Page One

Where has all the sewer money gone? 

Editor: 

Your Dec. 12 article on sewer overflows refers to the council item by Councilmember Maio which urges the city to crack down on homeowners who have illegally connected downspouts or storm drains into the sanitary sewer system, which results in overflows during heavy rains.  

An equally significant problem is where house sewer laterals were connected into the storm sewers which results in significant health problems as the storm sewers overflow during heavy rains. 

While the city has been working on the problem, Public Works Division Director Rene Cardinaux is quoted saying, “the department is limited by time and money...at the current rate, the city will take 50 years to complete sewer projects.  

If we had twice the allocation of funds we’d be able to make the kind of progress we’d like to see.”  

In the council packet for Dec. 12, item seven, which concerned a five year lease for 2.7 million dollars for Public Works engineering department to move to 1947 Center St. provides that half the rent will be paid from the sewer fund.  

The item elaborates by stating, “Payments for Engineering’s rent historically have been made from the sales tax and sanitary sewer funds.  

Rents will continue to be budgeted for and paid from these funds unless other sources are provided.” Sewer fund: $1,344,032. Contact person: Rene Cardinaux. 

This makes it very clear why the sewer problems will not get resolved in 20 years and probably not in 50 years.  

The sewer fund money is looked upon as a slush fund to pay for items desired by the city staff and council regardless of the illegality of the fund expenditures.  

The sewer fund was established in 1986 and was to put at least $6 million dollars a year into sewer replacement.  

Perhaps the auditor would like to review how sewer fund moneys have been expended. She could start with $300,000 last year to purchase the health building on Sixth St. and $43,000 to put in fiber optics lines to the corporation yard.  

Theodore R. Edlin 

Berkeley 

Beth El – good neighbors 

Editor:  

Although I am not one of the good people of Congregation Beth El, I live about a half-mile from their current proposed sites of operation, and I consider them good neighbors. Good where they are and potentially better if they are allowed to develop the derelict site on which they hope to build an appropriate expanded accommodation.  

Frankly, I am bewildered that some other neighbors are responding to the proposal as if a drug rehabilitation center or half-way house for felons was in danger of being plunked down in their midst.  

Historically, Beth El has been a force promoting spiritual values, civilized order and practical community support, and this proposed upgrade should be seen not as a threat to the status quo, but as an opportunity to improve Berkeley.  

Charles J. Meyers 

Berkeley