Index to this web page:
Reclamation Board and Supervisor Dickinson
   Dickinson letter about Hayer to Rec Board
Supervisor Dickinson on millions spent in Rio Linda
City of Sacramento on pump and pond operation
SAFCA fails to notify; CPAC offers to help
SAFCA Magpie Creek Project
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] July 20-Reclamation Board Meeting
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 14:22:13 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: dwerkman@sacbee.com, RLNEWS@aol.com, riolinda@vrx.net
CC: matt0612@earthlink.net, MKDANIE@yahoo.com, bltk@aol.com,wathor@aol.com, jbmitchell3@aol.com

RL Net and others.  July 20, 2001 Reclamation Board Meeting Info.

The Reclamation Board has approved SAFCA’s mitigation for increased flooding and SAFCA can now award contracts for the increased heights of Robla Creek South Levee.

Also, SAFCA can award contracts for construction of the levee to protect the Rio Linda Airport, Bell Acqua Lakes, Bell Acqua Apartments and the Western Acres/Bell Acqua Subdivisions that the Robla Creek South Levee has already increased the risk of flooding.

The homes on C and E Streets are still in some sort of mitigation for flood proofing.  SAFCA has told the Reclamation Board that SAFCA will flood proof all homes that want flood proofing.  The homeowners do not have to agree to the flood proofing.  Butch Hodgkins stated that if the property owner did not want flood proofing, SAFCA would flood insure the home.  One of the Board members made comments about taxpayer’s deep pockets should not continue paying for flood insurance.

Special Condition Fifty-Three of Permit No. 16003-A BD of September 19, 1997 states:
"If structural mitigation is not completed by November 1, 1997, the permittee shall purchase and maintain flood insurance and pay all deductibles until the structural mitigation is completed.  The flood insurance coverage shall apply to all structures (including contents) in the Lower Dry Creek Watershed determined to be impacted by stage 2 levee improvements up to the 500-year flood event.  The permittee will use best efforts for flood fighting and communicating with property owners in potentially affected areas."

The flood proofing would consist of floodwalls made of concrete or bricks or small levees.  Two property owners address the Reclamation Board and did not want walls or levees around their homes. The Reclamation Board was asking their attorney if the property owners that refused flood proofing could sue the government if their homes flooded at a later date.  This caused much confusion and huddles by SAFCA Staff and I did not hear what all was said.

Pam Bruner, Staff Assistant to the Reclamation Board is retiring and I do not know who will take over her job.

I will ask her to send me a copy of the transcript of this meeting when it is available.

Following is my testimony to the Reclamation Board today, July 20, 2001.

Erwin E. Hayer

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Madam President and members of The Reclamation Board,

My name is Erwin Hayer.  I live at 950 G Street in Rio Linda.

I still question the accuracy of SAFCA's 500-year flood event map showing floodwater elevations lower than FEMAS’s 100-year flood event map just north of my home.

Also I have five locations that mitigation for increased flooding has not been completed.

Location 1. West Second Street and Ascot Avenue at drain N-1.  Portable pumps have been installed multiple times to protect a few homes in the county that SAFCA does not even have the floor elevations

Location 2. A home at 5425 Rio Linda Boulevard, first floor elevation I have been unable to locate, was almost flooded after the levee was constructed.  The SAFCA data indicates a 1.4 foot increase for a 100 year flood at this location and a 1.6 foot increase for 200 year flood after levee construction.  This means the local rainwater would have to be pumped over the levee to protect this home as the levee is above middle of the windows.

Portable pumps have been required at S-10 drain to protect the home from floodwaters multiple times. I talked to the owner on Wednesday this week and she said that there has been no mitigation for increased flood risk of her property since the levee was constructed. A small drainage ditch on the dry side of the levee is choked with weeds and does not let the water from the rear of the property drain and water stands which used to drain directly into the creek.

I asked Pete Ghelfi about installing permanent pumps at drain culvert S-10.

His answer was to check with Dave Brent (264- 1400) of the City of Sacramento Drainage Improvement. I have called 3 times the last 3 weeks and left messages. I have not received a return call from Dave Brent.

The property owner also questioned me why the dry grass on the wet side of the levee has been mowed but on the dry side next to her property the dry grass is almost three feet tall and has not been mowed and is a fire hazard.

Location 3. The rainwater from the east side of the bike trail passes through drain culvert on its way to the Flap Valve drain culvert S-10. Portable pumps were installed east of the bike trail to protect some homes from flooding since the south levee was raised. I talked with the resident of 1027 Neal Road yesterday and found out the back yards of 1025, 1027 and 1031 Neal Road have flooded since the levee was raised to 42 feet and no one has talked to them about the increased floodwater elevations. I can not find the floor elevations of these homes. This resident did not even know the levee was in the process of being raised to 44.4 feet behind their home.

Location 4. SAFCA has been meeting with some property owners east of Dry Creek Road with proposals to flood proof their property. So far nothing definite on flood proofing in this area. I still have concerns about increase flooding risks in this area. With Dry Creek Road at 43.3 feet and the levee on the other side of Robla Creek above 44.6 feet, these 10 homes upstream of Dry Creek Road have a very realistic increase in the risk of flooding. SAFCA indicates that Dry Creek Road will be passable for a 100-year flood event but water could be flowing over the road elevation of 43.3 feet. 10 homes along C Street have floor elevations of 43.8 feet or lower and are at increased flooding risk.

Location 5. The homes of 428 and 433 G Street are at increased risk and no one has talked to them.

All of the increased risk of flooding just described is caused by:

1. The raising of the levees and the reduction of floodway and floodplain which has caused the same flows to be higher and stay higher for longer periods of time on the wet side of the levees.

2. The flap valve drains will not let the local rain water into the creek until the floodwater recedes and this causes the floodwater on the dry side of the levees to be higher and is why portable pumps have to be installed to protect these homes.

Thank You.
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] redistricting. -ACTION REQUESTED
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 10:34:22 -0700
From: Charlea Moore <cgamail@juno.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Thanks for the response Allen, as always your thoughts are very reasonable and fair.

I do agree with you that Rio Linda and Elverta are mostly rural and a majority of us wish to remain that way.

I have been studying the maps and as near as I can tell we are going to wind up with a large segment of heavily urbanized area no matter which district we end up in. We simply don't have sufficient population to out gun the more densely populated areas and if we did we wouldn't be rural. If we did end up in district 4 we would still have a supervisor whose main interest would be the densely populated Antelope and Orangevale areas.

In addition we would lose the continuity shared by Natomas and Rio Linda of the drainage and flood issues. Our watershed is continuous with Natomas and North Sac. but we have no common ground with Orangevale or Antelope.

There are other issues of continuity which would be lost - Sorento Rd. is a prime example.  I can't imagine that a District 4 sup would give a second thought to a backwater road at the edge of his district in an area with few votes.

Its mostly for these reasons that I would rather stick with District 1. I know that there have been many instances where I've disagreed with the Supervisors positions for us and with Roger, nonetheless I do feel that we need to stay as contiguous as possible regardless of who our supervisor might be.

Thanks for listening and I hope I have provided some food for thought.

Charlea
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Redistricting-Flooding Comments.
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 12:50:59 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net
CC: SPZNTAZ@softcom.net, matt0612@earthlink.net, MKDANIE@yahoo.com

Thank you Allan and Debbie for the information and your work for the community.

The following statement by Charlea is not totally correct.

-- snip --
In addition we would lose the continuity shared by Natomas and Rio Linda of the drainage and flood issues. Our watershed is continuous with Natomas and North Sac. but we have no common ground with Orangevale or Antelope.
-- snip --

I agree that the water that flows through Rio Linda and Elverta continues on to Steelhead Creek (was NEMDC), which flows between North Sacramento (consisting of North Sacramento, Del Paso Heights and Robla) and Natomas. All of these communities are within the City of Sacramento and the Sacramento City Council does not care about Rio Linda or Elverta as shown by the raising of the levees on Steelhead Creek and Robla Creek South Levee to protect the Natomas area and allow the current development. Go back to when the Magpie Creek Diversion Channel was constructed in the 1950s from Raley Boulevard to Robla Creek near the Sacramento Northern Railroad, now the Bike Trail. This allowed development in the historical Magpie Creek Floodway/Floodplain, which is in the City. The area on the east side of Steelhead Creek where Interstate 80 crosses used to be swamp and wetlands and had as much as 15 feet of water every winter. It also increased flooding in the lower Dry Creek and Robla Creek areas and nothing was done to minimize this increased flooding in the rural area of the County.

This has created a political separation at Ascot Avenue, which is the city limits. The city has two council districts that cover this area of the city and the county has only one district covering the same city districts and the Rio Linda and Elverta areas. The constituency within the city area of the county supervisor’s district out numbers the constituency within the Rio Linda and Elverta area many times and the unbalance will increase as more homes are completed in Natomas. The city also wants to place a sphere of influence from Elkhorn Boulevard north to the county line between Steelhead Creek and Sacramento Metro Airport. This is the first step for the annexing of this area to the City of Sacramento. At the present time this area is a detention basin for the Natomas developments and if the city wants to develop this detention basin, where will they move the water? Rio Linda and Elverta?

A few people in Rio Linda were able to persuade the State Reclamation Board to limit the construction of the Robla Creek South Levee to a maximum height of 42.0 feet until mitigation was completed for the increased flooding risk caused upstream by raising the levee.

The Reclamation Board approved the mitigation on July 20, 2001 and SAFCA plans on having the levee raised before this winter season. SAFCA is still working on flood proofing plans for the homes east of Dry Creek Road and this amounts to building a floodwall around the homes. I am not pleased with a future floodwall across the street from my home on the Rio Linda Junior High School Playground and I sure would not like one around my home. I realize this floodwall is necessary for the protection of nearly 100 homes.

If you check the watershed maps you will find all of the rainwater from Antelope and almost all of the rainwater north of Greenback Lane in Orangevale flows through Rio Linda and Elverta.

I think Rio Linda and Elverta have as much or more in common with Orangevale and Antelope than North Sacramento on drainage and flood issues. All of the developments in these areas add floodwater to Rio Linda and Elverta faster and deeper.

Placer County and Roseville developments are also causing an increase in risks of flooding in our area. SAFCA’s director has stated SAFCA is trying to get Roseville and Placer County to include detention basins in future developments. So far, I have not seen any approved detention basins.

Does any one have the number of registered voters of Sacramento County Supervisor District 1 that are within the City of Sacramento and how many registered voters are in the county?

Also what is the population of District 1 within the city and the population within the county?

Remember the Natomas developments will be adding to the city voters and city population.

Please forgive any misspelling and grammar problems as I did not like or do well in English classes. I now wish I had paid attention and learned more.

Have a nice day and keep smiling,

Erwin Hayer
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
 

The following letter was also published in the August 30, 2001 issue of the Rio Linda Elverta News:
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Flood Meeting at RL Grammer School 16 Aug
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 00:09:42 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: bradley@water.ca.gov
CC: bltk@aol.com, RLNEWS@aol.com, riolinda@vrx.net

Mr. Steve Bradley,

Sorry I have not responded sooner, but I called your office on 17 Aug about some questions I have but you were not available.

I told John Basset at the August 16, 2001 meeting that I did not get notified about the meeting.  His answer was that I was not impacted by what the meeting was about and it did not affect my home.

Jay O'Brien called my home the afternoon of August 16 to see if I was prepared to attend the meeting. I was working and my wife contacted me about Jay's call. I then called Jay about 4:30 PM to find out what was going on and he told me about the meeting. I was able to take off work 2 hours early to arrive at the 6:00 PM meeting by 6:30 PM.

I have tried to stay current with what is going on with the flooding problems in Rio Linda and Elverta since the floods of 1986. Getting information from the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) or Roger Dickinson, my representative, has been difficult most of the time.

I had tried to find out about meetings back when Grantland Johnson (Before SAFCA) was our representative on the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors. He never did return any of my telephone calls. Later, when I read about the levees to be constructed in the Sacramento Bee, I took a day of work from my job and went to the SAFCA Offices to find out what the plans were. When I saw a map with 45.8 feet elevation levees near Rio Linda Boulevard and E Street on the west and Robla Creek near Dry Creek Road on the southeast, I was concerned about the area in between which included Western Acres and Bell Acqua Subdivisions, Rio Linda Airport and Bell Acqua Lakes. I knew the runway had been raised 6 feet to 42.6 feet elevation on the south end to keep it out of the floods and many of the home floor elevations were less than 44.0 feet. Now with the 45.8 feet levees, more than 3 feet of water could cover the south end of the runway. The runway elevation at the north end is 44.3 feet. I told Paul Devereux that the levees would cause some flooding problems at Western Acres and Bell Acqua Subdivisions, Rio Linda Airport and Bell Acqua Lakes. He said it would not.  While coming home, I stopped at the Bell Acqua Boat shop to let Bill Mahanah know about the levees. Phil Todd was there and was also informed about the levees. I do not have the exact date, but this all took place prior to any construction of the north levee.

Later, a Public Hearing at the Rio Linda High School on 19 May 1997 was called by SAFCA. Paul Devereux opened the meeting at 7:30 PM and closed the meeting at 7:30 PM. The one resident of the community that attended did not wished to speak. Reference: FSEIR, August 1997, Transcript 2.  Later, when I found out about this meeting, I asked Paul who was notified. He said it was advertised in the Sacramento Bee and that was all that SAFCA had to do when holding a meeting. No community members were notified that I could find.

The Robla Creek south levee was moved north to almost the same location as turned down by the Reclamation Board while denying the Hansen Lakes Project.

This caused the floodway/floodplain width to be reduced more than 600 feet. Reference "ROBLA FLOODPLAIN PROJECT IS DENIED", Published on 04/19/1997, Sacramento Bee, Page A1, 772 words.

When SAFCA had their first Lower Dry Creek Watershed Mitigation Project Working Group meeting on November 19, 1997, more attendees were from SAFCA and SAFCA Consultants than attendees from the community. The meeting was held at 9:00 AM and most community members worked during the day. All of the community attendees asked if the meetings could be held in the evening so more community residents could attend and SAFCA said no. This was not entered into the minutes of the meeting and was again brought up at the second meeting on January 13, 1998. SAFCA still planned the future meetings for 9:00 AM.

I brought up the fact that if the floodwater depth west of Dry Creek Road was increased by the Robla Creek South Levee, then the floodwater would rise on the east side. Paul Devereux then said that the floodwater would not increase on the east side of Dry Creek Road and the project ended at Dry Creek Road. I then notified some of the residents east of Dry Creek Road and they had not known about the plans for the levee.

Later SAFCA had a meeting in the evening with the residents east of Dry Creek Road without notifying any of the residents that had been attending the day meetings. Is this divide and conquer?

Jay O'Brien told me later after the August 16, 2001 meeting that he mentioned to you that he had notified me of the meeting, and Mr. O'Brien quoted you as saying that you had specifically asked SAFCA to notify me. Did Mr. O'Brien hear you correctly?

If this is true, then SAFCA is still operating as to divide and conquer.

The above are some of the many reasons why I do not trust the SAFCA Staff and the SAFCA Board of Directors.

Sincerely,

Erwin E. Hayer
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
 

-------- Original Message --------
From: "Steve Bradley" <bradley@water.ca.gov>
Reply-To: <bradley@water.ca.gov>
To: "'Erwin Hayer'" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
CC: "Pete Rabbon \(E-mail\)" <prabbon@water.ca.gov>
Subject: RE: Flood Meeting at RL Grammer School 16 Aug
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 08:05:24 -0700

Mr. Hayer,

I did ask SAFCA to notify you of the meeting on August 16. I told SAFCA to notify all of the people (affected or not) in the area east of Dry Creek Road and to include you as you had been heavily involved in the public meeting process for the Robla/Dry Creek Project.

Stephen T. Bradley
Chief Engineer
The Reclamation Board
(916) 653-8089

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Fwd: RE: Flood Meeting at RL Grammer School 16 Aug
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2001 16:07:11 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net
CC: bltk@aol.com, RLNEWS@aol.com

I guess SAFCA did not want me at the meeting.

Erwin E. Hayer

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Millions on Flood Control went where Question
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 16:30:09 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: scohn@cityofsacramento.org, hfargo@cityofsacramento.org,Clyde.macdonald@asm.ca.gov, Amy.dean@sen.ca.gov, donn@saccounty.net,illac@saccounty.net, murielj@saccounty.net, rogerd@saccounty.net,nielloroger@saccounty.net
CC: bltk@aol.com, jbmitchell3@aol.com, dwerkman@sacbee.com,RLNEWS@aol.com, jmccarthy@kxtv.com, riolinda@vrx.net,kathy@argonautconsulting.com, hodgkinsb@saccounty.net,Dan.Sharp@mail.house.gov, doug.ose@mail.house.gov

Honorable Roger Dickinson and SAFCA Board of Directors,

The following is a quote from the Sacramento Bee, July 23, 2001:

-- snip --
"Dickinson attributed the secessionist sentiments to 'a relatively small percentage of people.' He said the county has spent millions on flood-control projects in Rio Linda, including pumping stations, levees and raising or buying homes in low areas."
-- snip --
Reference: Community wants out of city district--  By Robert D. Dávila, Bee Staff Writer, (Published July 23, 2001)

I have been trying to find out where the millions on flood control projects in Rio Linda were spent.

During the 1950s, the Magpie Creek Diversion Channel and a levee on the east side of the Natomas East Main Drainage Canal, now Steelhead Creek, was constructed. This construction gave the undeveloped property that was subjected to flooding in the Magpie Creek floodway of Del Paso Heights and Robla areas of the northern part of the city of Sacramento increased flood protection. This project increased the flood risks in the Rio Linda area and nothing was done to reduce the flood risks in Rio Linda.

The NORTH AREA LOCAL PROJECT LEVEE IMPROVEMENTS from 1993 to 1997 increased the flood protection for the Natomas area of the City of Sacramento. It also increased the risk of flooding in the Robla and Del Paso Heights area of the City of Sacramento and in the southern part of Rio Linda.

If it were not for a small group of Rio Linda residents, the Robla Creek South Levee would have been constructed to the 45.8-foot elevation that was originally planned. This would have been by the winter of 1997. The state Reclamation Board reduced the height of the levee until mitigation for increased flooding upstream was completed. The current project is the results of that mitigation.

Some people say the pump station on Steelhead Creek just upstream of Dry Creek was to protect the west side of Rio Linda. If this pump station was not put in, the west levee would have to be raised upstream and a new east levee would have to be constructed north past Elverta. Many pumps would have to be installed for the protection of the Rio Linda and Elverta area east of a Steelhead Creek East Levee which was not constructed. The Pump Station was the cheaper to do. Now the Steelhead Creek area upstream of the Pump Station has become a detention pond area. I have asked SAFCA Staff what the maximum water elevation would be allowed to rise to upstream of the Pump Station. On August 16, at the meeting at Rio Linda Grammar School, I asked John Basset how high the water would be allowed to go. His answer was under certain conditions, it could be allowed to rise to 37.0 feet.

If the flood water north of the pump station is allowed to rise to 37.0 feet, then West 6th Street between Ascot Avenue and Elkhorn Boulevard would be mostly under water, 7 feet deep about 800 feet north of Ascot Avenue. If the floodwater was 37.0 feet at Ascot Avenue, then 3.5 miles north at the proposed Florida Power and Light proposed Power Plant, with a lot of the area below 35.0 feet would be subject to flooding. Sorento Road at about 900 feet north of Elverta Road would have at least 12 to 13 feet of water depth. Ascot Avenue near West 2nd would have more than 3 to 4 feet of water.

The Pump Station does not reduce the risks of flooding on the west side of Rio Linda and Elverta "under certain conditions".

I have come to the conclusion that millions of dollars have been spent on flood-control projects that have increased the risk of flooding in Rio Linda and Elverta to give additional flood protection for Robla, Del Paso Heights, Gardenland, South Natomas and North Natomas. Most of the area that is now being protected at the expense of Rio Linda and Elverta has been or is in the process of major development.

The current project will be the first money spent in Rio Linda and Elverta for flood protection.  The area to be protected was placed at increased risk of flooding because of previous flood control projects down stream. This area has not had any flooding of structures in the past but the previous projects increased the risk.

Public funds have raised some homes and have purchased and removed others that have flooded in many previous years. These homes should have never been constructed in the first place.

Nothing is listed on any SAFCA web pages about any flood protection projects for Rio Linda or Elverta. Also nothing is mentioned about the floods of January 1995 on the SAFCA web pages even though the storm created record water elevations on All State and County Sensors on the Dry Creek and Arcade Creek Watersheds. Since then many sensors have been added to all of the streams.

The sensors may be considered for flood protection as we might get an earlier warning that we are going to be flooded.

Could you give me any more specific information as to where millions of dollars was spent on flood-control projects in the Rio Linda area that increased flood protection?

Sincerely,

Erwin E. Hayer
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] Millions on Flood Control went where Question
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 18:27:14 -0700
From: Jay O'Brien <jayobrien@att.net>
To: Rio Linda Elverta Mailing List <riolinda@vrx.net>

The Bee article to which Erwin refers below is now on line at http://www.sacbee.com/news/news/old/local01_20010723.html .

I wonder how Roger will get out of this one. Maybe he will say he was misquoted, then Bee reporter Dávila will lean our way even more.

Good catch, Erwin!

Jay
 
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] Millions on Flood Control went where Question
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2001 22:15:59 -0700
From: "Deborah Byrne" <luckyacres@earthlink.net>
To: <riolinda@vrx.net>

By the way, Erwin

Some of us were under the impression that FEMA, or federal money was spent on these projects, not county money. Also, Butch Hodgkins, the Executive Director of SAFCA stood right in our community center and admitted that the current project wouldn't have been necessary if it wasn't to fix problems with the former projects that protect, as you point out, everyone but Rio Linda and Elverta residents. Good questions!

Debbie Byrne
>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] Millions on Flood Control went where Question
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2001 12:11:18 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Deborah

I am not sure about where all the money comes from for the levee's, some from the assesment district formed for the levees.  Other fundes may come from the federal pockets.

But, the raising and the buy out and removal of homes in the floodway was supported by FEMA.  The amount, I am not sure of.

Erwin
>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Fwd: RE: Millions on Flood Control went where Question
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 22:16:59 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

The following is Roger Dickinson Reply FYI.

Erwin E. Hayer
>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
From: "Dickinson, Roger" <rogerd@saccounty.net>
To: 'Erwin Hayer' <eeh625@hotmail.com>, scohn@cityofsacramento.org, hfargo@cityofsacramento.org, Clyde.macdonald@asm.ca.gov, Amy.dean@sen.ca.gov, "Nottoli, Don" <donn@saccounty.net>, "Collin, Illa"  <illac@saccounty.net>, "Johnson, Muriel" <murielj@saccounty.net>, "Niello, Roger" <nielloroger@saccounty.net>
CC: bltk@aol.com, jbmitchell3@aol.com, dwerkman@sacbee.com, RLNEWS@aol.com, jmccarthy@kxtv.com, riolinda@vrx.net, kathy@argonautconsulting.com, "Hodgkins, Butch  (SAFCA)" <hodgkinsb@SacCounty.NET>, Dan.Sharp@mail.house.gov, doug.ose@mail.house.gov
Subject: RE: Millions on Flood Control went where Question
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2001 17:20:28 -0700

Erwin:

Thank you for your email requesting information on money spent to improve flood control in Rio Linda. I regret the delay in responding, but the County budget deliberations last week and the horrific events of this week delayed my reply.

The design and construction of the NEMDC Pump Station cost $14.2 million, the Dry Creek north levee cost $8.5 million, and the Rio Linda portion of south levee improvements including drainage improvements on C and E Streets will cost in excess of $2 million.  In addition, home acquisitions and elevations in Rio Linda to take families out of harm's way have cost more than $2 million to date and another up to $1 million is anticipated to be spent in the near future.  That total is nearly $28 million which has been or will be spent on flood control improvements or safety in Rio Linda since 1994.  The total does not include money spent to raise Elkhorn Blvd. to permit access to Rio Linda in times of flooding or the money spent by the County, the State, and federal governments on law enforcement, emergency services, or recovery efforts in Rio Linda after flooding has occurred. Nor does the total include money spent on local drainage improvements such as on Q St.

As I mentioned when you addressed the Board at the FPL hearing, your contention that the pump station has not lowered water surface elevations on the west side of Rio Linda is incorrect.  As John Bassett has confirment, the after pump station elevation is 32 to 33 feet, not 37 feet.  The elevation is substantially lower than the pre-pump station condition, giving significant flooding relief to the west side of Rio Linda.

Your contention that homes for which money has been spent for acquisition or elevation should never have been built misses the point.  They were built and Sacramento County got the money to help the families living in those homes avoid the risk of future flooding.

Your contention that flood control has been increased for South Natomas, Gardenland, Northgate, North Sacramento, and Robla at the expense of Rio Linda and Elverta because major development was occurring similarly misses the point.  Tens of thousands of people already lived in those areas who needed and deserved to be protected from the threat of flooding.  Bringing protection to them has not been done at the expense of Rio Linda and Elverta; indeed, flood control projects for their benefit have been delayed in order to take into account the effects upstream.

I hope the above information is helpful.

ROGER DICKINSON
Supervisor, District One
Sacramento County

--------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] RE: Millions on Flood Control went where Question
Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 22:14:16 -0700
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
Reply-To: riolinda@vrx.net
To: rogerd@saccounty.net, scohn@cityofsacramento.org,hfargo@cityofsacramento.org, Clyde.macdonald@asm.ca.gov,Amy.dean@sen.ca.gov, donn@saccounty.net, illac@saccounty.net,murielj@saccounty.net, nielloroger@saccounty.net
CC: bltk@aol.com, jbmitchell3@aol.com, dwerkman@sacbee.com,RLNEWS@aol.com, jmccarthy@kxtv.com, riolinda@vrx.net,kathy@argonautconsulting.com, hodgkinsb@SacCounty.NET,Dan.Sharp@mail.house.gov, doug.ose@mail.house.gov

Honorable Roger Dickinson and SAFCA Board of Directors,

Thank you for your quick response.  I agree with you about horrific events of this week and a terrible event Sunday.

The 32 to 33 feet elevation of floodwater on the north or upstream side of the NEMDC or Steelhead Creek Pump Station is during a 100-year storm event.  John Bassett answer of 37 feet was the maximum elevation under certain conditions, which included a 500-year event.

>From what I understand about the levees, they are all constructed to a top of levee elevation that is 3 feet above the expected 500-year flood event.  This is called freeboard.  Because of a small group of Rio Linda residents, the Robla Creek South Levee has been lowered to 44.4 feet instead of 45.8 feet.  This gives the North Sacramento area 400-year protection from Robla and Dry Creek with 3 feet of freeboard. It also gives them 500-year protection with 1.6 feet of freeboard.  North and South Natomas will still get 500-year protection with 3 feet of freeboard.

If this small group of Rio Linda residents had not complained to the State Reclamation Board, the Robla Creek South Levee would have already been constructed to the 45.8-foot elevation in the fall of 1997.  The residents of the Rio Linda area north of Ascot Ave would have been at increased risk for the protection of North Sacramento and Natomas.  Now the planned levee has been lowered and a new levee planned for protection of most of the area placed at increased risk.  Some of the homes east of Dry Creek Road are still at increased risk.

The buildings of the Wastewater treatment plant have been removed.  I was under the impression that the settling pond levees were to be removed to return the area back to floodway.  The detention pond area just south of the Elkhorn Manor Subdivision and across the North Channel of Dry Creek is less than 1/3 the area that the Wastewater Plant levee removes from the floodway or detention ponding area.  The G street levee is to be constructed on the west side of the Elkhorn Manor Detention Pond to maintain as much ponding area as possible.

Seven homes purchased and removed by SAFCA on the south side of Ascot Avenue and west of Dry Creek Road were all within the Sacramento City Limits.  Five had a Rio Linda address but were in the city.

Are the Water Treatment Plant Levees to remain in the floodway or will they be removed to increase the ponding/floodway area?

Where can I get a copy or read the operating instructions for the NEMDC / Steelhead Creek Pump Station?

Thanks again for your quick response in view of all the other problems.

Sincerely,

Erwin E. Hayer
>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Ponds SW of  Elkhorn Blvd and Natomas Blvd
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 01:23PM PST
From: Erwin Hayer <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: Lori Jackson <LJackson@cityofsacramento.org>

Who can I go to to get some written info for the purpose of the ponds that are west of Natomas Boulevard and South of Elkhorn Boulevard?

Erwin E. Hayer

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Ponds SW of  Elkhorn Blvd and Natomas Blvd
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 2:11 PM PST
From: Lori Jackson <LJackson@cityofsacramento.org>
To: <eeh625@hotmail.com>

You would speak to Dave Brent in Utilities. 264-1420.  He should be able to answer your questions.

Lori

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Ponds SW of Elkhorn Blvd and Natomas Blvd
Date: Fri, 02 Nov 2001 10:41PM PST
From: Erwin Hayer <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: Lori Jackson <LJackson@cityofsacramento.org>

Dave Brent is the same name given to me by Pete Ghelfi of SAFCA on July 1, 2001 to check with on culvert drains N-1 of the Dry Creek North Levee and culvert drain S-10 of the Robla Creek South Levee. I called him twice and left voice mail the following 2 weeks. Then called the secretary and asked her to pass a message to him. The phone numbers used were 264-1420 and 264-1400 I do not think there is a Dave Brent as I have tried to contact him 3 times in July 2001. He has not returned any of my calls.

Do you have an e-mail address for him.  E-mail is better than voice mail as I have been at least getting a response.

Erwin E. Hayer

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Ponds SW of Elkhorn Blvd and Natomas Blvd
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 3:21 PM PST
From: Lori Jackson <LJackson@cityofsacramento.org>
To: <eeh625@hotmail.com>
CC: Dave Brent <dbrent@cityofsacramento.org>

Erwin,
Dave can be reached at dbrent@cityofsacramento.org. When you said you were interested in ponds, I thought you meant detention basins. Dave does exist, I have been in meetings with him. If this is not something that Dave covers, he will refer you to the right person.

Lori

Lori Jackson, City of Sacramento, Council District 1, Administrative
Assistant
916-264-7339

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: Ponds SW of Elkhorn Blvd and Natomas Blvd
Date: Sun, 04 Nov 2001 10:10PM PST
From: Erwin Hayer <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: Dave Brent <dbrent@cityofsacramento.org>

Mr. Dave Brent
I have been asking about the Flap Valve Drains N-1 in the North Levee at Station 49+90 just south of Ascot Ave and West Second Street and S-10 in Robla Creek South Levee at Station 90+40 just East of Rio Linda Boulevard. Temporary Portable Pumps have been installed to pump floodwater over the levee at both locations multiple times.

1.  Who is responsible to insure that the drains are working?
2.  Who is responsible to install temporary portable pumps when the floodwater on the dry side of the levee threatens to flood homes?
3.  Are any plans in the works to install permanent sump pumps at Drain N-1 or Drain S-10?
4.  Temporary Portable Pumps have been installed to pump floodwater over the Robla Creek South Levee just east of the Bike trail. Was this because the drainpipe under the Bike trail was too small or plugged?  What homes were these pumps protecting?
5.  Where can I get written documentation on the purpose and operation of the ponds just west of Natomas Boulevard and Just South of Elkhorn Boulevard? Are these ponds detention basins?

Thank you for any information.
Sincerely,
Erwin E. Hayer

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Fwd: Re: Ponds SW of Elkhorn Blvd and Natomas Blvd
Date :  Thu, 08 Nov 2001 10:41 AM PST
From: "Dave Brent" <dbrent@cityofsacramento.org>
To : <eeh625@hotmail.com>
CC : Lori Jackson <LJackson@cityofsacramento.org>, <ghelfip@saccounty.net>

Dear Mr. Hayer,
I tried calling you back on several occasions.  Sorry for not hooking up.  I am forwarding this message to our maintenance manager for response.  DB Rod, can you get back to Mr. Hayer on this??  If you don't have the info, let me know and I'll continue to research.  Thanks, DB

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Follow-up, Ponds SW of Elkhorn Blvd and Natomas Blvd
Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2002 12:06:21 -0800
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: dbrent@cityofsacramento.org
CC: rtretheway@cityofsacramento.org, ssheedy@cityofsacramento.org

Dave Brent

I still have not received any answers to the 5 questions I submitted to you on Nov 4, 2001 which are listed below in my original e-mail.

I talked to Ray Tretheway after the SAFCA Board meeting on March 21, 2002 about the detention ponds/basins and he did not have an answer.

I still am concerned about the written instructions about the operation of the detention ponds/basins.

Have any written instructions ever been published?

Also, I do not like playing phone tag. I am looking for some written responses, either e-mail or a letter.

Erwin Hayer

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] SAFCA Community Meeting Notification Problems
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:43:40 -0800
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
Reply-To: riolinda@vrx.net
To: rogerd@saccounty.net, hodgkinsb@saccounty.net
CC: bradley@water.ca.gov, prabbon@water.ca.gov, assemblymember.cox@assembly.ca.gov,         assemblymember.leslie@assembly.ca.gov, Senator.Ortiz@sen.ca.gov, karenz@saccounty.net, illac@saccounty.net,
murielj@saccounty.net,rogersd@saccounty.net, donn@saccounty.net, ghelfip@saccounty.net, kreinbergg@saccounty.net, franklinma@saccounty.net

March 21, 2002.

Subject:  Magpie Creek Project Notification.

Mr. Roger Dickinson and Mr. Butch Hodgkins,

I had tried to find out about flood meetings back when Grantland Johnson (before SAFCA) was our representative on the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors.  He never returned any of my telephone calls.  Later, when I read about the levees to be constructed in the Sacramento Bee, I took a day of work from my job and went to the SAFCA Offices to find out what the plans were.  When I saw a map on the wall with 45.8 feet elevation levees near Rio Linda Boulevard and E Street on the west and Robla Creek near Dry Creek Road on the southeast, I was concerned about the area in between.  This area included Western Acres and Bell Acqua Subdivisions, Rio Linda Airport and Bell Acqua Lakes and Apartments plus Ascot Avenue and C Street homes. The person I talked to said at that time no documents were yet available for the public.

I knew the runway had been raised 6 feet to about 42.6 feet elevation to keep it above the additional floodwaters created when the Magpie Creek Diversion Channel was constructed around 1955.  This rerouted the Magpie Creek watershed east of Raley Boulevard into the Robla Creek just east of the Sacramento Northern Railroad (SNRR) Bridge for Robla Creek.  The Magpie Creek Diversion Channel is larger than the Robla Creek Channel and the channel at the Railroad was not enlarged.  This caused the floodwater on the east side of the SNRR to rise to a greater depth under the same storm conditions and this area became a detention pond/basin.

Later, a Public Hearing at the Rio Linda High School on 19 May 1997 was called by SAFCA.  Paul Devereux opened the meeting at 7:30 PM and closed the meeting at 7:30 PM.  The one resident of the community that attended did not wished to speak.  (Reference: FSEIR, August 1997, Transcript 2.)  Later, when I found out about this meeting, I asked Paul who was notified.  He said it was advertised in the Sacramento Bee and that was all that SAFCA had to do when holding a public meeting.  No community members were notified that I could find.

When SAFCA had their first Lower Dry Creek Watershed Mitigation Project Working Group meeting, a requirement by the State Reclamation Board, on November 19, 1997 at 9:00 AM, more attendees were from SAFCA and SAFCA Consultants than attendees from the community.  The community attendees ask if the meetings could be held in the evening so more community residents could attend and SAFCA said no.

Later, in 1998, SAFCA had a meeting in the evening with the residents east of Dry Creek Road with out notifying any of the residents that had been attending the day meetings.

Steve Bradley of the State Reclamation Board requested SAFCA have a meeting on August 16, 2001.  This meeting was to be held at the Rio Linda Grammar School.  He also requested SAFCA to notify all of the people (affected or not) in the area east of Dry Creek Road and to include Erwin Hayer as he had been heavily involved in the public meeting process for the Robla/Dry Creek Project.

I had been in contact with Arturo Ceballos of the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) on the Magpie Creek Project (MCP) prior to February 20, 2001.  Mr. Ceballos had added my name to the list of names for notices. He also supplied me with all the documents and plans for the MCP.

I received correspondence from William Gaines of the USACE on February 20, 2001 that he was the new MCP manager.  He stated a public meeting will be held in a few months regarding this project.  The Corps is planning to go to construction in the spring of 2002 on Magpie Creek.  SAFCA is planning to replace the Dry Creek Road Bridge over the Magpie Diversion Channel and do other improvements this summer as part of their Dry Creek improvements.

On June 5, 2001, I received correspondence from William Gaines that Bill Fakes < BFakes@spk.usace.army.mil > is the new USACE project manager for the MCP.  Mr. Gains also stated concerning Magpie Creek, there are still some design issues being worked on so it has been delayed for the public meeting and construction start.  A public meeting is planned in the future, but Mr. Gaines is not sure when.  Construction on the Federal Project will probably not begin until next year.  SAFCA has another project in the area scheduled to begin this summer.

I have not received any more info from the USACE.

The following was sent to me by e-mail from a friend in Rio Linda on March 18, 2002.
=================================================
Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency UPDATE MAGPIE CREEK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

As we indicated at the recent neighborhood meetings, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) is preparing a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for CEQA compliance on the Magpie Creek Improvement Project. The document is available for public review at SAFCA. Please contact Maggie Franklin at SAFCA 916-874-4582 if you would like a copy or if you have any questions.  Comments on the MND can be mailed to SAFCA until April 12, 2002.

A public hearing on the MND will be held as part of the SAFCA Board Meeting on March 21, 2002 beginning at 3:00 P.M.  The meeting will be held at the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Chambers, 700 H Street, Room 1450, Sacramento, Ca. 95814
=================================================

SAFCA has failed to notify me of the following meetings that have an effect on the flooding problems in Rio Linda:

May 19, 1997 meeting at Rio Linda High School.

The first C Street property owner meeting.  I do not have a record of date or location.

The C Street property owners meeting called by Steve Bradley and held at Rio Linda Elementary School on August 16, 2001.

The recent neighborhood meetings on the Magpie Creek Project, place and date unknown to myself.  Butch Hodgkins was surprised that I was not at one of the meetings.  Mr. Gaines indicated a communication breakdown between him and Mr. Pete Ghelfi.  Mr. Ghelfi indicated he was sorry about the oversight.

SAFCA has left me out of the notification process of critical community meetings on flood projects many times and I wonder why?

Has this lack of notification been deliberate or is something wrong with the notification process?

I am very disappointed with the SAFCA Staff in the notification process of the critical flood control project meetings that affect the property owners in Rio Linda.

I would like to get copies of all the notification documents by the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) on preparing a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for CEQA compliance on the Magpie Creek Improvement Project.  Is this possible?

Sincerely,

Erwin Hayer
>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [RL] SAFCA Community Meeting Notification Problems
Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 11:56:24 -0800
From: "Chris Darrow" <chris.d@rlecpac.org>
Organization: Rio Linda - Elverta CPAC
To: <riolinda@vrx.net>

Erwin, please bring this and anything else that you want answers for to the meeting. We will have reps from SAFCA and DWR present. I think Karen Z. or Roger D. will also be present. Please send me any thing else that you would like us to discuss at the meeting. I want to get answers for everyone at this meeting. So if any one else has some questions they would like to ask SAFCA or DWR please go to the meeting on March 26th at 7p at the Rio Linda community center or send me your questions along with how I can get in touch with you and I will get a reply to you.

Christopher Darrow
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=
Rio Linda / Elverta CPAC
Secretary
chris.d@rlecpac.org
http://www.rlecpac.org
PO Box 803
Elverta, CA 95626

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Magpie Creek Project
Date: Friday, February 16, 2001 8:57 AM
From: Erwin Hayer [mailto:eeh625@hotmail.com]
To: wgaines@spk.usace.army.mil

Bill Gaines

I was in contact with Arturo Ceballos for any updates on the project.  Am I still on the list to contact? Has any action been taken on the Magpie Creek Enlargement Project since June 1998?

Thanks for any information,

Erwin E. Hayer
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: Magpie Creek Project
Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 8:26 AM PST
From: Gaines, William C SPK <WGaines@spk.usace.army.mil>
To: Erwin Hayer <eeh625@hotmail.com>

Mr. Hayer,

I am the project manager for the Magpie Creek Flood Control Project. A public meeting will be held in a few months regarding this project. The Corps is planning to go to construction in the spring of 2002 on Magpie Creek. SAFCA is planning to replace the Dry Creek Road Bridge over the Magpie Diversion Channel and do other improvements this summer as part of their Dry Creek improvements.
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject:  Magpie Creek Diversion Channel Questions
Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 2:27 AM
From: Erwin Hayer [mailto:eeh625@hotmail.com]
To: WGaines@spk.usace.army.mil

Mr.Bill Gaines

I have not heard of or received any information on the proposed Magpie Creek Diversion Channel Enlargement since your e-mail of 20 Feb 2001, [above].

Did any public meetings take place between 20 Feb 2001 and today?

Is a schedule of planned actions/meetings on Magpie Creek Diversion Channel available?

Thank you for any information.

Erwin E. Hayer
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: Magpie Creek Diversion Channel Questions
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 4:15 PM PST
From: Gaines, William C SPK <WGaines@spk.usace.army.mil>
To: Erwin Hayer <eeh625@hotmail.com>
CC: Wallin, Stan J SPK <SWallin@spk.usace.army.mil>

Erwin,

I am no longer the Project Manager of this project, but have been out of the office and have not been able to get back to you. I am not quite sure where this project is, but I will get with the current Project Manager and ask for him to update you on the status. No additional public meetings have taken place. I think there are some issues holding up the project.

W. Craig Gaines, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Sacramento District, 916-557-6672
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] SAFCA Magpie Creek
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 9:08 AM PST
From: Raymond T Antonelli <raya6@juno.com>
Reply-To: riolinda@vrx.net
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Erwin
Did you
receive the notice on the public meetings on this issue or the one below?  I received this the other day and just found it again. We are going to be out of town for the meeting date. Are they up to old tricks again ?

Ray
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
---
Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency UPDATE MAGPIE CREEK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

As we indicated at the recent neighborhood meetings, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) is preparing a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for CEQA compliance on the Magpie Creek Improvement Project. The document is available for public review at SAFCA. Please contact Maggie Franklin at SAFCA 916-874-4582 if you would like a copy or if you have any questions. Comments on the MND can be mailed to SAFCA until April 12, 2002.

A public hearing on the MND will be held as part of the SAFCA Board Meeting on March 21, 2002 beginning at 3:00 P.M.  The meeting will be held at the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Chambers, 700 H Street, Room 1450, Sacramento, Ca. 95814
---

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] SAFCA Magpie Creek
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 1:53 PM PST
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Ray

No, I did not get notices of any meetings. Same old play, to divide and conquer.

Erwin
>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Magpie Creek Diversion Channel Questions
Date : Mon, 18 Mar 2002 1:44 PM PST
>From : Erwin Hayer <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To : franklinma@saccounty.net, WGaines@spk.usace.army.mil
CC : SWallin@spk.usace.army.mil, KarenZiebron@saccounty.net, hodgkinsb@saccounty.net, ghelfip@saccounty.net

Mr Gaines (USACE) and Maggie Franklin (SAFCA)

I still have not received any information on Magpie Creek enlargement.

I still do not know who the current project manager is.

Can you give me the current project managers e-mail address?

I just received the following information from a neighbor.

---
Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency UPDATE MAGPIE CREEK IMPROVEMENT PROJECT

As we indicated at the recent neighborhood meetings, the Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency (SAFCA) is preparing a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for CEQA compliance on the Magpie Creek Improvement Project. The document is available for public review at SAFCA. Please contact Maggie Franklin at SAFCA 916-874-4582 if you would like a copy or if you have any questions. Comments on the MND can be mailed to SAFCA until April 12, 2002.

A public hearing on the MND will be held as part of the SAFCA Board Meeting on March 21, 2002 beginning at 3:00 P.M.  The meeting will be held at the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors Chambers, 700 H Street, Room 1450, Sacramento, Ca. 95814
---

When were the recent neighborhood meetings held? Can I get a transcript of these meetings?

I would like a copy of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) on the Magpie Creek Improvement Project as soon as possible.

Send to:
Erwin Hayer
(address withheld on web page)
Rio Linda, CA 95673

Why was I not notified about the recent neighborhood meetings or the preparation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for CEQA compliance on the Magpie Creek Improvement Project.?

I called Maggie Franklin at 1:05 PM today, March 18, 2002 and left a message on her voice mail that I wanted the above document.

Erwin Hayer
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: Magpie Creek Diversion Channel Questions
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 1:52 PM PST
From: Franklin, Maggie (SAFCA) <franklinma@SacCounty.NET>
To: Erwin Hayer <eeh625@hotmail.com>
CC: Kreinberg, Grant (SAFCA) <kreinbergg@SacCounty.NET>, Ghelfi, Pete (PWA) <ghelfip@SacCounty.NET>, Hodgkins, Butch (SAFCA) <hodgkinsb@SacCounty.NET>

Mr. Hayer,

The project engineer is Grant Kreinberg. His email address is: kreinbergg@saccounty.net, Phone #874-8736

I'm sure either he or Mr. Ghelfi, #874-8733, would be happy to answer your questions.  Should you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Maggie Franklin
Public Information Officer, Sacramento Area Flood Control Agency, 1007 - 7th Street, 5th Floor, Sacramento, CA  95814-3407, franklinma@saccounty.net Phone:  (916) 874-7606, Fax: (916) 874-8289
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: Magpie Creek
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 1:57 PM PST
From: Hodgkins, Butch (SAFCA) <hodgkinsb@SacCounty.NET>
To: Erwin Hayer <eeh625@hotmail.com>, Franklin, Maggie (SAFCA) <franklinma@saccounty.net>, <WGaines@spk.usace.army.mil>, Kreinberg, Grant (SAFCA) <kreinbergg@SacCounty.NET>
CC: <SWallin@spk.usace.army.mil>, <KarenZiebron@saccounty.net>, Ghelfi, Pete (PWA) <ghelfip@SacCounty.NET>

ERWIN:

The project manager is Grant Kreinberg. The meetings were open house type meetings where the questiosn are answered individually. Incidently, the project plan has changed substantially, and by copy of this email. I am asking Grant to call you and go over it with you. Fundamentally, we have dropped the idea of enlarging the channel, are purchasing upstream property at Raley Blvd. and modifying it so that it can be used effectivly as a detention basin.  I was suprised that you were not at one of the meetings.

Thanks, Butch

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [RL] Re: SAFCA
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 6:27 PM PST
From: RQuack4131@aol.com
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Dear Erwin,

Thanks for keeping on top of this.  Please email me a copy to me, or let me know their email so I can request one.  I never received any notices either. Thanks, "Ole Buddy" :)

Chris Q
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] Re: SAFCA
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 9:01 PM PST
From: "Erwin Hayer" <eeh625@hotmail.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Chris

POC E-mail address

Grant Kreinberg is the project Manager,  The document was sent by special courier from Timothy Washburn.  It is about 3/8 inch thick.  I have sent all received e-mail to the riolinda@vrx.net.

Grant Kreinberg, Magpie Creek Project Engineer/Manager(SAFCA) kreinbergg@SacCounty.NET

Maggie Franklin, SAFCA Public Information Officer franklinma@SacCounty.NET

Butch Hodgkins, SAFCA Director hodgkinsb@SacCounty.NET

Pete Ghelfi, SAFCA Director of Engineering ghelfip@SacCounty.NET

John Bassett, Robla Creek Levee Project Engineer/Manager bassettj@SacCounty.net

Timothy Washburn, SAFCA Agency Counsel washburnt@SacCounty.net

SAFCA WEB PAGES: http://www.safca.org/

You can request the document "Initial Study/Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Magpie Creek Flood Control Project" to Butch or Grant.

Please Bcc me a copy of your request for my records.

This is twice recantly that Flood meetings were planned and I was left out of the notification loop.

Erwin Hayer
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] SAFCA Magpie Creek
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2002 9:27 PM PST
From: MARYETTA39@aol.com
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Ray I noticed that they were marking off the Creek behind yours and the house that Miss Devine had on C st today. Do you know what they have planned? I am going to try and go to the meeting on the 21st at 3 pm.

Mary Nelson
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] SAFCA Magpie Creek
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 7:52 AM PST
From: Raymond T Antonelli <raya6@juno.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Mary--

They are in the process of making the creek wider between our place and the houses on "C" street.. We have been contacted as well as all the people behind us by the acquisition team who has made offers to purchase the property they need top make creek improvements. In our case they want 1/2 acre from us but the house across from you the Headricks they have to buy almost 2 acres..

Jack Nolan Realty told me yesterday along with Marshall & Assoc. that 1/2 acre goes for $45,000 to $50,000 and they offer me $9,572.94 quite a bargain for them..  They also have taken away the possibility of us splitting our property if we should ever want to.

Ray
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] SAFCA Magpie Creek
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 9:28 AM PST
From: RQuack4131@aol.com
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Dear Ray,

They have to offer you a reasonable price.  Get an appraisal and get an attorney to fight for you.  They will low ball you unless you fight.

Aloha, Chris Q
>From the Rio Linda mailing list
 

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: Magpie Creek
Date : Tue, 19 Mar 2002 12:18 PM PST
>From : Gaines, William C SPK <William.C.Gaines@usace.army.mil>
To : Erwin Hayer <eeh625@hotmail.com>

Mr. Hayer, I am no longer working on the Magpie Creek Project, but will forward your message to the current Project Manager for the Corps.  I am not quite sure about the status of this project.

W. Craig Gaines

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] SAFCA Magpie Creek
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2002 9:48 PM PST
From: MARYETTA39@aol.com
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Ray

Don't they have to offer Fair Market Value? Can they force you to accept the $9,572.94?

Mary
>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] SAFCA Magpie Creek
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 6:57 AM PST
From: Raymond T Antonelli <raya6@juno.com>
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Mary --

No we won't accept that but will most likely end up in court which is OK with us..

Ray
>From the Rio Linda mailing list

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RL] SAFCA Magpie Creek
Date: Wed, 20 Mar 2002 3:17 PM PST
From: MARYETTA39@aol.com
To: riolinda@vrx.net

Ray this whole Safca Flood Control has been a nightmare the street was only suposed to be closed to Jan 31st and its still closed for as much work as they have got to do they should have never given an open date, don't give in because you can not buy property out here cheap.

Mary
>From the Rio Linda mailing list