 30 years, you might want to tell them to move to the county -- unless you leave them a large inheritance, they may not be able to afford RWSA water after this boondoggle is paid for! :-)
WHEN THE NSA GOT FLUORIDE IN THE WATER IN THE 1950'S, AMERICA STOPPED CARING. THAT WAS THE END OF AMERICA. NOW SHUT UP AND GIVE UP. THERE'S NOTHING YOU CAN DO. YOU'RE ALL DOCIL, BRAIN-DEAD MUTANTS. STOP MAKING ME SICK WITH YOUR PATHETIC ATTEMPTS AT FREEDOM.
ALL THE CONGRESSMAN WHO SPOKE OF COMMUNIST CONSPIRACIES AND CITED THE NAZIS PUTTING SODIUM FLUORIDE IN THEIR PRISONERS WATER TO MAKE THEM DOCILE AND SUBSERVIENT, ALL THE RESEARCH INTO FLUORIDES MIND NUMBING EFFECTS WERE LABELLED KOOKS BY YOUR FOREFATHERS. AND YOU CONTINUE TO THROW PEOPLE WHO TRY TO WARN YOU IN MENTAL INSTITUTIONS AND TORTURE THEM WITH MIND CONTROL TORTURE CHEMICALS. AND YOU COMPLAIN ABOUT TORTURE OF MUSLIMS IN CUBA BUT YOU SAY NOTHING ABOUT TORTURE OF CHRISTIANS IN STAUNTON WHILE YOU DO COVER STORIES ABOUT PORNOGRAPHY. AND YHOU COMPLAIN ABOUT BUSH WHILE SUPPORTING OBAMA. WHO BOTH WORK FOR THE SAME ELITE GLOBALIST CRIME SYNDICATE PUSHING FOR A SCIENTIFIC, BEHAVIORAL PSYCHOLOGY-BASED PROPAGANDA MATRIX FROM WHICH THE PROLES CAN NEVER ESCAPE, OR TO QUOTE BERTRAND RUSSELL, "TO THE POINT AT WHICH A REVOLT OF THE PLEBES AGAINST THE OLIGARCHY WOULD BE AS UNTHINKABLE AS AN INSURRECTION OF LAMBS AGAINST THE PRACTICE OF EATING MUTTON". I'M WARNING YOU: DON'T VOTE FOR A CANDIDATE FOR CITY COUNCIL WHO ISN'T MAKING THE ELIMINATION OF WATER FLUORIDATION A TOP PRIORITY. AND IF THEY AREN'T CALLING FOR A MORATORIUM ON CHILDHOOD VACCINES, DON'T ELECT THEM. THEY'RE IDIOTS.
rAMbo enDOrseD mE