⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 7 findings
F1
Despite the water rate increases of approximately 183% between 2011-2025, earmarked to address water quality and infrastructure issues, St. Helena’s water is still being delivered to customers with taste, odor, and color quality issues. After recent improvements and upgrades to the Bell Canyon Water Treatment Plant, water currently leaves it clear, clean, and healthy; therefore, city staff and consultants now blame decades of silt, debris, and sediment build-up in the water distribution system for the continued water quality troubles.
F2
The current Capital Improvement Plan approved and implemented by St. Helena’s City Council contains no projects dedicated specifically to the long-term rehabilitation of the aged water distribution system. To date, there is no plan in place to address the water distribution system problems. No formal assessment has been done to determine the scope and the 24 severity of the issues in total. Without it, the repair costs and the timeline for repairs remain unknown.
F3
St. Helena lacks a thorough and effective system for analyzing citizen water complaints. The Grapevine app implemented in 2023 provides only a basic level of data gathering and analysis. Therefore, City Council and city management staff do not have sufficient information to make informed decisions about how money and resources should be prioritized or allocated to resolve water issues.
F4
The water rate studies between 2011-2025 each cited the same core justifications for the need to raise water rates: declining infrastructure, deferred maintenance, depleted reserves, and debt covenant non- compliance. Even though additional revenues were raised, they were not utilized effectively by St. Helena’s City Council. Therefore, most of the justifications for water rate increases have not been met.
F5
The St. Helena City Council changed the St. Helena Water Enterprise’s fee structure in 2016 to implement a single water rate regardless of the location or type of customer. Prior to 2016, water rates included surcharges to offset the cost of pumping water to customers in elevated areas or customers outside the city limits. Therefore, the St. Helena Water Enterprise currently passes the additional costs on to all water ratepayers rather than those benefiting outside the city limits.
F6
St. Helena has more than 30 Outside Service Area Agreements (OSAAs), representing approximately 24% of St. Helena’s total annual water consumption. The OSAA customers benefit from the Measure H 25 funded infrastructure improvements but bear no responsibility for the repayment of the bonds because they are not located within the city limits.
F7
St. Helena suffers from a lack of governance, poor oversight, ineffective management by the City Council and City Manager, and a lack of professional project management expertise. As a result, St. Helena’s Water Enterprise remains in a similar state of physical decline and financial distress today as it was in 2011.
Recommendations 5
-
R1The Napa County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the St. Helena City Manager should conduct a comprehensive assessment of the water distribution system’s condition that includes the mains, the pipes, and the related infrastructure, and that the findings be reported to the St. Helena City Council
-
R2The Napa County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the St. Helena City Manager should develop a plan to address the failing water distribution system that includes the Capital Improvement Projects needed, the cost of said projects, the funding source(s) for said projects, and the timeline for completion of said projects; and that the plan be presented to the St. Helena City Council
-
R3The Napa County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the St. Helena City Manager should expand the use of the Grapevine app (or equivalent) complaint system to collect more in depth information and provide the St. Helena City Council and the Water and Wastewater Advisory Committee with quarterly data reports on water complaints to minimally include 26 complaint type, location, frequency, severity, and resolution status
-
R4The Napa County Civil Grand Jury recommends that St. Helena’s City Council should implement a water rate fee structure with differentiated rates based on the customer’s location (inside city limits vs. outside city limits) and the customer’s type (residential vs. commercial), as well as assessing surcharges for customers in elevated locations and surcharges for the Outside Service Area Agreement customers benefiting from Measure H
-
R5The Napa County Civil Grand Jury recommends that the St. Helena City Council require its members and St. Helena City Senior Management Staff attend governance training (in addition to Brown Act training) within the first quarter of their tenure after election by December 31, 2026. Training opportunities such as Mayors and Council Members Academy. can be found at The League of California Cities. 27
In the Press 2
Press coverage of this report, automatically tracked.
Letter: Grand Jury's St. Helena water report was all wet - The Napa Valley Register
The Napa Valley Register
· August 26, 2026
Grand jury blames poor St. Helena water quality on bad leadership - The Napa Valley Register
The Napa Valley Register
· June 29, 2026