Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - North Fork Water Company - 11/17/1981NORTH FORK WATER COMPANY BOARD MEETING NOVEMBER 17, 1981 A meeting of the Board of Directors of the North Fork Water Company was held November 17, 1981 at 7:00 p.m. in the office of the East San Bernardino County Water District, 1155 Del Rosa Avenue, San Bernardino, California. PRESENT: Arnold W. Wright Laird Roddick Victor Ray Ray Keslake ABSENT: Dennis Johnson Elisabeth Kiel Joseph Rowe The Minutes of the June 4, 1981 Board Meeting were read by the President and approved as read. STANDARDS ESTABLISHED BY NORTH FORK WATER COMPANY AND BEAR VALLEY MUTUAL WATER COMPANY REGARDING CHANGES TO THE NORTH FORK CANAL DUE TO LAND DEVELOPMENTS The Board briefly reviewed the Standards established by North Fork Water Company and Bear Valley Mutual Water Company Regarding Changes to the North Fork Canal due to land developments. It was determined the Secretary would have the Standards formalized by Attorney Farrell, have the Standards properly executed and recorded. EAST SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY WATER DISTRICT REQUEST FOR WATER DELIVERY Mr. Edward Jakowczyk, General Manager for East San Bernardino County Water District, was present to discuss the District's request for 300 inches of water per day starting January 1, 1982. He indicated the District has not in past years taken their water entitlement from North Fork because it did not have a need for it. The District does not have water rights established for their new well and would like water delivery to the well site which in turn will help the water table by spreading in the Conservation District's spreading grounds. This will help to guarantee that the water table and aquifer will not be adversely affected by pumping the well. Delivery to be at the North Fork box. William Hiltgen, Manager of the Conservation District, indicated this can be accomplished with minor modifications to the box. The water used will be measured as it goes into the spreading grounds. The meter can be read at any time. A charge will be made by the Conservation District for spreading water. It was stated that the water will not be taken if other North Fork stockholders needed the available water for irrigation purposes. It was noted Bear Valley had stated they would not spread water if it meant releasing water from the lake. However, if there is a problem Bear Valley can pump their wells or deliver state water. After discussing the matter at length it was the general concensus of the Board that if a stockholder requests water, they should be entitled 95 to the water regardless of how they are going to use it. It was noted in the by-laws that water would be used for irrigation use only. Therefore, the Board felt the matter should be reviewed by legal counsel. It was noted by Mr. Wright that some water had been delivered to the District's Plant No. 39 in the past. M/S/C (Roddick-Ray) that the matter be referred to legal counsel for his opinion as to the Board's responsibility in the matter of the request by East San Bernardino County Water District for delivery of water for spreading purposes. REQUEST FROM SAN BERNARDINO VALLEY WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT FOR TITLE TO PROPERTY - 20.8 ACRES Correspondence had been received from the Conservation District requesting North Fork to grant title to 20.8 acres located southerly of Greenspot Road. In 1961 North Fork granted an easement to the Water Conservation District allowing them to use the land for water spreading operations. The Conservation District stated in the event North Fork Water Company desired to develop a water well field on the land at some future time, the Water Conservation District would grant them reservation of the right to drill wells on the property. The matter was discussed at length, however, it was determined that a full Board should be present to make such a decision. Therefore, the matter was tabled. NOTICE OF RIGHT OF EASEMENT Attorney Robert J. Farrell had prepared a Notice of Easement relative to the North Fork canal from the end of Edison's 54" pipe to its termination at Highland Avenue and Palm. The document was reviewed by the Board, however, no action was taken at this time. RESOLUTION IN OPPOSITION TO THE MENTONE DAM The matter of the Board passing a resolution in opposition to the Mentone Dam was discussed. It was determined this should also be discussed with the full Board. A proposed resolution will be prepared and presented to the Board for their approval at the next Board meeting. Their being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m. Bonnie R. Eastwood, Secretary