|
Dear Loma Prietan Editor:
The Santa Clara Valley Water District has heard your concerns regarding our project to solve the water quality and reliability problem at the San Luis Reservoir. Because the "low-point" problem at San Luis Reservoir could threaten a large proportion of the water supply to more than 1.8 million people, we are working hard to identify the best solution.
The recent update published in the Loma Prietan focuses on just one alternative that would solve the problem--an expansion of Pacheco Reservoir. We have several other potential solutions that we are studying and have not determined which one makes the most sense. The other alternatives that are under consideration include a pipeline to bypass San Luis Reservoir, lowering the reservoir's existing intake facilities, source water quality control, water treatment methods and other regional projects and operational changes that my be combined to avoid the low-point problem.
We appreciate your early input on the Pacheco Reservoir alternative and understand your concerns about potential impacts to Henry W. Coe State Park. As it had been described, this alternative could have encroached upon the park. Based upon information provided by the district's counsel and my interpretation of our board's existing policy, I have directed district staff to observe the following:
• In seeking a solution to the San Luis Reservoir low point problem, the district will not adversely impact Henry Coe State Park. There will be no inundation of any Coe Park lands.
• While a change in designation from state park to state recreation area might allow for a storage facility, this change in use and purpose of Henry Coe State Park would be incompatible with district interests and the district will not seek such a change in designated use.
I presented this interpretation in a memo to the water district board of directors. On May 21, 2003, the district board discussed this memo and unanimously concurred with my interpretation, obviating the need to return to the board for any further policy discussion.
The above CEO interpretations pertain to issues raised concerning the Henry Coe State Park. They do not exclude storage as an option for consideration in resolving the low-point problem. It may be that a storage alternative could be designed without adverse impacts to the state park.
I would also like to correct the assertion that district representatives refused to add Advocates for Coe Park to the Stakeholders' List. In fact, during the meeting mentioned in the update, our staff indicated that this request would be considered. Since then, we have invited Advocates for Coe Park to join our stakeholder committee.
Furthermore, we would like to invite a representative of the Sierra Club, Loma Prieta Chapter, to join the committee. It is my hope that your participation can help assure that this important problem is solved in a manner that is consistent with our district's mission to protect watersheds, streams, and natural resources.
We would like to work with the Sierra Club and others to assure that the eventual solution to this problem does not adversely impact any state park lands. I hope you and your members will continue to provide input as we continue to learn more about how we can best solve the low-point problem.
Sincerely,
Stanley M. Williams
Chief Executive Officer
|