From: [email protected]Subject: [FWD: RE: water] Date: October 7, 2021 at 1:57 PM To: [email protected]-------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: water From: "Trinidad City Clerk" <[email protected]> Date: Wed, October 06, 2021 1:50 pm To: "'Maria C Bartlett'" <[email protected]> Cc: <[email protected]>, "Dave Grover" <[email protected]>, "Jack West" <[email protected]>, "Richard Clompus" <[email protected]>, "Steve Ladwig" <[email protected]>, "Tom Davies" <[email protected]> Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Council meeting. Gabriel Adams Trinidad City Clerk 707.677.0223 www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Maria C Bartlett <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2021 6:04 PM To: Trinidad City Clerk <[email protected]> Subject: water Gabe, Please add my letter to the responses for the meeting. Thank you! To The Trinidad City Council, I find it short-sighted of Miller, Levine & Clompus, to be proposing a feasibility study in regard to HBMWD with no regard or mention of what I believe should be prior steps to conserve water in our town. For example: What about a feasibility study to fix or replace the water pipes, as was done in Westhaven? What about pursuing storage tanks for residents? What about increasing rates for higher use, allowing for size of household?
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record,and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Maria C Bartlett <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2021 6:04 PMTo: Trinidad City Clerk <[email protected]>Subject: water Gabe, Please add my letter to the responses for the meeting. Thank you! To The Trinidad City Council, I find it short-sighted of Miller, Levine & Clompus, to be proposing afeasibility study in regard to HBMWD with no regard or mention of what Ibelieve should be prior steps to conserve water in our town. For example: What about a feasibility study to fix or replace the water pipes, as was donein Westhaven? What about pursuing storage tanks for residents? What about increasing rates for higher use, allowing for size of household?
What about increasing rates for higher use, allowing for size of household? What about creating seasonal rates for water use? I have signed the petition that Bryce Kenny circulated opposing thefeasibility study with HBMWD. Maria Bartlett828 Edwards St.Trinidad22 year resident
-----Original Message-----From: Jonathan Bloch <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2021 6:15 PMTo: [email protected]: Yes for HBMWD
Greetings,
I am Jonathan Bloch, a water customer at 708 Underwood Drive in Trinidad, CAand I would like to vote YES on the HBMED initiative. Thank you.
Sincerely,Jonathan H Bloch
***CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE***
This e-mail is intended for the sole use of the individual(s) to whom it isaddressed, and may contain information that is privileged, confidential andexempt from disclosure under applicable law. You are hereby notified thatany dissemination, duplication or distribution of this transmission bysomeone other than the intended addressee or its designated agent isstrictly prohibited. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify meimmediately by replying to this e-mail.
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, and willbe included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Council meeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Cory Soll <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2021 10:16 AMTo: [email protected]: Pipeline and its adverse effects
Hello I am very worries about the possibility of the pipeline. I am 20 and havegrown up in westhaven for as long as I can remember. The ocean on scenic driveand in surrounding areas has been where I spend my time from spearfishing tosurfing to kiteboarding it’s provided life for me. This possibility of developmentand expansion in the area I know like the back of my hand is very worrying. I amstrongly against the expansion and think that the coastline should be kept scenic.
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Debi Callahan <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 7:26 PMTo: [email protected]: Yes for HBMWD Hi, Dan and Debi Callahan (P.O. Box 1067/80 Berry Road), are watercustomers living in Trinidad for 38 years. We support a possible infrastructure study/project to potentially source safeand reliable water for our use in Trinidad. We read our water reports everyyear and realize we need to explore better resources than LuffenholtzCreek for safe, drinking water. Climate change and drought conditions havebecome apparent in our area over the years we have lived here, and webelieve it is time to mitigate this water issue for Trinidad residents. The cost-share idea seems fair to us with the Rancheria. Thank you. Dan and Debi Callahan
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, and willbe included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Council meeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Michael Cavanagh <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 5:39 PMTo: [email protected]: Water pipeline
Submitted on Wednesday, October 6, 2021 - 5:38pm Submitted by anonymoususer: [189.177.33.68] Submitted values are:
Name: Michael CavanaghEmail: [email protected]:Subject: Water pipelineMessage: I have owned my house on Quarry Rd since 1976. Our water is from awell with all that it entails including running out. There is city water at the housesacross the street and I have tried to hook up over the last 10+ years and havebeen unable due to city limits and the need by the city and LAFCO to conservethe issuance of contracts. I hope the council will Vote No on the pipeline even if itdiminishes my chances of hooking up in the future.Thanks, Mike Cavanagh
The results of this submission may be viewed at:https://trinidad.ca.gov/node/19/submission/5114
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record,and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: M Code <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2021 9:10 AMTo: [email protected]: Yes for HBMWD I Vote to connect to Humbolt Bay Water District Pipeline. Marc Code881 Van Wyke, Trinidad, CA I am a Trinidad resident and water customer.. Please “vote Yes” to Connect to Humbolt Bay Water – Thank You
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Christopher Cole <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2021 8:18 AMTo: [email protected]: Yes for HBMWD October 12 vote Council Members:I am a home owner and water customer at 117 Berry Rd, Trinidad.I support sourcing water from the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District. Itis my understanding that the cost of doing so can be shared with theTrinidad Rancheria, making this an ideal time to make the the connection toHBMWD.Please support the connection to HBMWD. Chris [email protected]
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, and willbe included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Council meeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
Dear city council members, please vote no on the proposed pipeline fromMcKinleyville. I live in Westhaven and love the quiet, rural atmosphere whichwould be ruined by unlimited water, leading to unchecked development. I havelived here for over 40 years and do not want to see the destruction of the greaterTrinidad area that the water pipeline would bring. Sincerely, Tina Cunliffe
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, andwill be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record,and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: john donahue <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2021 8:22 PMTo: Trinidad City Clerk <[email protected]>; Dwight Miller<[email protected]>Subject: Water First of all my our last name is DonAhue not DonOhue. That said yes on HBMWD for both of usASSUMING it's not fluoridated. I'm convinced. Our address is 640 Parker. PO box 807. I believe youwanted that information. Thank you all. John & SUSAN Donahue
From: Beryl Feldman <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 11:18 AMTo: [email protected]: Water, water! To: Trinidad City Council, Please, please do not vote for that stupid pipeline. If it goes in, what willfollow will be rampant development that will change forever the nature ofnow lovely Trinidad and turn it into an ugly, overcrowded place with highrise buildings and polluted beaches. You want that???? Respectfully, Beryl FeldmanMcKinleyville ubuntu
-------- Original Message --------Subject: RE: Attention City CouncilFrom: "Trinidad City Clerk" <[email protected]>Date: Wed, October 06, 2021 1:44 pmTo: "'Lois Harrington'" <[email protected]>Cc: <[email protected]>
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, and willbe included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Council meeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Lois Harrington <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2021 8:48 AMTo: [email protected]: Attention City Council
My name is Lois Harrington, 780 Underwood Dr, and have been a Trinidad watercustomer for 46 years.Concerning the different water options, I am in favor of joining the Rancheria andreceive our water from HBMWD. I feel this is the most feasible plan offered.Thank you for your consideration.
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Dan Henry <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2021 10:28 AMTo: Trinidad City Clerk <[email protected]>Subject: Yes on HBMWD Yes on HBMWDDan and Connie Henry80 Scenic Drive TrinidadWould like to attend virtual zoom meeting on October 12th.Wondering what time?ThanksThank you very much.Sincerely, Dan and Connie Henry Daniel Henry
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, andwill be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Jan Nash Hunt <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2021 9:59 AMTo: Trinidad Clerk <[email protected]>Subject: Yes for HBMWD
YES for HBMWD. I am a 52 year water customer and we all deserve to know wewill have adequate water in our future. We are a lucky community in CA inthat water is our own resource that I feel we have a right to. It is uniquefor communities in our state to have ample water from our neighboringsources, stored for us all in Ruth Lake.
Trinidad needs to be part of this natural resource too. If the Rancheriawants to build their hotel, they will regardless of our involvement. Weneed to protect our citizens from drought and keep our community functioningwithout the struggles and yearly worry of trucking water in and wonderingwhen Luffenholtz Creek will dry up.
Let the community and our planning dept decide on future development bywhether projects are appropriate, not by creating a mass water shortage thatwill make all citizens suffer.
Jan Hunt, 52 year water customer30 Scenic Drive, Trinidad797-845-6618
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Joy Soll <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2021 4:58 PMTo: [email protected]: No To A Water Pipeline To whom it may concern:I am writing this letter to encourage the Trinidad City Council to reject theproposal of a water pipeline from Mckinleyville. I am opposed to this ideafor a number of reasons.As a Trinidad resident I appreciate Trinidad as it is, the size it is. If morewater were piped in, we all know that this would enable Trinidad to growand be a stepping stone to bigger hotels, restaurants and other businesses.People come to Trinidad because of its small town beauty. I am also aware that Trinidad is not maintaining the water system it hasresponsibly. I am aware that there is a current leak in the system that hasnot been repaired. I believe that Trinidad should use its funds to fix andmaintain the water that it has and live within its means. Please vote no on aproposed water pipeline.Best, Joy Soll775 Second Ave,Trinidad, CA 95570
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, and willbe included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Council meeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
We still object, most vigorously and for the third time, to the proposal to bringMad River water up to the greater Trinidad area. The effects would not stop withTrinidad. Abundant water would make extensive development north, south, andeast inevitable, to the detriment of the environment and rural character of ourarea. Our quiet way of life would be destroyed, our forests, our scenery, ouralready-failing roads, would be destroyed. Where would the sewage go ? Do thedevelopers plan to pay for a sewage plant? Again, we urge the city to rejectbringing water up here.
Bringing water in was discussed nearly 50 years ago, and several times over theyears since. It’s already been discussed twice within the year. Each time, enoughpeople objected that the proposal was dropped. Now it’s being submitted again,and being opposed again. Clearly most of your constituents want it to staydropped.
Tell the proponents to face reality and stop wasting your time.
THE PUBLIC HAS SPOKEN. YOU HAVE ALREADY REJECTED THIS DESTRUCTIVEAND UNWELCOME PROPOSAL. DO NOT SUBMIT TO DEVELOPERS' PRESSURE toreconsider it yet again. It would ruin our quiet way of life here.
James and Virginia Waters, Stagecoach Roadresidents of North Trinidad since 1966
From: [email protected]: [FWD: RE: I still object to the proposal to bring Mad River water up to the greater Trinidad area.]
To the Trinidad City Council and other concerned parties,
I object to the proposal to bring Mad River water up tothe greater Trinidad area.
Abundant piped-in water would make extensive development north,south, andeast inevitable, to the detriment of the environment and ruralcharacter ofour area. Our quiet way of life would be destroyed; our forests, ourscenery, our already-failing roads, would be destroyed.
Where will all the sewage go? Do the developers plan to pay forconstructing, operating, and maintaining a large sewage plant?
The City Council should reject the long-distance pipeline.
Bringing water in was discussed nearly 50 years ago, and severaltimessince. Each time, enough people objected each time, and so eachtime that proposal was dropped.
Then the pipeline proposal was submitted again, and rejected again.
Clearly, most of your constituents want the pipeline proposal rejected.
AGAIN AND AGAIN, OVER AND OVER, THE PUBLIC HAS SPOKEN. YOU HAVE ALREADY REJECTED THIS DESTRUCTIVE ANDUNWELCOME PROPOSAL TWICE. DO NOT SUBMIT TODEVELOPERS' HAMMERING PRESSURES to reconsider long distancepiping of abundant water to Trinidad.
John Waters, resident of North Trinidad since 1977
From: [email protected]: [FWD: RE: Trinidad Water Pipeline. Please forward to City Council members.]Date: October 8, 2021 at 4:17 PMTo: [email protected]
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Kathryn Donahue <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 6:41 PMTo: Trinidad City Clerk <[email protected]>Subject: Trinidad Water Pipeline. Please forward to City Council members. Dear Trinidad City Council Members. I am writing to encourage you to vote NO on the proposed water pipelinefrom McKinleyville. The cost would be exorbitant and the ensuing development in theTrinidad area would change the beauty and structure of a small coastal town forever.And how does the city propose to handle all the increased sewage from increasedpopulation on a town that sits on the edge of the Pacific Ocean? Coastal communitiesneed to live within their resource means. Coastal communities need to protect thebeauty of nature that our greed driven society is destroying. As a citizen of HumboldtCounty who enjoys tremendously the beauty of Trinidad, local businesses, the lovelymuseum and native plant garden, hiking the coast, art and community events, I amasking you not to bring big money into the area. The Casino is big enough and it’sfootprint does not need to expand with a large hotel complex bringing more peopleand corporate dollars into the city to overtake the small community feeling that isTrinidad. If you think the tourist crush of summer is bad now, and it is, it is nothing towhat will happen if water enabling development is passed by this council. Thank you for your consideration.Kathryn Donahue
From: [email protected]: [FWD: RE:_Public_Comments_for_CC_Agend a_“Items_from_the_Floor”]Date: October 7, 2021 at 3:53 PMTo: [email protected]
-------- Original Message --------Subject: RE:_Public_Comments_for_CC_Agend a_“Items_from_the_Floor”From: "Trinidad City Clerk" <[email protected]>Date: Wed, October 06, 2021 1:43 pmTo: "'Kathleen Lake'" <[email protected]>Cc: <[email protected]>
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record,and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Kathleen Lake <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, October 04, 2021 6:44 PMTo: Trinidad Clerk <[email protected]>Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Richard Clompus<[email protected]>; dgrover <[email protected]>; TomDavies <[email protected]>Subject: Public Comments for CC Agenda “Items from the Floor” Please post these as Public Comments for Agenda “Items from the Floor” for the upcomingCC meeting.
Trinidad City Council,
This compact parking allowance, in front of the Eatery, was never properly vetted by the citystaff. The residents of Trinidad were obviously fed a line regarding the PedestrianConnectivity Project, which cost residents a ton of money. This project has not provided theproposed design outcomes of ADA compliance. In addition, allowing the City Engineer tomake any agreement with the business owners regarding management of these parkingspots was clearly outside authority of the Engineering position. Addressing this blockade ofthe sidewalk with these signs has in no way resolved the issue and has had no impact oncorrecting the problem.
What are the plans of the City Council to assure that sidewalks remain clear in light of thisongoing illegal and dangerous parking situation? The city is responsible for the sidewalk
ongoing illegal and dangerous parking situation? The city is responsible for the sidewalkprogram and the assurance of ADA compliance.
The city Manager “Monitoring” parking violations during his work hours is not bringing thisissue into compliance, continues the discrimination despite clear knowledge of the problemby the city, and is clearly unacceptable and a waste of time. It also appears that the lack ofsolutions by the city continues the discrimination towards people with disabilities based onthe fact that a business is making money (peak season). Have any of these parking violatorsever been required to move their cars? Has the Eatery been fined?
Allowing the violations/discrimination to continue, despite being aware of it for monthsamounts to direct evidence of discrimination by the city.
If you have questions regarding solutions for ADA you can contact the Office of Civil Rights.Continued discrimination of persons with disabilities despite being aware of the problem iscriminal. The liability to the city is too great.
As a City Council you must address this ongoing problem.
Thank you, Kathleen Lake Kathleen
October 7, 2021
To: Trinidad City CouncilRe: City Council Agenda Item: Trinidad Water and Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District (HBMWD).
From: Kathleen Lake, Trinidad Resident
“A thing is right when it tends to preserve the integrity, stability, and beauty of the biotic community. Itis wrong when it tends otherwise.” -ALDO LEOPOLD, THE LAND ETHIC
The spin that Dwight Miller and Richard Clompus have claimed in their explanations of what Trinidad needshave clearly attempted to solve for the wrong variable for sustainability in Trinidad. Their claims regardingTrinidad Water clearly smack of Green Washing and another “bright green lie”. The “hook up” to HBMWDdoesn’t SAVE TRINIDAD. HBMWD is not the savior. In fact, it makes all the Trindad area less sustainable inthe future in multiple ways.
I am strongly opposed to the City of Trinidad engaging in any study regarding accessing HBMWD. Ourcurrent General Plan and our Draft Updated General Plan both require protection of our coastal village, it’senvironment and open spaces. Impacts of bringing water north of Little River would not be consistent with theGeneral Plan in the current or in the newly drafted forms. There is NO water emergency at this time. Nowater emergency has been declared. What has happened is the Trinidad Rancheria has requested water fromthis agency to develop a HYATT 5 story hotel on a fragile bluff, in a protected scenic coastal area. Trinidadshould not get involved with adjusting our water system plans to support development outside of Trinidad.
Water in Trinidad, and other places in the world, has created development constraints. We are fortunate in thatand that has been the direction that the City has taken since it’s beginning to keep the Village a place ofenvironmental sanctuary and beauty and living within our means. Creating real sustainability.
Framing and leveraging this agenda item as an environmental decision for Climate Change is short sightedand wrong. Hiding actual outcomes (profits for developers and less protection of the environment and scenicnature of our town) of more water use and more development for the area. Green-Washing attitudes illustratethat “It’s less about nature, and more about us.” The residents of Trinidad are the ones who would clearlystand to lose, as would the planet, when the Trinidad area becomes less able to live within its means. Theimpacts of this water development would have far reaching environmental impacts on environmentallysensitive habitats, significant biological diversity, air and water quality. Creating impacts that all reducesustainability.
Bringing Mad River water to Trinidad would truly be a cash cow for developers, banks and those that profitfrom development of the area. Moving forward and requesting a study of this type moves the residents ofTrinidad one step closer to losing control of their decisions about our own water supply, our water rates, ourenvironment, our sustainability and impacts on the environment.
Trinidad has a water system. We have spent time and money investigating and finding that it has water tosupport all of the businesses and residents in Trinidad. It needs work and we need to roll up our sleeves and
1
get the work done. Living within our means and our limits. Making the changes we need to sustain ourcommunity and a healthy ecology.
Below is the City’s current stance on extending water service in the surrounding areas. The focus has alwaysbeen, and remains, on sustainability, preservation, limiting development and living within our means.
Current General Planhttps://trinidad.ca.gov/sites/trinidad.ca.gov/files/library/PlanningDocs/1978%20general%20plan.pdfMany residential property owners...recognize that insufficient water supply has preserved the low density ruralresidential character of the area and they prefer it that way. They see the extension of the city water serviceinto the area as an action that would trigger commercial and residential expansion and destroy the ruralcharacter of the area. There is also concern that additional water would overburden septic tanks andincrease ground and surface water pollution. Proposals to form a water district to pay for a water serviceextension have been defeated by a sizable majority on several occasions.
DRAFT GENERAL PLAN: CONSERVATION, OPEN SPACE & RECREATION ELEMENT pg.2https://trinidad.ca.gov/sites/trinidad.ca.gov/files/library/Conservation%200418%20w%20Figs.pdf3. Background: The City of Trinidad and its Planning Area contains ample natural resources and open spacesin and around its borders. These include, but are not limited to, a beautiful coastline, scenic offshore rocks,sheltered Trinidad Bay and harbor, coastal streams, rugged headlands, bountiful trails, viable timber stands,and rare, threatened and endangered plants and animals. The kelp beds around Trinidad Head aredesignated as a State Water Quality Protection Area (SWQPA) – Area of Special Biological Significance(ASBS) and Critical Coastal Area, and the City has been established as one of five California CoastalNational Monument Gateways. The natural resources of the Trinidad area are described in more detail in theBackground Report: Biology and Environment of the Trinidad Area dated October 2009. In 2008, the City alsoprepared an Integrated Coastal Watershed Management Plan that addresses a variety of water qualityconcerns and watershed management strategies. The following sections incorporate information andrecommendations from these background reports among other sources. The City wishes to create asustainable environment by identifying and conserving natural resources. The City also wishes topreserve as much open space as feasible to provide habitat for native species of plants and wildlife,minimize sprawl, maintain the aesthetic benefits of undeveloped land, and provide its residents with afull range of recreational opportunities. The goals, policies and programs of this Element address theseaims by establishing the framework for the protection and enhancement of natural resources, protection ofwater quality, enhancement of open space, and providing for coastal access and recreational opportunities forTrinidad residents and visitors.
Regendizing this same issue multiple times is highly disrespectful to our community who have clearly spokenout, and appears to have been minimized in the process to ramrod this agenda item down our throats. Standup for your constituents as elected officials and vote no.
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Linda Bruce <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 4:42 PMTo: [email protected]: Yes for HWMWD.My name is Linda Bruce, I am writing for my property at 828 Edward'sStreet, Trinidad. My home is a rental for Maria Bartlett. We rely on City ofTrinidad water. Thank you for all of your attention on this matter. Sincerely, LindaBruce
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Lore Snell <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2021 10:11 AMTo: [email protected]: Humboldt Municipal Water Disrict Pipeline Dear Esteemed Council Members: NO, NO, NO!!! to the water pipeline, you all know the reasons why NO isthe only response necessary. Lore Snell Trinidad business owner since 1991Trinidad resident since 1951
From: Bob Lake <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 10:36 AMTo: Trinidad City Clerk <[email protected]>Subject: YES FOR HBMWD Katy's Smokehouse Robert D Lake, Owner 742 Edward Street, Trinidad CA. I am a water customer. I vote for #1. .Ruth Lake reservoir
Hi Paula, Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record,and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: paula levine <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2021 4:15 PMTo: Trinidad City Clerk <[email protected]>Subject: Mayor's Disservice Please post in Public Comments ASAPMayor's DisserviceFollows is the Sept.14 City Council meeting transcription documentingMayor Ludwig's disservice to the community. Councilman Clompuspresented an accurate report about Luffenholtz Creek flows, fulfilling hisobligation as Water Advisory Committee (WAC) member. Mayor Ludwigasserted that Clompus omitted significant information, presented hisunderstanding of the data, and did not allow Mr. Clompus to explain theaccuracy of his report. The reason that this exchange is so important is because it casts a publicshadow on Dr.. Clompus's integrity when a very important vote on waterinfrastructure will occur at the Oct. 12 Council meeting. The methodology Dr. Clompus used to calculate creek flow isrecommended by PWA, the engineering firm the City paid $28,000 toprovide accurate creek flow data. Creek flow data is mailed to Mayor
provide accurate creek flow data. Creek flow data is mailed to MayorLudwig. It is understandable that Mayor Ludwig misunderstood the dataand scientific methods used by Dr. Clompus to report creek flow byaveraging the flow data for each day.What is difficult to understand is why Mr. Ludwig was so sure of himself andwhy he abruptly dismissed the effort of Dr. Clompus to explain the data tothe public. Dr. Clompus spent his professional life focused on meticulousscientific detail. He is a retired eye doctor. ZOOM video Sept.14/2021 Trinidad City Council Meeting: Council Member Clompus Completes 5 Committee Reports withDocumentation Mayor: “I also want to add some pretty significant information that you leftout Richard in your supply of information about the water. I too getall the same reports that you do on the creek’s flow. Um, ourmaximum creek flow in the last week was .8CFS. In fact, every night,the flow hovers somewhere in the vicinity of .7, .75. I think that’s apretty significant omission of information that does not that shouldnot go overlooked. That our creek has the capacity to flow at .7, .8,something like that and clearly the use upstream is a consideration. I’m grateful that Pacific Watershed will be providing information onwater rights and use upstream.” Council Member Clompus:“I’d like to make a comment. I’d like to make a comment please.” Mayor:“No, we’re going to move on. You’ve taken an exceptional amount oftime on the water and we have next week, next month to moveforward with our water report.” Council Member Clompus:“Point of Order” Mayor:“What’s that Richard?” Council Member Clompus:“When I create a hydrograph, I average every number which is
“When I create a hydrograph, I average every number which isprovided...” (interrupted) Mayor:“So this is a disagreement that you and I can take offline. I’m reallynot going to burn more city time and you and I can take this offlineand perhaps come to some sort of agreement for next week’s sorrynext month’s meeting. So Eli, staff report please.” _______________________________________________________________________________As a concerned community member involved with the City's debatesconcerning how and when to move forward improving our water system, Isent Mr. Ludwig an email requesting he send a letter to Public Commentsto set the record straight by Sept. 24. He declined to do so, so I have. Paula AlevineMill Creek Lane, 30 year water customer
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record,and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Ray and Sherry Manka <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 6:20 AMTo: [email protected]: Water Yes for HBMWD. Ray and Sherry Manka-321 Trinity Street. We areTrinidad city water customers.We thank you for all the information both pro and con on this this topic inrecent weeks.Ray Manka
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record,and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Linda <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 1:24 PMTo: [email protected]: Water pipeline I would like to register my opinion with the city that I oppose the development of a pipelinefrom the Mad River to Trinidad. We have already had a taste of the increased populationimpact due to Covid travel restrictions and it isn't pretty. Crowded beaches, parking lots,trash accumulation and increased vandalism have turned my beautiful backyard (MoonstoneBeach) into a place I avoid. The thought of a 100-room hotel would magnify those impactsone thousand-fold. I live here because it is remote and peaceful. Opening up development for hotels andadditional housing flies in the face of my choice of residence. I recognize the drought hasstretched our water resources, but relying on our own environmental approach to improvingthat circumstance appeals more to me than a giant pipeline from the Mad River that wouldencourage more density and reduce habitat. I own property in Westhaven and rely on a 180-ft well for our water supply. Please considersimilar technology to solve our water woes and as Mr. Ladwig has stated, live within theecosystem's ability to support its appropriate population. Thank you for representing my opinion in the city council meeting next Tuesday. Sincerely,Linda Mortenson
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: paula levine <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2021 8:28 PMTo: Trinidad City Clerk <[email protected]>Subject: Yes for HBMWD Yes for contracting with HBMWD. It's the responsible way to assure a cleanand resilient water supply. Paula Levine30 year water customer on Mill Creek Lane
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Tom peters <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 6:19 PMTo: [email protected]: water pipeline To the Trinidad City Clerk and the City Council. I live in Eureka but my mother lived in Westhaven for many years. Growthwas very slow and the area remained attractively rural. I believe that apipeline from McKinleyville would only serve to promote growth well pastwhat the area should endure. Traffic on narrow roads and increasedservices such as garbage and police would become large problems.Trinidad does not have the resources for those things. Trinidad is a greatplace precisely because it is a small town. If you want it to turn into a citywith all the attendant problems, just bring water for everyone. Right nowwater acts as a limiting factor keeping Trinidad within its bounds.This project is designed to benefit only one entity, the Trinidad Rancheria. Ihave nothing against them or their operation as long as they respect theother citizens of Trinidad. Their big hotel project needs water and theywould destroy the ambiance of Trinidad to get it.Stay within what nature gives you. There is enough water to support yourmodest town. It can always use improvement to help in the dry years butthat doesn’t mean enabling rapid development from McKinleyvill to Trinidadis desired or in the interests of the area’s residents.
is desired or in the interests of the area’s residents.It is a tough call. At least consider the cost of the pipeline and the energycost of pumping water uphill. I think you will see it is not worth the expense. Thank you for considering my views. I have many happy attachments toTrinidad and would hate to see it become another strip city. Thomas H. Peters221 Dollison St.Eureka, CA [email protected]
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, andwill be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Cliff Poulton <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2021 9:24 AMTo: Trinidad, City of <[email protected]>Subject: Yes for HBMWD
Hi GabeAdd us to the vote tally as in favor of getting a cost analysis for HBMWDwater.
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record,and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Richard Bruce <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2021 11:36 AMTo: City of Trinidad <[email protected]>Subject: Yes for HBMWD water for Trinidad Please add my support for HBMWD water for Trinidad to the publiccomments for the Oct 14 City Council meeting. I am a 45 year Trinidadresident, former business owner, and current City of Trinidad watercustomer. Richard "Dick" Bruce780 Underwood DriveTrinidad CA 95570
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Faith Cavalli <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 8:20 PMTo: [email protected]: Vote For HBMWD Ratzlaff YES For The HBMWD Barbara Ratzlaff 901 Van Wycke St. #605Trinidad CA 95570 I am confirming, I am a water customer. Kind Regards,Barbara Ratzlaff
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, andwill be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Lynn Ryan <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 3:19 PMTo: [email protected]: Please reject the water pipeline
Dear Trinidad City Council,I am writing to again urge you to reject the water pipeline. I recognizeTrinidad has water problems especially this drought year. I am also watchingWesthaven Road issues surface, as the Rancheria project stays in the news.As an Arcata resident and homeowner, I visit Trinidad and enjoy the restfulbeauty. Unlimited water will bring increased development and accelleratedculture change. For the third time, say no to the pipeline. I have attendedconfusing meetings about this issue as we the people stumble along inopposition to the Rancheria Big Hotel. This water pipeline is not a goodidea. Other communities have found more community minded and communityinclusive solutions to water issues. Trinidad is too precious to turn into abig road, an obtrusive hotel and a mega B and B destinstion advertisement. Sincerely,Lynn Ryan RN1693 J stArcata, Ca 95521707-845-2825
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Council meeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Sharon Hunter <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2021 9:44 AMTo: [email protected]: Water issue comment
Hi Gabe,
Earlier this week I signed a petition for no pipeline from Mad River.But, after reading through more material this morning, I’m reconsidering and would like to lend my support for sourcing
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Steen Trump <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2021 10:24 AMTo: [email protected]: Tami Trump <[email protected]>; Steen Trump<[email protected]>Subject: Water Pipeline for Trinidad - Opposed Trinidad City Council,We oppose the proposed involvement of the City of Trinidad in the construction of awater pipeline to Trinidad, fearing the rampant development and growth that a waterpipeline would inevitably bring to the Greater Trinidad Area.Steen & Tami Trump
CONFIDENTIALITYThis e-mail and any attachments are confidential and are protected by the attorney/client and/or workproducts privileges. If you received this email message inadvertently, please delete it, and do not disclose itscontents to any other person, use them for any purpose, or store or copy them in any medium. Thank you foryour cooperation.
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, and willbe included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Council meeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Sherry Vanderpool <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2021 9:49 AMTo: Trinidad City Clerk <[email protected]>Subject: Yes for HBMWD
Dear Trinidad City Councilors:
As a city water customer at four locations (707 Underwood Drive, 426 Trinity,355 Main Street & 359 Main Street) we are concerned about the potential dryingup of Luffenholtz Creek and urge you to consider a Yes for HBMWD as analternative reliable water source.
In the ten years we have lived here, we've witnessed California's worseningdroughts and feel the time is now to make a decision that will provide cityresidents with a reliable water source.
We are grateful for your service to our town. Thank you.
From: karen Schatz <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 11:38 AMTo: cityclerk <[email protected]>Subject: NO for HBMWD TO: [email protected]: Gordon and Karen Schatz 385 Wagner St. Trinidad 95570 WaterCustomer: Route 1, account #181 RE: NO for HBMWD Dear City Council, We are opposed to sourcing water from HBMWD. The offer from theRancheria to cost-share a pipeline is little more than a blatant bribe toproceed with their unwanted and unnecessary development plans. Thecurrent water system and usage already seriously taxes the City's ability todispose of wastewater without causing erosion problems. If unlimited wateris provided, the already-existing erosion problems with wastewater disposalwill be exacerbated to the point of washing the town away. The answer isnot "bring in more water," but "use available water more responsibly." The City needs to build adequate storage facilities to capture moreavailable water during the wet seasons. But of most importance, the City ofTrinidad needs to implement more effective policies for water conservationthan the current, very weak, Stage 2 Water Alert. Conservation andresponsible water usage measures need to be in place year-round, insteadof waiting for the summer crunch and then trying to implement inadequateconservation policies by way of scare tactics and biased accusations thatresponsible water users are being swayed by "misleading social media"assertions.
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, andwill be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Cynthia Solinsky <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 3:11 PMTo: [email protected]: Water
Yes for HBMWD
Michael & Cynthia Solinsky108 Berry LaneTrinidad CA 95570We own a lot, currently not an active water customer Sent from my iPhone
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: larry Soll <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 9:29 PMTo: [email protected]: No to pipeline again please Dear City Council Members,I live in Westhaven, and thus Trinidad is a big part of my home. I urge youto vote NO to any proposal of a water pipeline. Trinidad is beautiful.....It isliving within its means water wise....The way that cities and towns keepfrom growing in ways that threaten their beauty, integrity, and quality of lifeis to limit growth to what the resources (water ) can support. To bring in apipeline would likely lead to rationale for large hotels, condos and othergrowth. This will negatively impact all residents and honestly probably hurtmany businesses as it will change the unique beauty of our town. It alsoseems from here to be just another push for the big hotel proposal abovelufenholtz/bakers beach...Please, you have a lot of responsibility for thehealth of our community...I am guessing there is hard pressure frommoneyed interests....Please vote No to the pipeline proposal and letTrinidad continue to live within its means...Please keep our children andtheir future children in mind. thank you --Larry Soll 707-298-5990775 2nd Ave
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a publicrecord, and will be included in the public comment packet for theupcoming Council meeting. Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Ted Pease <[email protected]> Sent: Friday, October 08, 2021 12:42 PMTo: Steve Ladwig <[email protected]>; Jack West<[email protected]>; Tom Davies <[email protected]>; DavidGrover <[email protected]>; City of Trinidad<[email protected]>Subject: No on Pipeline Please include in the public record... Dear Trinidad City Council: Once again, I write to urge the City Council not to commit the city toparticipate in a water pipeline project from Humboldt Bay Municipal WaterDistrict. Clearly, the City of Trinidad must address its current and future waterresiliency issues in the face of ongoing and worsening drought. But thepipeline is an extreme step with many foreseeable negative consequencesand collateral damage to the Greater Trinidad Area. I urge the Council toapply its energy and resources to pursuing less drastic solutions that willaddress potential water shortages without collateral damage of unwanteddevelopment.
I note that the pipeline issue is similar in many ways to the proposal for amulti-city municipal wastewater system to serve Eureka and Arcata in the1970s. Arcata, fearing that such a system would encouragerampant growth between Eureka and Arcata, rejected the plan in favor of amore environmentally friendly solution, which became the Arcata Marsh. Let's learn from that model. Trinidad also should reject the pipeline and thedevelopment threat that comes with it. Instead, let's first try, as Mayor SteveLadwig has said, to “live within our means” through measures thatincorporate both new groundwater resources (e.g., underground reservoirsfeeding the Luffenholtz and Mill Creek aquifers), catchment and storageupgrades (including both water tanks and ponds), as well as betterstewardship of our existing resources by addressing deferred maintenanceproblems of aging storage tanks and a leaky delivery system that loses~25% of treated water pumped from the water plant. No one wants the taps to go dry, and everyone is cognizant of the impactsof climate change on California wildfires (although, happily for us, these areall in hotter, drier areas than ours). But scare tactics do a disservice toengaged and informed public decision-making, and must be rejected.Instead, I urge the city leadership to move forward aggressively to gatherinformation and to facilitate level-headed public discussion to permit aninformed and sensible action plan that will take advantage of existingresources and permit us to live within our means. I also call on the City Council to publicly and forcefully reject thedivisive and destructive strategies that seek to pit city residents againsttheir neighbors in the larger Trinidad area. Water decisions in Trinidadcannot be made in a vacuum, and, contrary to what some have said, thisvery much *is* everybody's business, whether they live in the city, inWesthaven or anywhere else in the Greater Trinidad Area. Thank you for your hard work on behalf of all of us on this and other issuesaffecting everyone who loves the Trinidad area. Sincerely, Ted Pease & Brenda Cooper446 Mill Creek LaneTrinidad, CA 95570707-677-5222Our home is less than 3/4 mile from Trinidad Town Hall, but we are notTrinidad city residents or voters. We are, however, Trinidad city watercustomers.
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record,and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Mitch Trachtenberg <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2021 7:49 AMTo: Trinidad City Clerk <[email protected]>Subject: Yes for HBMWD Hi, Jim and I are water customers on Scenic, and we both agree with thosewho would like the city to join with the tribe in bringing HBMWD into ourarea. Thanks,Mitch Trachtenberg
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2021 3:39 PMTo: [email protected]: Yes for HBMWD Hello,I am a resident of Trinidad and a water customer.I am in support of obtaining water from the HBMWD. The future of our city relies upon having a good quality reliable water source. Thanks, Gary and Susan Wagner826 Underwood DriveTrinidad, CA 95570
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, andwill be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Ann Wallace <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2021 8:49 AMTo: [email protected]: Water Pipeline
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record, and willbe included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Council meeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov
-----Original Message-----From: Tom Weisend <[email protected]> Sent: Saturday, October 02, 2021 5:57 PMTo: [email protected]: Dwight Miller’s letter and NO to HBMWD
So it appears Dwight and his buddies are now teaming up with the rancheria tobring that pipe across little river. I have always smelled a rat with him ever sincehe called us all idiots at the city council meeting about the failed cell tower at theold church. It really got my Danish up today when I got that letter about it. ( thepipe) There is so much that’s not said in that letter, mainly cost. Impacts. TheHotel. Cooperation with the Rancheria? I figured Garth Sundberg hates all of ushere in our burg. I smell a rat again. So NO to HBMWD. I’m not dumb the water situation is critical but this isn’t theanswer for me. Please put me on record as NO. Thanks Tom Weisend 89 BerryRoad Trinidad 7076722823.Sent from my iPhone
Trinidad and the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District. Members of the city’s WaterAdvisory Committee have voted (4-1) to ask the Council to reconsider the pipeline, andsome residents are engaging in scare tactics to create panic.There is no need for another vote on the pipeline. This question has already beensettled — not just once but twice — by two previous City Council votes (Jan. 26 and Feb. 9,2021) against the pipeline plan. Just because people disagree with the outcome of a vote isnot reasonable cause to request a “redo.” If the Council is going to reconsider this again,much more public notice is needed.The pipeline proposal is a “nuclear option” to address Trinidad’s water concerns. It mightbe easier to buy into a hugely expensive and environmentally disruptive pipelineconstruction project, but it is the wrong answer for Trinidad and the surrounding area.Water Committee’s agenda? I am very concerned that Trinidad’s Water AdvisoryCommittee — four of five of whose members are pipeline proponents — seems to preferthe pipeline “solution.” Much more attention needs to go to conservation measures thathave been suggested for years by Steve Madrone and others.All of us should look for ways to address the droughts created by climate change, but Iprefer approaches such as conservation, rainwater catchment and collection, new watersources, revival of the city’s Mill Creek water rights, repair to (or replacement of) a leaking
water system that loses up to 40% of its water, development of springs and small ponds forstorage, etc., before the city considers a pipeline that opens the entire Trinidad area to aninevitable development boom.Please reject proposals to revisit the pipeline, and let’s please refocus our attention onfinding ways for Trinidad — as Mayor Steve Ladwig has said — to live within our means bydeveloping new local water sources. The city has a fund of some $1 million dedicated towater issues. Let’s put that money to work on solutions we can live with, and won’t regret. 1. We oppose Trinidad City Council reconsideration of Trinidad’s involvement in awater pipeline.• The City Council has already voted — twice! (Jan. 26 and Feb. 9, 2021) — not toparticipate in a water pipeline project with the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District(HBMWD).• There is no new information or argument that changes the situation that existed when theCouncil voted 3-2 not to participate in a pipeline project.• No ‘redo’! Those who don’t like the previous legal and valid votes don’t get to demand a“redo” until they get the result they do like.2. Concerns about the Water Advisory Committee (WAC):• The Water Advisory Committee is comprised of four pipeline proponents and oneopponent: City Council Members Richard Clompus and David Grover voted (twice) in favorof the pipeline; Planning Commissioner Cheryl Kelly has
expressed support for the pipelinesolution; city resident member Dwight Miller is a strong pipeline proponent; city residentmember Bryce Kenny opposes the pipeline. Ex officio member City Manager Eli Naffahsupports the pipeline. Last month, the committee voted 4-1 (Kenny opposed) to ask theCity Council to reconsider the pipeline option.• The Water Advisory Committee has examined various aspects of Trinidad’s watersituation, but seems focused on the pipeline “solution.” Numerous proposals have beenmade over years for conservation, rainwater catchment and collection, new water sources,revival of the city’s Mill Creek water rights, repair to a leaking water system, developmentof springs and small ponds for storage, etc. Let’s focus on those.• Scare Tactics: Some WAC members are using scare tactics to create a false sense ofurgency and panic about joining the pipeline project “before it’s too late.” A pipeline wouldtake many, many years (estimated at 5-15 years) to complete — permits, propertyeasements, environmental studies, California Coastal Commission review and approval,community and resident opposition, etc. This is not an answer to current droughtconditions.3. Opposition to a pipeline “solution”:• ‘Nuclear Option’ — A pipeline is wildly out of proportion with Trinidad’s current waterresource situation or the city’s future water needs.• The minimum HBMWD pipeline size would be a 6” line to
conform with fire-suppressionregulations; this size pipe could deliver more than 500,000 gallons per day — far inexcess of the requirements of Trinidad, Westhaven and the Rancheria combined. One easilyforeseeable consequence is a development boom, as buildable lots that currently have noaccess to water become valuable commodities for construction.
• A development boom would ruin the very qualities of unspoiled beauty that residents andvisitors to the Trinidad area most value.• New development that a pipeline would make possible east of Highway 101 and north ofWesthaven would require infrastructure — roads, utilities, etc. — and also would dependon septic systems in areas already prone to pollution of streams, springs and groundwater.• Some pipeline proponents say this decision should be made only by Trinidad residentsand water system customers. This is an elitist view. While the pipeline may initially serveonly Trinidad city water customers, its development impacts would be felt by all arearesidents and visitors, north to Big Lagoon.Sincerely Jane Williams MD On Fri, Aug 6, 2021 at 9:45 PM Jane Williams <[email protected]> wrote:I am writing to express my strong disagreement withthose who are calling for a THIRD vote to consider a pipeline
deal between the City ofTrinidad and the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District. Members of the city’s WaterAdvisory Committee have voted (4-1) to ask the Council to reconsider the pipeline, andsome residents are engaging in scare tactics to create panic.There is no need for another vote on the pipeline. This question has already beensettled — not just once but twice — by two previous City Council votes (Jan. 26 and Feb. 9,2021) against the pipeline plan. Just because people disagree with the outcome of a vote isnot reasonable cause to request a “redo.” If the Council is going to reconsider this again,much more public notice is needed.The pipeline proposal is a “nuclear option” to address Trinidad’s water concerns. It mightbe easier to buy into a hugely expensive and environmentally disruptive pipelineconstruction project, but it is the wrong answer for Trinidad and the surrounding area.Water Committee’s agenda? I am very concerned that Trinidad’s Water AdvisoryCommittee — four of five of whose members are pipeline proponents — seems to preferthe pipeline “solution.” Much more attention needs to go to conservation measures thathave been suggested for years by Steve Madrone and others.All of us should look for ways to address the droughts created by climate change, but Iprefer approaches such as conservation, rainwater catchment and collection, new watersources, revival of the city’s Mill Creek water rights, repair to
(or replacement of) a leakingwater system that loses up to 40% of its water, development of springs and small ponds forstorage, etc., before the city considers a pipeline that opens the entire Trinidad area to aninevitable development boom.Please reject proposals to revisit the pipeline, and let’s please refocus our attention onfinding ways for Trinidad — as Mayor Steve Ladwig has said — to live within our means bydeveloping new local water sources. The city has a fund of some $1 million dedicated towater issues. Let’s put that money to work on solutions we can live with, and won’t regret. 1. We oppose Trinidad City Council reconsideration of Trinidad’s involvement in awater pipeline.• The City Council has already voted — twice! (Jan. 26 and Feb. 9, 2021) — not toparticipate in a water pipeline project with the Humboldt Bay Municipal Water District(HBMWD).• There is no new information or argument that changes the situation that existed when theCouncil voted 3-2 not to participate in a pipeline project.• No ‘redo’! Those who don’t like the previous legal and valid votes don’t get to demand a“redo” until they get the result they do like.2. Concerns about the Water Advisory Committee (WAC):• The Water Advisory Committee is comprised of four pipeline proponents and oneopponent: City Council Members Richard Clompus and David Grover voted (twice) in favor
of the pipeline; Planning Commissioner Cheryl Kelly has expressed support for the pipelinesolution; city resident member Dwight Miller is a strong pipeline proponent; city residentmember Bryce Kenny opposes the pipeline. Ex officio member City Manager Eli Naffahsupports the pipeline. Last month, the committee voted 4-1 (Kenny opposed) to ask theCity Council to reconsider the pipeline option.• The Water Advisory Committee has examined various aspects of Trinidad’s watersituation, but seems focused on the pipeline “solution.” Numerous proposals have beenmade over years for conservation, rainwater catchment and collection, new water sources,revival of the city’s Mill Creek water rights, repair to a leaking water system, developmentof springs and small ponds for storage, etc. Let’s focus on those.• Scare Tactics: Some WAC members are using scare tactics to create a false sense ofurgency and panic about joining the pipeline project “before it’s too late.” A pipeline wouldtake many, many years (estimated at 5-15 years) to complete — permits, propertyeasements, environmental studies, California Coastal Commission review and approval,community and resident opposition, etc. This is not an answer to current droughtconditions.3. Opposition to a pipeline “solution”:• ‘Nuclear Option’ — A pipeline is wildly out of proportion with Trinidad’s current waterresource situation or the city’s future water needs.
• The minimum HBMWD pipeline size would be a 6” line to conform with fire-suppressionregulations; this size pipe could deliver more than 500,000 gallons per day — far inexcess of the requirements of Trinidad, Westhaven and the Rancheria combined. One easilyforeseeable consequence is a development boom, as buildable lots that currently have noaccess to water become valuable commodities for construction.
• A development boom would ruin the very qualities of unspoiled beauty that residents andvisitors to the Trinidad area most value.• New development that a pipeline would make possible east of Highway 101 and north ofWesthaven would require infrastructure — roads, utilities, etc. — and also would dependon septic systems in areas already prone to pollution of streams, springs and groundwater.• Some pipeline proponents say this decision should be made only by Trinidad residentsand water system customers. This is an elitist view. While the pipeline may initially serveonly Trinidad city water customers, its development impacts would be felt by all arearesidents and visitors, north to Big Lagoon.Sincerely Jane Williams MD
Message received, forwarded to the Council, considered a public record,and will be included in the public comment packet for the upcoming Councilmeeting.
Gabriel AdamsTrinidad City Clerk707.677.0223www.trinidad.ca.gov From: Andrea Pucci <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2021 1:28 PMTo: [email protected]: Water Choice HBMWD Dear Gabe - Please forward for City Council Meeting Oct 12 Dear City Councilors - Please register my recommendation that yousupport our future water needs from HBMWD. Before you vote please state your reasons for your vote at this time.Many of us will be attending on Zoom, and look forward to hearing from youregarding your thoughts I am a long term resident of the city of TrinidadI live at 785 Underwood Drive PO Box 252I would like to add my voice to the coming vote about future water needsand solutions A pipeline from the HBMWD system will be coming to our area, whether wejoin or not.We should take advantage of the opportunity to share costs with Rancheria Thank you
