It would appear that the final chapter may have been written in the saga of San Justo Reservoir—as far as the county supervisors are concerned.
After hearing a presentation from Sara Fontanos, San Benito County management analyst, outlining several potential recreational uses for the Union Road reservoir, the board en masse thanked her for the effort, applauded her body of work for the county as she prepared to leave for employment elsewhere, and then pretty much rejected any notion of opening the site to the public in favor of other projects, such as a regional park.
Even though she described the presentation as a “fun topic,” Fontanos had her game face on for what she most likely knew was a losing proposition as she stood before the board and gave it five possible options, including potential costs of each, for opening the reservoir. Up front, she warned that there was no approval from the Bureau of Reclamation or any other federal agency, and asked the board to consider her presentation a brain storming session and not to come to any conclusions. By the end of the presentation, though, her request was moot because it was obvious their minds were already made up.
Fontanos explained how she came up with five options by explaining that she was hoping to develop ideas that would open the reservoir — which has been off-limits to recreational use for eight years after the discovery of invasive Zebra Mussels there — immediately to the public. The ideas ranged from the least expensive at $100,000, to “shooting for the moon.” She said that as she strategized, she also took into consideration what the Bureau of Reclamation might approve by mitigating risks. She reminded the board that the ultimate goal was to eradicate the zebra mussels that infest the reservoir and were responsible for shutting it down.
“Depending on how successful eradication is, recreation could look very different,” Fontanos said. “If we’re 100 percent successful we have more opportunity for more recreation. At this point, we’re shooting at a target in the dark because I do not know what they’re (Bureau of Reclamation) likely to approve. I have asked them for a white paper on risk and what they’re willing to accept. We have not received it yet.”
She laid out the five options, each more inclusionary, more expensive, and with higher risk than the previous: Option 1: hiking, picnicking and barbecuing only; Option 2: hiking and shoreline fishing (in consideration that there are still some mussels); Option 3: hiking, shore fishing and renting boats and other watercraft; option four, hiking, shore fishing, rentals and floating docks for overnight camping; and Option 5, do nothing with San Justo and look elsewhere for recreational opportunities.
“It is staff’s recommendation to push this to the Parks Commission,” Fontanos said. “Their meetings are in the evening, which would provide more opportunity for the public to help us focus on which of these alternatives we might want to focus on. Alternative two with the shoreline fishing is staff’s recommendation. But it’s important to have public input.”
Supervisor Margie Barrios asked Fortanos if she knew what the Bureau of Reclamation would allow. Fortanos said at this point the agency would not allow any use of the water. Barrios asked why then should the county even consider any of the alternatives, other than the first.
“If we want this to be available to the public immediately then we need to go with alternative one and make that the recommendation, and move forward with it quickly,” Barrios said.
Supervisor Anthony Botelho opened the floodgates of rejection: “A very good report, but I’m going to have to throw cold water on it. I’m pessimistic that the bureau would let us do anything, much less the water district, whether it’s hiking or anything. The risks far outweigh the gains. I think our energies need to be more focused. Let’s take our money and our focus and do the regional park. Let’s get that done and forget about this.”
Botelho went on to say the board would be better served by directing the staff and Parks Commission to complete the regional park and not waste energy and time on the reservoir because “it’s not going to happen.”
Supervisor Jaime De La Cruz said when he was talking to the “fishing community” there was never a mention of trails. He said all they were concerned about was fishing. He agreed with Botelho and said too much money was involved.
“These are not acceptable options,” he told Fortanos.
Supervisor Jerry Muenzer commented that he had driven around the reservoir recently and said the facilities are, “falling down and the road has weeds growing up through it.” He said the land could be utilized for hiking, but agreed with De La Cruz in stating, “…that’s not what the public is looking for.”
He said the county needs to continue working with the federal agencies and that with a new Congress person in office soon perhaps whomever it is might help resolve the situation.
Supervisor Robert Rivas thanked Fortanos and the staff for its efforts, and then used the rest of his time to deride Hollister Mayor Ignacio Velazquez.
“A couple months ago Mayor Velazquez made a big brouhaha out of nothing,” he said. “He came up here and erroneously accused this board, and me in particular, on social media and said, ‘Supervisor Rivas is responsible for keeping San Justo’s gates closed.’”
Rivas went on to say others contacted him via Facebook questioning just how much power he actually had.
“I don’t have that much power. You’ve been misinformed,” Rivas responded. “At our last meeting, we were all educated. We all realized that this is way beyond the control of the San Benito County Board of Supervisors. This is a federal facility. All we can do is our part to work towards a solution to open it sometime in the future. It may never open up is the reality, and it’s unfortunate that Mayor Velazquez is not here today. He tried to score some cheap political points and I think he finally realized that we don’t have any control over that facility.”
He concurred with Botelho, Muenzer and De La Cruz that the options were not viable.
“We have a lot of interests, from our library to a regional park, and as essentially as we want San Justo to open, it just isn’t visible at this time,” Rivas said. “This isn’t simply opening up the gates or allowing people to jump gates to go and enjoy this facility because there’s nothing to enjoy right now.”
Barrios said she thought it was the board’s responsibility to continue to pressure the Bureau of Reclamation.
“This is very irresponsible of them,” she said. “We need to be more proactive to keep pressure on them to do something not just for recreation, but to not have that risk. I agree with Supervisor Botelho in that this is not something we can move forward with, so let’s concentrate on bringing the community another form of recreation.”
Even though she was moving on to another job, Fortanos thanked the board for their direction and said the staff would continue to focus on getting the Bureau of Reclamation and the water district to move through the eradication process.
During the public comment portion of the meeting, Hollister resident Marty Richman said he doubted if the reservoir would ever open again to the public because no one would want to take the risk. He said he favored alternative five, doing nothing, then added that perhaps the county should make some effort to inform the public where it could go to find fishing opportunities. Ann Ross strongly disagreed with Richman and commented that it isn’t the county’s job to tell people where they can go to fish.
Then she joined Rivas in criticizing Velazquez: “In response to how the mayor handled himself and got a rise out of the community, it was ill-informed, and I’m sorry to see that the community in which I live people find themselves rallying around this topic as opposed to the many that we have that are far more important.”
The very public fray between Velazquez and Rivas continued onto Facebook when the mayor later wrote: “Here we go again with Supervisor Rivas blaming me for his refusal to stand up for the people.”
Not to let the mayor’s post go unchallenged, Rivas responded: “Really Hollister Mayor-Ignacio Velazquez? I’m not blaming you one bit… I’m calling you out for what you are… A cheap political hack! A couple of months ago you blatantly accused the SBC Board of Supervisor and me in particular of closing San Justo’s gates and keeping them closed… That couldn’t be further from the truth. When you finally realized that the federal government (Bureau of Reclamation) owns and controls San Justo’s fate, you decided to move on from this issue… Yesterday, when our Board discussed San Justo’s future and possible options, you were notably absent. I guess you’ve decided that ‘standing up for the people’ or jumping fences at San Justo is too much work?!”
The war of words continued as the mayor came back with: “Robert Rivas there you go again.”
And Rivas responded: “Hollister Mayor Ignacio Velazquez as I mentioned to you in private… I have no problem having a civil disagreement with you on policy or local issues. But when you take to social media and frame issues haphazardly, it is unproductive and irresponsible. As our Mayor… I want (to) work with you… But you make it difficult to do so.”
Meanwhile, the Board of Supervisors has diverted its attention to a possible joint-use agreement with San Benito High School to concentrate on a regional park project, which Fortanos discussed in an earlier presentation and will be expanded on in another BenitoLink story.
You must be logged in to post a comment.