On Tuesday, February 12th, the MWC launched a survey designed to gather basic information from the local public about where they stand on the Nestle issue.

To quote MWC Board member Debra Anderson, ”We wish to find out what thoughts and ideas our citizens have so we can move forward in future public discussions, and we hope this survey will serve as a tool for everyone to use going forward. We are committed to compiling and releasing this information for the public to review and discuss as they see fit.”

Community Survey Results and Summary Are Posted!

Click on the link to view the entire spreadsheet. 

As you will see, there are just over 100 responses, and a lot of great comments. Thank you to each participant for voicing your opinions.

The MWC Board of Directors will be addressing comments and questions from the survey on this webpage, as well as in our monthly News Bulletins.  Visit this page from time to time to see our posted responses.

Feel free to email us at survey@mccloudwatershedcouncil.org if you have questions about our survey!

Survey summary- Posted April 18, ‘08

There were a total of 109 responses. Of those

• 65 live in McCloud
• 16 live in Shasta Forest or Squaw Valley
• 9 live out of Siskiyou County

* Question #2- What result would YOU like to see regarding the Nestle project:

“Go forward as the Contract currently stands?” out of 28 responses:

• 17 said yes, with comments such as “with current modifications”, “It will be adjusted as time goes by”, “Good for McCloud”
• 11 said no, with comments such as “Bad contract” and “Bad Idea”

Change/Adjust Contract: What would you Change?  Out of 43 people that responded:

• 3 said No changes to contract
• 41 suggested changes to the contract
• 17 - increase revenue for McCloud
• 10 - reduce term of project
• 7 - reduce size of plant
• 7- reduce amount of trucks/Use rail instead
• 4 comments each to:
• reduce amount of water taken
• eliminate bore holes
• change everything about the contract/ start over
• 3 - Need more CEQA/ environmental study
• Other comments include:
• Remove exclusivity
• Add profit-sharing for McCloud
• No well drilling
• More accountability and monitoring of effects

Reject Project Entirely- Why?  Out of 85 responses:

• 2 said No, go with current project
• 83 said Yes, reject project
• Why?
• 15 - Nestle not to be trusted
• 11 - No privatizing of water
• 11 - contract was bad (too long, not enough money, etc)
• 10 - traffic issues
• 10 - Nestle not a good fit for McCloud (company too large, etc.)
• 7   - poor or no community control
• Other Comments included:
• Giving away too much water
• No economic plus
• Would hurt growth in other areas

Other Project Comments  Out of 37 responses:

• 7 - Community needs to cooperate
• 5 - MCSD not listening/ needs to be replaced
• 4 comments each:
• Nestle too large
• Bottle our own water
• NAFTA and CEQA concerns
• Other comments included:
• Economic/Contract issues
• Traffic issues
• Search for alternatives
• County making decisions for McCloud

* Question #3- List your ideas about what options McCloud has to revive the economy-
out of 90 responses:

• 13 - Tourism/ More McCloud Advertising
• 12 - Wood manufacture/ workshops/school/furniture coop)
• 10 - McCloud bottle their own water
• 8 comments each:
• Fishing and Recreation (more river/woods/mountain access)
• Resort/historical theme park at mill site
• Eco-friendly /green industries/organic gardening
• 7 - Brewery
• 5 - jobs that pay well with benefits
• 5 - small businesses with county help
• 3 - Keep Nestle
• Other Comments included:
• Cottage industry
• Artist colony
• Music Events

* Question #4- Do you have any suggestions for the McCloud Watershed Council-
Out of 55 responses:

• 10 - Keep It Up
• 7 comments each:
• Educate Community/Get facts clear
• Get community involved
• Stop Nestle/keep pressure on Nestle
• 4 said Look at Water Rights/Save Water
• 3 each said
• Stop/ McCloud needs jobs
• More Publicity
• More public meetings/ at other places
• Stop harassing/Get lost
• Need new contract
• Other Comments included:
• Help industry come to McCloud   
• Work on the EIR
• Help community get written protection with Nestle

The McCloud Watershed Council believes this survey is a useful tool as a general gauge of the community and their thoughts about our town and the Nestle project. We would like to acknowledge the major points the respondents made and provide feedback to comments.

Below we will be posting our responses to your comments on a monthly basis.

Posted May 22, 2008

Question #2 asked “Change/Adjust Contract? What would you change?”

• Our Response: As of May 12th, Nestle has announced a change in the scope in their proposed project. Under the question of “What would you change about the contract” we received many good suggestions. Most had to do with changing the size of the plant and reducing the length of the contract. According to Dave Palais of Nestle, the size of the plant and amount of water used have been reduced by 60%. Also, Nestle has stated that the current contract will have to be discussed and re-negotiated. We urge all concerned citizens to voice their opinions regarding their desired outcome to the MCSD Board as this new phase of the project takes shape.

Survey #5 “Has Nestle looked at using McCloud railroad to mitigate truck trips?”

• Our Response: Yes. According to the original draft of the DEIR released in June 2006, Nestle had analyzed two methods of water shipping using the railroad rather than trucks to transport water. Transporting water in bulk and in filled water bottles was researched and found to be unsuitable to the project for a variety of reasons. These details can be referenced in the draft EIR, in the Alternative Section 4.0, starting on page 13. We can send you a disk copy of this document if you’d like to view it.

Posted April 18, 2008

Under “Go forward as contract currently stands”

• Survey #36 “Yes, it will be adjusted as time goes by”
• Our response: This belief is troubling, for it reveals a misconception about the contract. While we are aware of the fact that the MCSD has the ability to adjust the project or reject it if they so choose, there is nothing in writing to say that Nestle is willing or obligated to change any portion of the contract. Dave Palais has stated several times in public that there will be no changes made to the contract for any reason.

• Survey #40 and #46            “Yes, with current modifications”
• Our Response: This comment references the statements made in a Nestle press release on February 11th 2008 and by Dave Palais at the Feb. 12th McCloud Community Forum. In particular, the Nestle press release states that changes to the proposed project will include “Eliminating from the project description the potential use of groundwater wells by the bottling facility” and “Imposing a firm 1600 acre-foot per year cap on the overall water use at the proposed facility…”

While these statements can be construed as concessions, Nestle is not willing to make these changes part of the contract; therefore, these are not legally binding project changes. Our groundwater can potentially still be tapped as per the contract. 

Survey Results Notes:
Survey Spreadsheet: Under the “Where do you live” column, you will see several SVR abbreviations. This stands for Squaw Valley Road.

No one’s ideas or comments have been omitted. However, in order to fit in the more lengthy responses, we have abbreviated and removed unnecessary phrases such as “I think”, “I believe”, “maybe”, and so on. Beyond that, each response has been entered into the spreadsheet without any content editing.