Claremont Insider: Water Woes

Monday, March 12, 2007

Water Woes

Yesterday's Daily Bulletin featured an in-depth look at water issues in our area. In one of several articles, the reporter Will Bigham wrote that Claremont is considering using eminent domain proceedings to take control of the water company from Golden State Water Co.

Bigham's article had a few errors and omissions. Bigham quoted Councilmember Ellen Taylor:

"'We didn't move forward with very much in the last couple years; we dealt with micro-managing issues,' Councilwoman Ellen Taylor said. "

Of course, Taylor was doing her usual posturing (and dissembling). The fact is, the council didn't look further into eminent domain last year in large part because of last November's Proposition 90--a referendum that would have limited cities' ability to exercise eminent domain. Prop. 90 failed, but its supporters have vowed to take another crack at it. So, Claremont could go forward with eminent domain on the water company, get partway through the proceedings, then be barred from the takeover by any new restrictions after having spent hundreds of thousands of dollars or more. This Taylor knows well.

If you have any questions, Councilmember Taylor can be reached at etaylor@ci.claremont.ca.us.

So, why would Taylor lie? She wanted to get a dig in on outgoing Councilmember Jackie McHenry, of course. The "micro-management" tag is part of the Claremont 400 script. They keep repeating a charge (or a lie), and it becomes the truth because reporters like Bigham are too busy and too limited in space to report the reality of the situation.

Another factor complicating the purchase is the issue of the Pomona Valley Protective Association (PVPA) land in Northeast Claremont. Recall that's the land that Vulcan Material Co. wants to mine for gravel. It is also the same land PVPA has talked about selling to a developer.

Golden State Water owns a 47% stake in PVPA, so that holding might have to be part of any water company purchase. The land, at current market rate values, could be worth in excess of $100 million, which would inflate the cost of the city's purchase quite a bit.

On the other hand, if the city did take control of the water company, along with the PVPA stake, that might help settle the mining issue.