Aeration system installed as pilot project at Holiday Harbor to help minimize seasonal algae blooms

LAKE COUNTY, Calif. – A new subsurface aeration system has been installed at Holiday Harbor Marina in Nice to improve the aeration and circulation of the water within the harbor as a possible way to help minimize build-up of seasonal algae blooms.

After investigating several possible options, county staff identified a system from EP Aeration as having the most potential to help minimize nuisance algae mats that collect within the harbor during seasonal blooms.

Designed as a pilot project to test the effectiveness of circulation and aeration in protected water bodies, the system will circulate the water within the harbor more than seven times per day.

This subsurface aeration system comprises eight diffusers driven by six 1/3-horsepower air compressors – all of which work to aerate and improve water circulation within the harbor – and do so in an energy-efficient manner. In fact, the energy efficiency of the new system qualifies for an energy incentive from Pacific Gas & Electric.

The bottom-mounted system will have no impact on boat traffic in the harbor.

“We are anxious to determine if the results of this system will be successful,” said Alan Flora, administrative analyst in the Lake County Administrative Office. “Not only will the results of this pilot project provide us with additional information and insight about how to effectively minimize nuisance algae blooms in specific impacted areas of the lake, but the improved water quality will help maximize the development potential of the marina site.”

Until now, this specific aeration technology has not been utilized on Clear Lake.

Flora said a transitional period is anticipated as the system breaks down organic buildup and oxygenates the water column.

Over the past few summer seasons, parts of Clear Lake have experienced seasonal algae blooms, most particularly in sheltered areas such as channels, bays, and other inlets.

In an effort to protect Clear Lake’s ecosystem and enable residents and visitors to enjoy the lake to the fullest extent possible, county officials developed a multi-pronged approach designed to help minimize the impact of the algae through the use of several different methods, including pump-based aeration and circulation, chemical treatments, and mechanical harvesting.

With approval by the Lake County Board of Supervisors in April 2012, the Lake County Department of Water Resources has contracts in place now with service providers that are ready to respond and move into action at the early signs of seasonal algae blooms on Clear Lake, should the need arise this summer.

Resort owners and residents with private docks are encouraged to install pumps to spray water onto the surface of algae mats, which helps to knock down the algae and also provides aeration and improves circulation.

EP Aeration has provided chemical-free water treatment solutions for water bodies throughout the country for more than 20 years.

For information about EP Aeration systems visit www.epaeration.com .

To view a short video showing a portion of the installation at Holiday Harbor, visit www.co.lake.ca.us/holidayharbor .

Holiday Harbor Marina is owned and operated by the County of Lake and offers public boat slip rentals year-round; slips are available at $60 per month, $20 per week, or $8 per day.

For information about boat slip rental, contact Lore Schneider in the Lake County Administrative Office, 707-263-2580; for information about the aeration system installation at Holiday Harbor Marina, contact Alan Flora in the Lake County Administrative Office at the same number.

For information on installing simple pumps for aeration, contact the Lake County Department of Water Resources at 707-263-2344.

Details

Written by: Lake County News reports

Published: 12 May 2012

Community rallies to help family of teen killed in south county crash

CLEARLAKE, Calif. – As the Clearlake City Council was beginning its Thursday night meeting, Mayor Joey Luiz asked for community members to stand for a moment of silence to remember a young local woman who lost her life in a crash earlier this week.

He was speaking of Leah Davidson, who died Tuesday night in a single-vehicle rollover crash near Middletown.

The California Highway Patrol identified Davidson as having the last name Hernandez, based on information from her sister, Tamara Davidson, who also was involved in the crash, according to CHP Officer Kory Reynolds.

Susan Thompson, foster mother to one of Davidson’s sisters, told Lake County News that the young woman was known more commonly by the last name Davidson.

Davidson was a former Carle Continuation High School student who most recently had attended Yuba College, according to Thompson.

The 18-year-old Davidson, along with older sister Tamara, was riding in a Chrysler Sebring driven by 23-year-old Clearlake resident Nina Litzen when the crash occurred shortly before 7 p.m. Tuesday along Highway 29 near Hidden Valley Lake.

A witness told the CHP that the vehicle was swerving behind them and attempted to pass before going off the roadway and over an embankment.

The CHP said the vehicle missed a guardrail, went down the embankment where it hit a tree and rocks and then rolled over. Leah Davidson was thrown from the car and died at the scene.

Tamara Davidson and Litzen were flown by air ambulances to Santa Rosa Memorial Hospital, the CHP said.

Litzen, who had a broken back, was arrested on suspicion of driving under the influence, according to the CHP.

Some readers had posted on Lake County News’ Facebook page Wednesday, disputing the CHP investigation’s findings that Litzin had been driving, as Leah Davidson had been seen driving the car at one point that evening.

Officer Kory Reynolds told Lake County that witnesses placed Litzin behind the wheel at the time of the crash.

Thompson said she spoke about the discrepancy with Tamara Davidson, who said her sister had started out driving, but they stopped at a friend’s house and Litzen took the wheel.

Thompson said the young women also had reportedly been drinking earlier in the evening and weren’t wearing seatbelts.

Tamara Davidson suffered injuries to her foot, ribs and back, had whiplash and was nearly impaled by branches, said Thompson.

She was discharged from the hospital and on hand at Thursday’s meeting along with another sister, Julianna Hernandez. The two young woman sobbed as they spoke of their younger sister, who they called their “baby.”

Thompson also was at the meeting Thursday night, along with Mike Mix, who runs The Harbor on Main, a youth center in Lower Lake.

Mix asked everyone to speak to others about the dangers of drinking and driving.

She said a memorial service will be held for Leah Davidson at The Harbor on Main, located at 16170 Main St. in Lower Lake.

The event will take place from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. Saturday, May 19 – which would have been Davidson’s 19th birthday.

At the council meeting Thompson – a foster parent for Redwood Children’s Services – thanked community members for their support for the girls, who were orphaned several years ago.

She said they now are faced with the huge expense of burying their younger sister.

A bright young woman

Thompson told Lake County News in a Thursday night interview that she has known all of the sisters since they came into foster care, and is foster mother to one of Davidson’s sisters. Thompson said Davidson stayed with her a lot, and all of the girls called her “Mom.”

When Davidson turned 18 last year, she went into a transitional housing program offered by Redwood Children’s Services, Thompson said.

“She decided to strike out on her own around Christmas,” Thompson said.

Davidson was living with her sister in Clearlake, doing child care for North Coast Opportunities and had been taking classes at Yuba College, according to Thompson.

“She was a bright girl,” Thompson said of the young woman. “She had a wonderful spirit. She was tough on the outside and she was soft and sweet and gentle on the inside. She had a good heart. She would bend over backwards for her friends.”

Leah Davidson’s friends and family are now working to raise funds for her final arrangements.

“The young people, in their grieving, want to do something,” Thompson said.

A candlelight vigil for Davidson took place Thursday evening at Redbud Park. Thompson said they raised more than $100 at the event to go toward final arrangements.

Thompson said Davidson’s family has been touched by the support from the community, which has come forward to offer financial assistance and organize fundraisers.

On Saturday, there will be a car wash, bake sale and yard sale at Four Corners Builders Supply, 14975 Olympic Drive in Clearlake, from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. All proceeds will go to help Davidson’s family cover burial costs.

Thompson said Redwood Children’s Services is going to assist with mortuary and memorial service costs.

The agency posted a message on its Facebook page Thursday asking for the community’s assistance in taking care “of our dear girl.”

“Leah was smart, had a beautiful smile and liked to joke around with staff. She will be greatly missed,” the post read.

A fund in Davidson’s memory has been set up at Mendo-Lake Credit Union, which has branches at 963 11th St. in Lakeport, 14866 Olympic Drive in Clearlake and and 626 South State St. in Ukiah.

Donations also can be dropped off at The Harbor on Main. For more information call Program Coordinator Jolene Chappel, 707-994-5486.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

Details

Written by: Elizabeth Larson

Published: 11 May 2012

Clearlake City Council votes to oppose Measure D

CLEARLAKE, Calif. – The Clearlake City Council came out against Measure D at its Thursday night meeting, with council members using some of the harshest language yet in describing the marijuana cultivation initiative that goes before voters June 5.

The council voted 4-0 – with Councilmember Joyce Overton absent – to formally oppose Measure D, which was sponsored by Lake County Green Farmers and Lake County Citizens for Responsible Regulation, the same groups that gathered signatures for a referendum against a county cultivation ordinance last year.

While Vice Mayor Jeri Spittler and Mayor Joey Luiz both said they support marijuana legalization, they joined colleagues Judy Thein and Curt Giambruno in voicing their concerns over the potential harm the measure could do to the county.

Luiz faulted the measure for being four pages of definitions and two pages of actual content.

“That’s garbage. That’s not intelligent planning. It’s a free for all,” Luiz said.

The council’s action follows similar votes taken by the Lake County Office of Education Board of Trustees Wednesday night, the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday and the Lakeport City Council last week.

Earlier this week the Sierra Club Lake Group also formally announced it was taking a position against Measure D.

Other local organizations that oppose the measure include Lake County Deputy Sheriffs Association, Kelseyville Business Association, Lake County Chamber of Commerce, California Women for Agriculture, Lake County Farm Bureau, the Buckingham and Clear Lake Riviera homeowners associations, and the Lake County Association of Realtors’ Board of Directors.

Rob Brown, a county supervisor who said he was going to the council as a concerned citizen and not an elected official, asked for the council to take the action.

“The issue is not about medical marijuana, so let’s get that out of the way,” he said.

While the measure wouldn’t specifically affect zoning in Clearlake, a similar measure could find its way to a city ballot if Measure D passed within the county, he said.

Brown said most of the 2,100 signatures gathered in support of the initiative were collected in the two cities, adding that residents of the cities can vote on the measure.

“It is about zoning by referendum,” said Brown. “It’s a very dangerous proposition to get into.”

The Lake County Board of Supervisors adopted its own medical marijuana cultivation ordinance on Oct. 11, 2011, rescinding it on Jan. 3 after the referendum qualified for the ballot, he said.

A board ordinance can be changed by the board, while such an initiative must go back before voters, Brown explained.

Brown said the county formed a new committee to look at alternatives, including crafting a new ordinance.

If Measure D passed, “The implications could be very huge,” Brown said. “It’s a badly written initiative. It may have been well intended but it was badly written.”

While Measure D’s proponents have said it provides regulations where there were none, Brown said that isn’t accurate, pointing to the county ordinance that had been in place and which the initiative’s proponents weren’t willing to give a chance.

Lower Lake attorney Ron Green, reportedly one of the people responsible for drafting Measure D, called Brown’s comments “a bunch of hooey” and said the Board of Supervisors passed “a terrible, draconian” ordinance.

Green also argued that the board hadn’t needed to rescind its ordinance, but could have placed it on the ballot.

“There’s no reason for this council to get involved in supporting or not supporting Measure D,” he said.

However, Green urged them to support what he called a “very reasonable regulation.”

He said the Lake County Green Farmers had attempted to get reasonable regulations in the form of Measure D, which he said was “strictly a zoning ordinance.”

Brown, returning to the microphone, said Green was “way off base,” adding that he thought Green was being inaccurate intentionally.

He said the Board of Supervisors had chosen not to put the county ordinance on the ballot because that would have made it the same as the initiative, meaning it could not have been changed by the board. “It has nothing to do with our ordinance is better than theirs.”

Spittler said she was concerned about how Measure D did not apply the same zoning rules and regulations to growers as to other interests.

She raised issues with enforcing existing rules on erosion, which has serious impacts on Clear Lake, and said it would override existing zoning laws on grows in residential areas and empty lots.

Spittler said she supported medical marijuana, and was pleased by the supervisors forming the new advisory committee to consider a new ordinance because she wanted fairness for everyone, but added, “I have a lot of concerns about Measure D.”

While Spittler said she would like to see marijuana become an accepted agricultural crop, “The commercial grows within the city limits needs to stop. It’s dangerous.”

Green wanted to respond to Spittler, but Luiz said no, that he was not going to allow a back and forth.

Councilmember Judy Thein said she’s always believed the cities and county should be in the same boat, rowing together.

The three jurisdictions have taken united stances on issues such as the spay-neuter ordinance, limits on pseudoephedrine purchases and an underage drinking ordinance.

“And I think this one should go on that list also,” Thein said of Measure D.

If the measure passed, it would require more initiatives to fix it – at a cost of $12,000 per election – tie the hands of current and future supervisors and override existing zoning, she said.

“And that’s not what we’re all about,” Thein said. “We need to do this right.”

Thein said opposing Measure D represented responsible planning now and in the future.

Giambruno offered no comments other than to move to take a formal stance of opposition against it.

Luiz noted the difficulties counties and cities have encountered in dealing with the requirements of Proposition 215, the Compassionate Use Act passed by California voters in 1996.

He said he’s pro-marijuana, and supports legalization and regulation. “It should be off our backs,” with local leaders able to deal with issues like roads and stop signs.

He said he didn’t think the county ordinance was a good one, and was glad the county was going to give it another try. The city also is planning to work on a cultivation ordinance. “I look forward to working on that.”

Luiz went on to fault the plant totals offered by Measure D, which allows 12 female plants to be grown in residential areas on lots under a half acre, 24 plants on lots larger than a half acre and 84 plants on larger parcels. He called the amounts “ridiculous.”

Measure D gives growers free rein, said Luiz, adding that local leaders already are dealing with 100 years of bad planning in Lake County.

“This does not make any sense in my opinion,” he said.

It also served as a red flag to Luiz that Measure D is opposed by both the Sierra Club and Lake County Chamber of Commerce.

He said he wanted to oppose the measure as a statement by the council.

“We are here as leaders to help communicate what’s good for our future and what’s not,” he said.

Luiz said he would accept a second to Giambruno’s motion, which Thein offered, with the 4-0 vote following.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

Details

Written by: Elizabeth Larson

Published: 11 May 2012

Lakeport City Council gets update on South Main Street/Soda Bay annexation proposal

LAKEPORT, Calif. – On Tuesday Lakeport’s city manager made a presentation to the council on the city’s proposal to annex 197 acres just south of the city limits.

The city, which has long included the proposed annexation area in its sphere of influence, is proposing to move forward with the action although the council has so far not acted formally to pass any resolutions.

Since last fall the city and county of Lake have had sharp public disagreements about the plan to annex the lucrative commercial corridor.

The county has faulted the city’s process, alleging it failed to follow state environmental quality laws and its own general plan. County officials also have stated that surveys of the area have shown property owners aren’t in support of the move.

City Manager Margaret Silveira’s presentation to a full council during its regular meeting Tuesday was the same one she gave to area property owners in the past, she said.

“It’s our intent to have future meetings with the property owners in the area,” Silveira said.

She said Lakeport is considering the submission of a resolution of application to the Local Agency Formation Commission for the annexation.

The proposed annexation area, she said, runs from Kmart down to the Lake County Waste Solutions transfer station.

Silveira said the annexation area has been in the Lakeport sphere of influence for more than 25 years, and the Lakeport General Plan sets the area as the city’s No. 1 annexation priority.

The first questions community members usually ask about annexation relate to costs, she said.

The city will bear all costs for the annexation process, and property taxes won’t increase, said Silveira.

The city does require right-of-way frontage improvements on property where more than $50,077 of nonexempt improvements are made over a five-year period, she said.

There is no obligation for existing homes or businesses to hook up to the city’s sewer or water services, but Community Development Director Richard Knoll said new development requires connection to sewer if it’s located within 200 feet of a hookup.

The city has a 7.75 percent sales tax, as opposed to 7.25 percent in the unincorporated county, and Silveira said the city doesn’t currently have a utility tax, although there has been a discussion regarding a proposed 1-percent tax on Mediacom users to support the county’s public access television station.

She said new residents annexed into the city would have to sign up for garbage service, which is mandatory in the city and is provided by Lakeport Disposal.

New residents would continue to be served by Lakeport Fire Protection District, and the Lakeport Police Department – with its good response times – would offer law enforcement services, Silveira said.

The city would grandfather in current agricultural uses to allow the keeping of animals in some areas, she said.

In addition, if newly annexed residents wanted water service, they would get some of the best water offered in Lake County for $28 a month, which Silveira said was one of the lowest rates in the county.

Silveira said the city has several preannexation agreements with the county for the area, including a memorandum of understanding from 1993 that established common road standards for South Main Street and city and county projects.

A 2001 South Main Street preannexation agreement called for future tax revenue sharing between the two governments, and other agreements reached in 1997 and 2002 also addressed how annexation would be pursued, she said.

Alan Flora of the County Administrative Office raised issues about continuing agricultural uses, suggesting that in fact use permits not required in the county may be necessary within the city. “There is some potential for nuisance complaints,” he said.

According to Flora, there also was a disparity in the numbers the city provided as to the total cost of the proposed South Main Street improvement project.

While numbers the city had presented – and which had been pulled from a December 2011 report from Quincy Engineers, hired by the county to work on the proposal – suggested $12.1 million was needed for roadway improvements, Flora said the actual number is $15.3 million, with a more than $3 million shortfall between the $11 million in funds the Lake County/City Area Planning Council has programmed for the project and the final price tag.

If the city annexed the area, it would have to come up with $5.9 million to finish the project, Flora said.

As for the preannexation agreements, Flora said the county is reviewing them.

“At this time we don’t consider those agreements to provide any sort of obligation on the county’s behalf” in moving forward, he said.

When asked about the public review process, Knoll said the city already has prepared an initial study on the annexation proposal and has gone through the public review process.

Most of the public comments the city received – 44 pages of them – came from the county, Knoll said.

He said the city is currently assessing those comments. “We’re in a strategic process here, determining the appropriate response.”

In response to Flora’s comments, he said there is a legitimate concern about the potential issues related to agricultural lands and how those would be affected by “urbanization” and annexation into the city. He said there currently isn’t a lot of agricultural activity within the city.

While he acknowledged the insinuation that because of the permit process the city could turn down agricultural-related permits, he said that has been neither the city’s practice nor the city’s intent.

“The bottom line is, we want to look at that, we want to address the issue,” and find out how property owners want to handle it and how it can fall more in line with the county, Knoll said.

Email Elizabeth Larson at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. .

Details

Written by: Elizabeth Larson

Published: 19 April 2012