Idyllwild Water board plans to end recycled water project

Share via email

The Idyllwild Water District board meeting on Wednesday, Jan. 18, had a full complement of five directors. Show here (from left) are General Manager Jack Hoagland, directors Geoffrey Caine, Steve Kunkle, President Dr. Charles Schelly, Vic Sirkin and Peter Szabadi. Photo by JP Crumrine


The recycled water project, long a dream of the Idyllwild Water District’s past boards, is being flushed down the drain. The current Board of Directors unanimously agreed to have staff begin negotiations with the state to end the project.

“At this juncture, I recommend to the board that it not move forward at this time,” General Manager Jack Hoagland said at the end of his presentation on the history and feasibility of the project. “Certainly now it is not financially feasible, and I don’t see a way to go forward.”

In the future, perhaps new technology and different costs might improve the project’s feasibility, Hoagland added. But the current plan does not support the “unique demographic, geographic and hydrologic conditions of the community.”

After reviewing the project’s plan, intent and local conditions, Hoagland described three main problems that limit its likelihood of success and impose excess costs currently.

Recycling local wastewater had two goals. The first was to provide water for irrigation in lieu of customers using potable water. The second was storing it in Foster Lake to supplement the groundwater for wells in that area.

However, the volume of water currently used for irrigation is not very much. Hoagland referred to a 2011 report that also questioned the amount of water needed for irrigation.

“The amount of water that was identified in several scenarios is not clearly supported by data,” Hoagland concluded.

Regarding the goal of using the water to replenish Dutch Flats wells, Hoagland also debunked that premise, calling it “… likely never credible…” According to Hoagland, water at Foster Lake percolates into the ground too fast.

“The state wants at least six months’ retention time,” he said. “There is no way to make that happen.”

In addition, the recycled water has a higher salt content, which would diminish the quality of Foster Lake water over time. To maintain the water quality, ultimately the district would need to build a desalting facility.

Finally, Hoagland explained that the low estimate of demand for recycled water to be used for irrigation would substantially increase costs for which water customers would ultimately have to pay.

“The recycled water would replace about 4 percent of the water demand for which water ratepayers would have to pay a 20+ percent increase in their rates,” he wrote in his report. “… for a minor improvement in water supply [that] would be difficult to justify to the water ratepayers.”

The cost of a new well is about $100,000, according to Hoagland. If it produced about 10 gallons per minute, that would meet or exceed the goal of the recycled water project at substantially less cost — even if one or two were dry wells.

In response to a question from Director Vic Sirkin, Hoagland also said the district’s cost will probably more than double to at least $2.25 million for the current estimate of less than $1 million.

The current directors expressed surprise that previous boards did not share Hoagland’s conclusions, especially since they seemed to have been readily available for years. Several directors wished that some former directors would step up and explain how they decided to go forward with the facility.

But the board unanimously approved Hoagland’s recommendation to pursue with state agencies the project’s termination.

Share via email
  1. jerkyman911@yahoo.com January 27, 2017, 5:06 pm

    You better hope we were wrong!
    Time will tell! Hey porter insurance move

    Reply
  2. jerkyman911@yahoo.com January 27, 2017, 5:08 pm

    That’s eight poor insurance move !

    Reply
  3. “You better hope we were wrong.” What a croc! You fired your comptroller who said you were wrong. Your wastewater engineer told you. I wonder if you threatened him. Oh that’s right you sued him. So hows that going? Oh yes you left. Coward! Your engineer says he told you too. Your new comptroller somehow failed to write a report negating his fired predecessor. Your attorney somehow failed to tell you too. Oh yes he’s up on felony charges for failing to provide proper oversight as attorney for his client, Beaumont.

    Personally, I think the District Attorney should take a healthy look at this and the conduct of the prior board..

    Reply
  4. And wrong we were not! None of you have ever been able to represent water with either the purity its nature reflects or the clarity almost expected by the element itself. Deer in your own headlights. The ether of your affinity with each other led to a despairing outlook from each of you that was self inflicting, with a suicidal and cannibalistic vision for district. Not only had you decided to pee in the pool, you wound up peeing on each other. There are consequences when you offend the natives. Chuck Stroud Idyllwild

    Reply
  5. Cook, Billman, and Freitas you have been asked and are afforded a chance to offer your opinion on your prior actions within the context of known facts. That window is small.

    Reply
  6. Without them the community is left wondering why they owe a quarter million dollars for an abandoned project that should never been started. One couldn’t blame them if it went to a grand jury

    Reply
  7. The silence is overwhelming. $250,000.00 IN LOST IWD CUSTOMER AND TAXPAYER ASSETS! POOF!

    Reply
  8. Former board member June Rockwell asked the current Iwd board tonight whether prior board members would be held accountsble for the kunkle suit. HMM.Jack Hoagland advised the board not to answer the question as it is a closed session matter. I wonder whst brier patch this ends under.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

s2Member®