This story was first printed in this morning’s (Dec. 20) Daily Post. If you want to read important local stories first, pick up the Post in the mornings at 1,000 Mid-Peninsula locations.
BY BRADEN CARTWRIGHT
Daily Post Staff Writer
Representatives tackling floods from the San Francisquito Creek had harsh words Thursday (Dec. 19) for Valley Water board member Nai Hsueh, who has suggested that Valley Water go its own way unless other agencies take more financial responsibility.
“This threat of pulling out is not the way to go about it. I don’t think any of us are going to capitulate to that,” Palo Alto Mayor Greer Stone said.
Hsuch surprised members of the San Francisquito Creck Joint Powers Authority when she had a Valley Water committee discuss leaving the creek authority on Dec. 5 because of her concerns with its plans for flood control. Thursday was the first chance for a response from other creek authority members: the cities of Menlo Park, Palo Alto, East Palo Alto and a flood control agency in San Mateo County.
Stone called Valley Water’s discussion a “breakdown of communication and violation of trust.” He said the creek authority is like a marriage, You don’t go in and say Option A is to get a divorce, and Option B is to start cleaning up your socks.
Valley Water has had several opportunities to raise concerns over the years, and now Hsueh is going back on issues that have already been decided when the creek authority is on the precipice of its next project, Stone said.
“This is not a solution to help our residents. We do need to work together,” Stone said.
Stone was frustrated that Hsueh didn’t tell the creek authority about Valley Water concerns until Dec. 3, two days before the committee meeting. Stone said Valley Water put out inaccurate numbers at the Dec. 5 meeting, even when the creek authority’s Executive Director Margaret Bruce tried to correct them.
“We can leave the disinformation at the door,” Stone said.
Menlo Park Mayor Drew Combs also wasn’t happy about Valley Water’s approach.
“It’s another curveball that gets thrown at us and further gets us off what should be the focus for all of us,” Combs said.
Hsueh said she didn’t want to get into a back-and-forth and said she would have a more complete response on Jan. 31.
“What I can promise is a transparent conversation in January when we can put this information together,” Hsueh said. “At this point, I don’t even know what the project is.”
Hsueh raised concerns at the Dec. 5 committee meeting about the creek authority pursuing a design that doesn’t meet Valley Water’s standard to protect from a 70-year-flood, or a flood that have a one in 70 chance of happening in any given year.
Hsueh replaced Valley Water board member and Palo Alto representative Rebecca Eisenberg on the creek authority’s board in March.
Eisenberg yesterday accused Hsueh of “usurping the will of the voters.”
“Just because someone doesn’t understand something, doesn’t mean that thing is wrong,” Eisenberg said during public comment.
Residents encouraged the creek authority to keep its focus on flood control.
“When I heard about this, I felt like, ‘Oh no, here we go again,’” Palo Alto resident Jerry Hearn said.
The creek authority has been working to remove the Pope-Chaucer Bridge since a flood-damaged hundreds of homes in February 1998.
But another flood on New Year’s Eve 2022 caused water to spill out in unexpected areas in East Palo Alto, and hydrologists found the creek authority’s models were inaccurate.
That means the Pope-Chaucer Bridge can’t be replaced unless the creek’s capacity is expanded further downstream first.
So now board members are looking into adding flood walls and excavating parts of the channel before removing the Pope-Chaucer Bridge. They also are looking for a way to pay for the project that will be discussed on Jan. 31.
I’m sure Valley Water could pay for all the work that’s necessary on the creek just by eliminating those $500,000 and $400,000 salaries. There’s a reason they call Valley Water the “Golden Spigot”.
Yikes! Eliminate all those salaries? What would be left of Valley Water? The only reason Valley Water exists is to give unqualified people high-paying jobs. Take the CEO. His only experience before Valley Water was that he was head of the NAACP, which did shakedowns of big companies. He had no engineering degree, no education in hydrology. He got the job only because of racial identity politics.
I wish the staff writer had checked his work before publishing. Not only is Nai Hsueh’s name misspelled at least twice but the lack of context on Ms. Hsueh replacement of Ms. Eisenberg as the Valley Water representstive on the SFCJPA feels disengenious given the inclusion of Eisenberg’s factually incorrect and melodramatic public comment.
Right you are, Jade. Eisenberg shouldn’t be allowed to speak about this case unless there’s somebody there from Valley Water to provide needed context to what she says. Eisneberg’s free speech rights should be limited when she talks about the fraudsters at Valley Water and its grifter board. No way should be allowed to be heard without a filter on her comments. Yes, let’s get rid of that pesky First Amendment and control what government critics say, just like they do back in your home country.
Interesting how the Valley Water people focus on Eisenberg and not flood control. We Palo Altans don’t get much from Valley Water. We buy our water from Hetch Hetchy, not a project Valley Water owns. Valley Water only gets a portion of our property taxes because they are supposed to be involved in helping to fund flood abatement. That’s the way it’s been for decades, long before Eisenberg came along. If Hsueh wants to pull out of the JPA, so be it. Don’t let the door hit you on the ass on the way out. Then let Palo Alto and Los Altos pull out of Valley Water. If they’re not going to help us, we shouldn’t be funding them.