The Stewart Street Replacement Project would build a new 2 million gallon water tank at a cost of over $4million. This is not necessary.

A new city reservoir was built to replace the Stewart Street tanks in the 1960's.

The next step in the project was completed last November with the Vancil reservoir relining and modification project ($1/2 million).

City records contain an estimate of $600,000 for the pumping and water main improvements to allow the city reservoir on Vancil to provide the 2 million gallons of storage needed for the largest zone in the city. There will still be 2 million gallons of reserve storage in the city reservoir.



1. Where does Fortuna store it's water?

There are six reservoirs/tanks. One in the southern part of town and five in the north. Two in the north need to be retired before they fail. The remaining four hold 6.75 million gallons. Vancil reservoir alone holds 5 million gallons, of which 4 million gallons are currently unallocated more...

2. Does Fortuna need more water storage?

The 2007 Water System Improvements Preliminary Design Report recommended 4 1/2 million gallons of storage for the city. If the two failing reservoirs were retired today the town would still have more that 6 1/2 million gallons of storage. more...

3. Is there enough emergency storage?

• The recommended storage provides for emergency storage. more...

• The delivery of water, in an emergency as well as everyday, also depends on the wells, the pumps, and the water mains. In addition, during an emergency back-up systems such power generation are key. back-up systems... past emergencies... more on the system...

• Contrary to popular belief, Vancil was not built after the '64 Flood as emergency storage. It was called the "new city water reservoir" in a 1965 news article.more...

• If the recommended storage is not enough emergency storage, will the City Council act to protect the 4 million gallons in Vancil as emergency water? you can ask them
  

4. Are there alternatives to spending more that 4 million dollars on a new water tank?

• Dr. DeBoise, of Oscar, Larson & Associates estimated first costs of about $600,000 to use Vancil instead of building a new tank.
  

• The water bond money was to be use to remedy a backlog of repairs. The new water tank will cost over 4 million dollars. There are 9 million dollars in water projects planned during the next 5 years. CIP water projects...

• There is another tank for which replacement storage is needed. more...

• If there is money for improvements to the system then investing in solar power is one wise use. more...

5. Didn't City staff conclude that using Vancil was "not prudent at any cost savings?

• There is no discussion or evidence in the report supporting their conclusion. read the report (Vancil discussion begins on p. 21)...

• Information in the 2007 Water System Improvements PDR and discussions with engineers, an insurance agent and an accountant do not support this conclusion. more...

6. What information did staff use to come to their conclusion?

The preliminary information used to prepare the report does not include supporting information for the operational concerns. take a look...

7. Wouldn't using Vancil risk relying on PRV valves?

The city currently uses PRV valves. more...

The stated concern is that PRV valves fail closed which could be disastrous in an emergency. According to a conversation with a California Department of Health engineer there are PRV valves which fail open and, if used in a series, would safely control the pressure.

8. Do the Water Revenue Bonds require building a new reservoir to replace those at Stewart Street?

It was stated at the January Special Meeting that under the terms of the bonds Fortuna could be sued if we did not build a new reservoir. The bond wording gives the City Council authority over what improvements are to be made. more...

What comes next?

The Council needs to hear from the citizens of Fortuna. We need to use the Vancil city reservoir.
write a letter to the editor

Historical Summary

Written Statement presented at City Council meeting on March 2, 2009:

I would like to very briefly share with you some information I've gathered since the Special Meeting in January on the proposed 2 million gallon tank.

First, there was some discussion at that meeting regarding the need for storage for disasters. The '64 Flood and '92 Earthquake Fire were given as examples. For information on the '64 Flood I found a book, The Killer Eel at the Fortuna Library. It is a photo essay of the damage from the flood: the destroyed power lines, bridges, roads, homes and businesses. There are two photos of Fortuna floodwaters. In the caption is the information that "For several hours all of South Fortuna was threatened and more than 1000 persons were evacuated from their homes." The "Killer Eel" was kind to Fortuna. I also found in a local paper two photos of the Fortuna water department pumping plant. One photo was too dark for the machine to print, but the caption read, "Why you are boiling your water." (Dec. 31, 1964)

The City did receive $122,000 for flood damage. The June 30, 1965 Annual Financial Report, printed in the Humboldt Beacon, listed flood damage expenditures as of June 30th. They were for : water treatment, Wells No. 2 & 3, Water Site, Lift Station and Sewer Line Repairs. (Aug. 12, 1965)

As for the '92 Earthquake fire, the National Geophysical Data Center web site states an earthquake started the fire early Sunday morning and a second earthquake snapped the town's water main. Firefighters had to draw water from a nearby log pond to contain the fire.

In neither disaster was water storage the issue; the flooding of the wells and pumping station, power and piping were.

So why was Vancil built? In recent newspapers and the Staff Report (p. 25) it has been written that Vancil was built in direct response to flooding in 1964. This is not the case. Looking at Humboldt Beacon papers I found that the City Council "Accepted a bid. . .for delivery of laminated beams to roof the Vancil Street reservoir" only six months after the flood. Going backwards through the papers, I found that four months prior to the flood the City Council authorized the CAO and City Engineer "to start on the roofing project for the new city water reservoir."

And why were they building a new reservoir? Annexation was in the news. Two months after the '64 Flood the Humboldt Beacon reported that a petition was circulating "for one of the largest area annexations in the history of the City of Fortuna. . ." and on "continuing reports that many residents in the Kenmar Road and Campton Heights districts are anxious to explore the possibilities of annexation. Here again, the matter involves water,sanitation and lighting. . . " The article concludes "The City of Fortuna is not soliciting these annexations, . . .simply putting out the welcome mat, and preparing through constant utility improvements to make it possible. . ." (Feb. 11, 1965)

A couple weeks before this report the Humboldt Beacon reported that the Fortuna Area was to get a $13,000 planning grant. Perhaps the map in the 1967 Humboldt County - Fortuna General Plan Project was one of the results of that grant. The map shows the plan in 1967, 2 1/2 years after the flood, was for public facilities at the Vancil site, a tank reservoir. There are no public facilities planned for the Stewart Street site on this map.

I hope this information provides you with a clearer historical perspective as you continue planning for the use of our water rate revenues.

Note: As I retyped this here I corrected, and possibly added, a few grammatical and typographical errors. In addition to reading the written report, an apology for going over time and thanks for their patience were given orally.