About Cambria

There were more participants in this week’s meeting than expected, given that it was the day before Thanksgiving. Our goal for the day was to determine a set of committees and set priorities so we are prepared for the December meeting of the CCSD. What we came up with is four committees:

Rate Increase Review - including analysis of overhead, allocated costs, general fund expenditures, capital improvements planning, etc. This subcommittee is chaired by Jerry McKinnon and aims find a more reasonable rate structure and increase than the one proposed by CCSD staff in September.

CCSD Policy Review - including policies guiding selection of independent contractors, consultants, construction contractors; litigation policies and practices; community interface guidelines.

Water Master Plan Review – including concerns related to the BRP and desalination and alternate water sources.

CCSD Accountability and Authority Concerns – This subcommittee bring concerns about CCSD to the SLO LAFCO, the agency with the directive from the State government to ensure efficiency and accountability in local governments.

Next week’s meeting will provide an opportunity for everyone to join the committee (s) they find most interesting and to choose a committee head. If your concern isn’t included in one of the above committees, please email Amanda or call Amanda 927-4191 or bring it to the next meeting.

The highest priority is the work of the Rate Increase committee. The Wednesday meetings should focus on sharing progress made and coordinating our efforts going forward. Our meetings will be more productive if we use this site to exchange information and obstacles between meetings, shifting some of the problem-solving to the flexible time. The sheer volume of information about CCSD-related concerns is too immense to cover at a one-hour per week meeting if we are accomplish anything other than passing information. As you find good information, the committee chair should include it in a new post or email the information to Amanda to post. Call Amanda for help with posts or other site-related issues.

Please note: Whenever you contribute to this site, be sure to include the source of the information you add. There are a lot of opinions about our community and the vision of its’ future. Let’s keep an eye on the first objective: to ensure a reasonable, justified rate increase. And our ongoing goal: to ensure a responsive, responsible CCSD dedicated to serving our community fairly and legally.

A SLO County official looked at the proposed Buildout Reduction Plan (BRP) and said it is nothing more than “pie in the sky”. Who is going to pay for it? All Cambria property owners will, that’s who. In the failed water and sewer rate plan, every water user would be paying a monthly fee into the BRP. Of course, new residents who get a meter will pay a very substantial fee to get their meter, but much of that will go to support the District bureaucracy.

When one person sues the District because he cannot get a meter (There are 650 on the CCSD’s list, so supposedly they will eventually get a meter. What about the other 1000s who want to live in Cambria?) that person will win his suit, according to the same county official. “No community in America has ever been successful in capping growth,” he said. One successful litigant will lead to more suits and the BRP will go down in flames.

[Doug Buckmaster]

“We must all hang together, or most assuredly we shall all hang separately.”

– Benjamin Franklin, upon adding his signature to the Declaration of Independence

The CCSD Board meeting takes place today, Monday November 19, 2007 at 12:30 at the Vet’s Hall. See the full agenda at the CCSD’s website.

Continuing to turn out in large numbers to these meetings is one way to let the CCSD know that this community is serious about addressing the issues that were raised during the rate protest campaign. WE are the COMMUNITY this district was formed to serve. Until we are once again confident the district is serving us well, we must keep our eyes open and ask the important questions.

As he noted at the meeting on November 2, 2007, Greg Sanders will not be attending this meeting. The Board has no regular business scheduled. The main activity for this meeting is 90 minutes scheduled to consider appeals for relief from water surcharges by 8 specific ratepayers, including the Baptist Church and the Car Wash at Old Cambria Marketplace.

The Public Comment period is scheduled for after the appeals. If the time allotted each agenda item is used entirely, that would land public comments sometime near 2:30, though it wouldn’t be unusual for the Board to be ahead of its schedule and find public comments starting as early as 1:30.

The CCSD and our elected board represent our best opportunity to ensure our community is the one that we, as Cambrians, envision, not some unlivable seascape painted by the county or the state.

“Whenever the people are well informed, they can be trusted with their own government; that whenever things get so far wrong as to attract their notice, they may be relied on to set them to rights.” – Thomas Jefferson

As Cambria residents continue to focus on the accountability of the CCSD management and the elected Board of Directors it is important to remember that the CCSD is not in control over the so called “citizen committee”. The good residents of Cambria own the accountability issue – lock, stock, and barrel. It is critical that the CCSD does not claim ownership or direct the energy flow of our rightful fiscal accountability requests. It is important to remember that the Board of Directors work for us and THEY are responsible for the enormous increase in CCSD staffing, questionable litigation practices, allowing the CCSD to become “more then a Water, Garbage, and Sewer District”, and for funneling millions of water and sewer fee and tax dollars to lobbyist, consultants, and non-profits who largely have nothing to do with providing up-keep on existing water and sewer infrastructure. Cambrians do not need the CCSD permission to review any public documents nor do we need their permission to name who we want on any committee wanting access to public records or accounting practices. While it important to work cooperatively it is imperative that the CCSD not manipulate, direct, or oversee who is allowed to view public documents, question expenditures, or inquire about other fiscal issues that cause concern.

While it was entertaining to hear that the CCSD would ‘allow’ a citizen committee to review the spending habitats of staff it is important to remember that the CCSD staff and board of directors have little authority to stop anyone requesting information whether it be a committee of individuals or a person.

Lastly, it is apparent that dramatic changes to our local government will be coming. This likely will be in the form of decreased spending which could mean decreasing the current staff levels of the CCSD. These hard decisions will be made soon and it is of the utmost importance that civility be maintained as our community adjusts to the realities of economics of this century.

What does “Fiscal Responsibility” mean to you? Describe it as you think it applies to CCSD, and as it applies to the community at large.

A report was done by Black & Veatch in 2006 to establish the average cost of water in the state of California. The average cost of 15 units of water is $36.39. In Cambria, under our current rate schedule, we pay $78.42. In the proposed rate increases, we would have paid the completely egregious amount of $232.67, which is more than 6 times the state average.

I am a member of the California Restaurant Association which publishes average revenues plus average food, labor and overhead costs. As a restaurant owner in the small town of Cambria, I am proud to say I stay well within the averages of the state. The CCSD claims their costs to be under the state average. What they fail to state is that their revenue is double the state average. In my business if I were able to double my prices, my costs would be half of the state average. Remember, our water company has a monopoly on the product they sell. They don’t have competition to keep them honest on how they price their product. That is the job of our representatives on our CCSD board. Obviously, we have major over staffing issues that need to be addressed. In my opinion, one of the first places to look for savings is in the amount of administrative overhead that is being taken from the water and wastewater fund to cover general fund costs.

I want to thank all Cambrians for getting involved with the rate protests, but we must stay involved and hold our board members accountable to achieve meaningful change.

The Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Act) establishes procedures for local government changes of organization, including city incorporations, annexations to a city or special district, and city and special district consolidations.
Local agency formation commissions (LAFCOs) have numerous powers under the Act, but those of primary concern are the power to act on local agency boundary changes and to adopt spheres of influence for local agencies. Among the purposes of LAFCOs are the discouragement of urban sprawl and the encouragement of the orderly formation and development of local agencies.
Staff to the Assembly Local Government Committee regularly updates the Guide to the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000. The version linked below reflects the 2005 legislative changes to the Act. I hope that you find it to be a useful and helpful document.

Complete 2005 Review of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000

This post focuses on the state law regarding citizen’s access to public records. If you would like to request documents from the CCSD, you will find the required form linked here, or visit the CCSD’s web site.

Legislation enacting the California Public Records Act (hereinafter, “CPRA”‘) was signed in
1968, culminating a 15-year-long effort to create a general records law for California.
Previously, one was required to look at the law governing the specific type of record in
question in order to determine its disclosability. When the CPRA was enacted, an attempt
was made to remove a number of these specific laws from the books. However, preexisting
privileges such as the attorney-client privilege have been incorporated by reference into the
provisions of the CPRA.
The fundamental precept of the CPRA is that governmental records shall be disclosed to the
public, upon request, unless there is a specific reason not to do so. Most of the reasons for
withholding disclosure of a record are set forth in specific exemptions contained in the CPRA.
However, some confidentiality provisions are incorporated by reference to other laws. Also,
the CPRA provides for a general balancing test by which an agency may withhold records
from disclosure, if it can establish that the public interest in nondisclosure clearly outweighs
the public interest in disclosure.
There are two recurring interests that justify most of the exemptions from disclosure. First,
several CPRA exemptions are based on a recognition of the individual’s right to privacy (e.g.,
privacy in certain personnel, medical or similar records). Second, a number of disclosure
exemptions are based on the government’s need to perform its assigned functions in a
reasonably efficient manner (e.g., maintaining confidentiality of investigative records, official
information, records related to pending litigation, and preliminary notes or memoranda).
If a record contains exempt information, the agency generally must segregate or redact the
exempt information and disclose the remainder of the record. If an agency improperly
withholds records, a member of the public may enforce, in court, h s or her right to inspect
or copy the records and receive payment for court costs and attorney’s fees.

Complete Document of 2004 summary of the CPRA

1. Why did you protest the rate hike?

2. What criteria should be used to form the CCSD citizen’s commitee?

3. What would like to see the committee accomplish? (1, 2, or 3 things is plenty) Should the committee be standing or ad hoc?

Recently posted as individual entries, the three questions we will be using to focus the “Cambrians for Fiscal Responsibility” mission statement. This site is meant to help continue the discussion beyond the one hour meeting each week. Please login and add your comments and ideas.