default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

Lodi City Council rejects privatization of water plant

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Wednesday, November 23, 2011 12:00 am | Updated: 6:59 am, Fri Dec 30, 2011.

In a 3-2 vote, the Lodi City Council decided to have city staff — not outside contractors — operate the new water treatment plant now under construction.

Council members Larry Hansen, Alan Nakanishi and JoAnne Mounce said they did not feel comfortable turning over the plant's operation to one of two private companies that specialize in running water and wastewater plants.

Subscription Required

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?



You must login to view the full content on this page.

Thank you for reading 20 free articles on our site. You can come back at the end of your 30-day period for another 20 free articles, or you can purchase a subscription at this time and continue to enjoy valuable local news and information. If you need help, please contact our office at 209-369-2761. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?



Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • Jim Kay posted at 6:10 am on Sat, Sep 22, 2012.

    jim kay Posts: 1

    the best thing you can do is run this plant in house. it would be a terrible mistake to give it to a company klike veolia. look at the mess they made in richmond. and with so called add ons, their cost would skyrocket. always kick these private schmucks to the curb when they come sniffing around.

  • Jackson Scott posted at 9:13 am on Wed, Nov 23, 2011.

    Jackson Scott Posts: 392

    "Both companies said the city will have to worry about rising public pension costs, workmen's compensation and health obligations if they keep the operation in-house."

    Having done many RFP's all of these above costs should be accounted for in the City's estimate, not just salaries. I sure hope these costs were projected in the city's bid.

  • roy bitz posted at 7:43 am on Wed, Nov 23, 2011.

    roy bitz Posts: 503

    The cost of operating this plant is significant but it is only a fraction of the total cost involved with this massive project. I believe the city owes rate payers an overview of all the costs and all the benefits of this project.
    Unlike our ground water, river water is loaded with pathogens and every drop of it must be heavily chlorinated before it can be used safely. Ground water ( except for the central plume which is shut down)--- is of much higher quality and is generally safe to drink though it may need to be lightly chlorinated from time to time.
    I would like to be proven wrong but I believe this project will cost about two hundred million dollars over the life of the plant and the water contract. I do not believe it is needed at this time and I don't believe it will do much to reduce overdrafting.



Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists