Letters to the Editor

Let’s be fair about rates
I think it is a given that we need a new sewage system. The
state demands it. It is also a given that the new system must be
large enough to allow for growth.
It’s expensive! Did we choose the best one? Who studied what
systems are available? What systems were studied? What were the
results of the studies? On what did they base their decision? The
public would have a lot more confidence in the decision if they
knew what systems were considered, who decided and why they chose
the particular system.
The new system must be paid for. But how? The method chosen was
essentially a parcel tax, where every dwelling pays the same as
others in its class. It has been suggested that the fee be based on
water usage, so that large households would pay more than small
ones. City Councilwoman Monica Johnson is quoted as saying
”
in order to implement per usage rates we would have had to make
it equitable and install meters.
”
Balderdash! The meters are already there. Every couple of months
our water usage is read from existing meters and we are billed.
Sewage usage is at least loosely related to water usage, and sewage
charges could be based on water usage, or perhaps on a fixed fee
plus a charge based on water usage. Metering sewage separately
might make it more equitable, but a flat fee is less equitable than
charges based on water usage.
What is needed is more information about what was studied and
how the decisions were made, and a more equitable billing system
than one based on number of dwellings.
Richard H. Fish
Hollister
Let’s be fair about rates

I think it is a given that we need a new sewage system.  The state demands it. It is also a given that the new system must be large enough to allow for growth.

It’s expensive!  Did we choose the best one?  Who studied what systems are available?  What systems were studied? What were the results of the studies?  On what did they base their decision?  The public would have a lot more confidence in the decision if they knew what systems were considered, who decided and why they chose the particular system.

The new system must be paid for. But how?  The method chosen was essentially a parcel tax, where every dwelling pays the same as others in its class.  It has been suggested that the fee be based on water usage, so that large households would pay more than small ones.  City Councilwoman Monica Johnson is quoted as saying “in order to implement per usage rates we would have had to make it equitable and install meters.”

Balderdash!  The meters are already there.  Every couple of months our water usage is read from existing meters and we are billed. Sewage usage is at least loosely related to water usage, and sewage charges could be based on water usage, or perhaps on a fixed fee plus a charge based on water usage.  Metering sewage separately might make it more equitable, but a flat fee is less equitable than charges based on water usage.

What is needed is more information about what was studied and how the decisions were made, and a more equitable billing system than one based on number of dwellings.

Richard H. Fish

Hollister

Council rate hike a joke

It’s clear most people who attended the Hollister City Council meeting Sept. 5 came away with the same thought.

Councilmembers had made their decision on a proposed new sewer (necessary for growth) long before the meeting started.

It was an insult to the audience and speakers who voiced their objections and remedies to an inattentive, disinterested, uncaring, arrogant council. The meeting was a waste of time.

Council put no thought into the financial structure or burden imposed on disabled persons any age, seniors on fixed incomes or just plain working poor.

Mr. Sanjay Gaur, principal consultant, after giving his ridiculous presentation proceeded to laugh most of the evening at speakers and more importantly the council because they’re the body with “stupid” written on their foreheads.

Remember 15 months ago when the city vowed to give qualifying seniors a 25 percent reduction on water rates? Council does a lot of talking but no implementing.

If you really want to get the attention of council it’s simple. Your city utility billing is broken down into three components: water, sewer, street sweeper. Just don’t pay the sewer portion. It’s not monitored and they can’t turn it off. What an attention getter.

Please remember, in a democracy the city manager and council are simply implementers. Objectives, strategy, procedures and priorities are prescribed by the shareholders of the city; landowners, voters and citizens. Ignore this and we will all be subjected to the personal agendas of the public servants who have their service oriented toward mega developers and realtors at our expense.

Noreen Martin

Hollister

City needs to do its homework

Our mayor and city council have made a major move to destroy life in Hollister as we know it.

The way they are handling the sewer problem is a nightmare. They have been given a plan by a firm in Southern California, and a consultant I believe who has a limited knowledge of cash flow, and has not done the homework covering income or property values of the people who will pay for this bond.

Also, if you review the muni-financial proposal with an ethical brokerage firm, their so-called contingency accounts they are trying to shove down our throats are window dressing. Proper planning would cover these expenses in the bond.

And what about term and rates? I just heard them talk about sticking it to the homeowners.

Our leaders have not done their homework. They should take their heads out of the sand and listen to the people, take their advice and put this package together.

If not let’s not recall them. That’s too easy. We should take them to court.

E. L. Morgan Jr.

Hollister

Give the mayor a break

What do you and John Lemos have in common that you continue to allow Mr. Lemos to trash the mayor time and time again in his letters to the editor?

When in fact the mayor is working day and night, going from meeting to meeting nonstop for the betterment of our community, and John Lemos has the gall to attack and criticize the mayor for working so hard not only for a money-maker biker rally next year but so many other issues that concern our community and Mr. Lemos also.

I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: Mayor Scattini is the best mayor so far. Things are finally getting done!

Barbara Bailey-Valdez

Hollister

No Sun City for us

After receiving the Sun City mailer this week I wrote the following letter to them requesting our names be removed from their list.

We are against this project for many reasons.  One is that the hard work of many city dwellers to have a managed growth policy for the city will be exempt from this project.  One wonders how many grandparents that live in Hollister will be able to afford these homes and what about the lack of services that exist in the city?  Police and fire are way understaffed, services for seniors are limited, our streets, water and many other services are limited.  The other objection we have is the fact that only those in the city will vote on this, while the project is entirely in the county.

With these slick, expensive ads you may fool some of the people.  Money always seems to rule. I can’t imagine that people will be fooled, but again money seems to overshadow the truth and it is obvious this group has money to spare.

Again, please remove us from your mailing list.

Marian Cruz

Bob Cruz

Hollister

Maintain local land-use control

Kate Woods’ excellent Pinnacle article, “Up To Our Necks” detailing Hollister’s history of sewer woes is a cautionary tale. It shows where most of the blame belongs – with previous administrations. The voters should not take those mistakes out on the current council members who are performing the thankless task of raising rates.

It also shows what happens when we fail to manage development. The Sun City, Del Webb, Pulte Homes initiative seeks to change Hollister’s General Plan by adding 650 homes a year for almost 7 years and to do it by bypassing the Planning Commission and the City Council. How is that management? Several county commissioners and city council members have expressed serious concerns over this method of forcing a major development on Hollister; the mayor opposes it, as do other political and community members across the spectrum, but they cannot act, the developer has done an end-run around them all with the initiative.

The proposed development is too large for the city and it would be hard to find a worse location. The right to develop is a valuable commodity owned by the city’s citizens, it would be foolish to give it away without checks and balances. Yes, the people have the right to vote to change the general plan, but just because you have the right to do something does not make it a good idea, and this initiative is a very bad idea indeed. Vote no and retain local control.

Marty Richman

Hollister

Child is the right choice

This November, voters of the Gavilan Community College District are being asked to select two trustees to represent San Benito County on the college board. Kent Child is one of the experienced candidates for board. He was appointed two years ago to fill the unexpired term of Jaime De La Cruz.

Child has served San Benito County well on the college board. He has brought a thoughtful, reasoned leadership approach to his service. He is articulate, respectful of the community, and understands the challenges and opportunities facing Gavilan College.

Kent Child has had over 35 years experience as a college professor, administrator, and trustee. He has been well respected by his teaching colleagues, employees, and board colleagues. He has a reputation for being honest with those who have worked with him.

He has deep roots in the local community, having been involved in the local art community. A family man, he has raised his children in Hollister and understands the value of a good education. Both he and his wife Kathy Sheridan have made long-term investments of time and leadership in our community.

Having worked with Kent Child over 16 years, I’ve seen his leadership ability at work. He can reason with the most difficult individual, find compromises with those who have disagreements, and find ways to soothe bruised egos. He is one of the finest leaders I’ve worked with in government, business, and education. I strongly endorse Kent Child for a full term on the Gavilan College Board of Trustees.

Matt Escover

Hollister

Glad to have left Hollister

After leaving Hollister after living there for 12 years, we really got a good look at what a dump it is when we went back and visited it after a year. Nothing’s new and it looks so dirty. People there seem to be miserable.

The E. coli was bound to happen, after living there and seeing the working conditions of the imported farm workers, we have never eaten bagged salad. We know how the people picking the fields were treated. Wake up people, you have no growth, still sewage problems after 15 years!

And probably still a very “good ole boy” bunch of idiots running the city like they always have – into the ground.

We are so happy to be out of that place. I feel sorry for the people that have to live there. Now the E. coli, but do you think the farmers will learn anything from this? Hell no, they will just cover it up like they always do in San Benito County, find someone else to blame. Same old story, different day.

Linda Norton

Nevada