Once again Inrebuttal, you are wrong - your statement about rice farmers no longer being able to disc rice straw under is inaccurate. Had you checked with proper authorities you would have determined that and not made the statement. It is inaccurate.
Residents of Walnut Ranch need to determine whether or not the quality of water under the City system is appreciably better than what they now have - that is doubtful, maybe only slightly. City needs to replace at least 2 wells, needs to improve chlorination, etc., etc. Many, many residents purchase soft water/filter systems in order to save their pipes and have drinkable water. As for above ground septic systems - great idea. The City wants to bring in WR to reap from the taxes - why should the County give those up. WR should seek better water alternatives than the City's system - it's pretty bad also. City doesn't have money to revamp their system.
Whoever you are "inrebuttal", you are over-stepping every boundary you think you have. Maybe we should do away with the Council as they do not seem to answer to anyone, particularly the citizens who they are supposed to answer to. It will be a mistake to make the City Clerk an appointive position and it would definitely be a mistake to have the Treasurer appointed or eliminated. Then no one monitors or has oversight of the citizens tax dollars - no checks and balance system in place. Just remember - if the City Clerk is appointed, she will be answering to the City Manager, not the Council - and the same would apply if the Treasurer were appointed and not elected. We do not want to end up like City of Bell, Vallejo and other Cities that haven't had oversight. This City was much better off without a City Manager also.
FYI - our bill does have dates of water coverage. Maybe you need to learn to read your bill. Water readings are from dates in the past by about almost two months.
I know all of the 5 who were appointed to a Utilities Com. and none are on a witch hunt, including Ron Loudon. I also agree they would need to know how things were done in the past, including shifting of funds, etc., etc. in order to recommend NOT continuing those practices. Think about it ColusaResident - It is my understanding, your City Manager doesn't even know how to read the budget - ask anyone that has gone in and asked questions. This City needs more accountability, transparency & professionalism & we need to fix the problems & move forward. Give out the information requested by the commission/committee (?) let them do their job with whatever time it takes. That is money well spent to protect the residents & would be a lot more effective than continuing to pay an outside Consultant $7895.00 a month to TRY to bring in large projects. Remember, this City is off the beaten track. Williams needs to steer clear of joining partners with Colusa on any project or joint services. I've also been told by several individuals, the City's cash position at the end of June, 2011 is a million and a half less than the previous year????? Not good.
The Council needs to read all information possible on Revelopment Agencies and what has happened on the State level, despite the fact there are going to be lawsuits filed against actions taken by the State. The City needs to seriously consider disbanding the RDA and not loaning anymore money to the RDA. The City will not make the millions of dollars through taxes from projects as the CM has stated. Since we have no actual projects in progress, it appears we will not even recover the money loaned to the RDA, according to all the literature and information that is out there. Lets terminate the contract with the high costing consultant and use that money to take care of our current employees and the needs of our City rather than sending the money elsewhere. We need to keep our budget in the "black" not red.
As of recent Council action, it will be even harder to start up a business. The Impact Fees were increased, even though almost each time business tries to come in and objects to the old impact fees, the City at times lowered those, but still felt the need to increase the fees. That also applies to building a new home, or adding on, etc. Unfortunatly, Colusa is off the beaten track which is a detriment for suppliers into the area. As for loaning hundreds of thousands of dollars to the RDA, to pay consultants, why not use that money to take care of what we have. We have individuals that live in this community that are trying regularly to bring in new business and jobs, why pay an outsider huge sums of money, that may never materialize into anything, and that takes increased taxes away from local districts. Good luck to anyone wanting to start a new business - we need it.
You mean she was texting during the meeting? ? How rude and unprofessional! It takes all kinds. But then, it doesn't surprise me or anyone else. She is the most unprofessional person I've ever run into.
FYI, the Consultant receiving the $7875.00 per month plus expenses, was hired by the Redevelopment Agency of the City to bring in all kinds of new businesses that create jobs, etc., etc. Big joke. The City loaned to the RDA, to date, over $600,000. This isn't coming from restricted Funds - get your facts straight. How many times has this City tried the Redevelopment route to no avail. The $7895.00 per month could be used to fill a position that will not be filled, or could be used to increase current employees pay, etc., etc. Lots of other outside Consultants could be cut or eliminated to cut expenses. This City Manager doesn't understand cutting spending,just starts something new that never gets completed. No policies and procedures, restructuring of job descriptions for employees not finished - it is done piece-meal. All employees should be treated equally, fairly & given equal opportunity. Don't favor one group over another, don't cut salaries of the lowest paid individuals - they keep this City operating, not the expensive Consultants who spend their money elsewhere.
It was stated by City Mgr that the State wants the City to annex the entire State property (100+ acres) not just the 7 of the park now being utilized for camping ground, etc. Well, I would assume that means the City would have to maintain the entire property, including the roads in the forest North of Roberts ditch that is used by residents to get to the sandy beach, etc. This City's parks crew has trouble taking care of the current City parks, particularly the restrooms - I agree if certain local merchants are suffering from lack of people using the State Park, and would even more so if the park closes, then those merchants should get together as a group and run and maintain the park facilities. The boat channel is still not going to be dredged so that it is usable, unless you want to get stuck in the sand. Come on citizens, do you really believe the City can run the park for the numbers the City Mgr produced at the meeting recently. Councilwoman Hosmer stated that maybe Senior Citizen volunteers could do the work - the work to be done there is not what Senior Citizens should be doing. We don't need any heart attacks happening out there, or anything else.
![[Avatar]](/images/avatar26.png){kind=avatar}
Opus