NVR Logo
Trouble in east county
Friday, September 05, 2008
Save and Share Share
Napa County is a special world all its own: Rugged, beautiful, isolated. Unfortunately, the isolation is now haunting people in one corner of Pope Valley, a residential neighborhood on Putah Creek called Berryessa Estates.

Berryessa Estates residents have been dealt a lousy hand that leaves some vulnerable to foreclosure on their homes.
It all starts with the isolation, but in fact several factors have led the residents of Berryessa Estates to their predicament: Strict, but beneficial, environmental regulations; the big bill ($15,000 per property owner over 30 years) for water and wastewater treatment repairs that came after years of neglect and a $400,000 fine by the state; and the shaky economic times.

Today, more than 11 percent of Berryessa Estates property owners are having trouble paying their assessment for the systems run by the Lake Berryessa Residential Improvement District.
If they don’t? County officials say the law requires LBRID to move toward “judicial foreclosure” on delinquent properties. Those property owners who haven’t paid their assessments by Oct. 1 are at risk.

While the law might require the district to take action, the situation doesn’t benefit anyone. Clearly, the property owners will lose if foreclosure proceedings begin; LBRID doesn’t want to take anyone’s property; and foreclosed-on owners don’t tend to make their sewer and water payments — which shows LBRID itself may not be out of the weeds for a few years.
County officials say they are seeking options short of foreclosure proceedings. One suggestion stems from the fact that owners have less flexibility to pay their assessment bill than they do their property tax bill. If they can pay the assessment by Oct. 1 while they seek delays or incur penalties on their tax bills, they can at least extend the period in which they can work out of a financial jam.

It would be better still if the county can help identify a grant or lending source to further minimize the risk to homeowners.

From the homeowner’s perspective, this dilemma feels like punishment for doing the right thing.

Agreeing last year to pay for major upgrades that would put their community into compliance with state environmental regulations and ensure the safety of their water supply, they now find the government sniffing around their door for failure to pay the substantial bill.

In Thursday’s Register, Napa County Supervisor Diane Dillon suggested it might have been a mistake for local officials to approve the remote residential neighborhood in the first place. That may be the case. If so, Berryessa Estates is not the only mistake out there. Rural outposts in other parts of the state are facing similar problems.

But no one can turn the clock back at Berryessa Estates. The homes are there, the improvements to the water and wastewater systems are nearly in place, stability is around the bend -- as long as people aren’t forced by hardship to abandon their beautiful corner of Pope Valley.
7 comment(s)

boots wrote on Sep 5, 2008 7:51 AM:

" Angwin would Become Berryessa Estates II if the Triad PUC subdivision plan were to be approved. Rural, remote, low income folks being asked to fund the infrastructure to run a small city. PUC walks with millions....Triad calls it green and the residents of Angwin are left with a multimillion dollar water and sewer and road maintenance agreements that can not be paid for by the new sub division! Who do you think will carry the costs of this sprawl? Not long till us poor folks are leaving Angwin too, because we cant afford to flush our toilets. (Thanks to Ms. Gitelman for allowing this batttle ship to leave the dock) your neighbors living in the affordable community of Aggwin will soon be forced out!

Was there some thing about housing retention in the Housing element? Oh, never mind, let them play golf in Pope Valley! "

Teddy wrote on Sep 5, 2008 8:13 AM:

" While you are certainly entitled to not like a particular proposed project, blaming the Planning Department for processing an application in accordance with the law is pretty stupid. "

concerned1 wrote on Sep 5, 2008 10:58 AM:

" Isloated developments will always have problems like this. It is a shame that the developer is long gone leaving the burden on a limited number of home owners and ultimately the public. That is what Napa Pipe and Angwin have in common, public burden building new services for outlaying communities, one for school bus service and the other for a new, straightened road up the hill. Why should I have to pay for unwise isolated developments away from urban centers? "

vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 5, 2008 12:18 PM:

" It's a bad idea, altogether, allowing developers to come in, build up these dense rural developments and then allowing them to walk away after delivering the burden to taxpayers. I live in Angwin but I pay for the costs and maintenance of my OWN well and septic system which the county or college are not responsible for maintaining. And if the Berryessa homeowners think $15,000 is hefty, they ought to take a look at my costs to install a well and septic system and maintain them. For example, my water is very acidic and I installed a system to make the water more alkaline. My well pump went out not too long ago. Talk about costly!

I do not object when the county allows houses to be built in rural areas which have some degree of self sufficiency. Putting dense homes in a rural area without any guarantee built in for future maintenance is what's stupid. So it's ok for the planning dept. to approve these developments without taking future maintenance into consideration? If the costs are passed onto me (remember I am already responsible for my own maintenance costs), I will be incredibly mad.

I've heard a few Angwin residents dependent on these systems say "I don't like this development but at least I can't SEE it". You may not SEE it but you WILL FEEL it in your pocketbook, especially if you are dependent on Angwin's water/sewer systems. Someone will pay; if not you, it will be county taxpayers. So, for any of those apathetic Angwin residents who are too lazy or intimidated to become vocal about this project, don't say you weren't warned. The county has no interest in protecting YOUR interests. "

musikluvr wrote on Sep 5, 2008 2:31 PM:

" Diane Dillon can only lament that it was a mistake to develop Berryessa Estates 50 years ago? I think our county deserves better representation than that. There is an answer to solve this problem and it is not blaming someone's actions 50 years ago. Ms. Dillon is the area supervisor and it is time for her to start earning her paycheck and all the fringe benefits. "

reader wrote on Sep 5, 2008 2:51 PM:

" I sympathize with the B.Estate residents because it was built as a low income community so these folks are not in a position, say, for example, like Meadow Wood folks would be, to pay for these costly upgrades. It makes no sense to build rural developments for the "lunch pail" folks who commute and live pay-check-to-ay-check. This is exactly what PUC/TRIAD wants to do in Angwin. It is BLASPHEMY.

I too have and maintain my own well and septic system. I budget for these things but what concens me is what will happen to my water table when the proposed suburb is built. I suppose I will be told to join the suburb water system and pay through the nose like everyone else. Angwin residents not on their own well already pay upwards to $200.00 mo. for water. This proposed development is BLASPHEMY. That is the only word I have for it; and BERRYESSA ESTATES IS THE CANARY IN THE COAL MINE. ARE YOU LISTENING MS. GITELMAN, ET AL? Are you interested in the residents and the environment or only in following the big money and running from PUC/TRIAD's "pulling-the-religious-card stunt? I pray you do the right thing. "

glenroy wrote on Sep 5, 2008 10:48 PM:

" No doubt about musicluver….I still can’t understand her voting on land issues when she is both an advocate and consultant for special interest groups that are anything but friendly to rural homeowners…..there very well could some litigation in the near future on this issue.

The county should reduce the assessed values on Berryessa Estate homes to the absolute minimum land value and give them a dollar for dollar credit the infrastructure costs…..these folks get few county benefits but are paying the same rate as us…..besides the elitist SC, NCLT, UCD and BOR ruining Lake Berryessa in turned ruined a lot of home values all around the lake…. "

Comment Guidelines
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy