3 core questions to consider for this week’s meeting:

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.

Last 5 posts by Amanda Rice

This entry was posted in CFRC. Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to 3 core questions to consider for this week’s meeting:

  1. Amanda says:

    Responses can be posted here or after the individually posted questions (below).

  2. dbuck says:

    I protested the proposed increases because they are excessive and very unfair to
    businesses. Also, I have no confidence in the CCSD. It is a bloated bureaucracy with far too many employees. It is driven by the need to grow — more houses, larger population. No growth = restricted budget. The District has spent money like the proverbial drunken sailor on many questionable consultants, lobbyists, and “experts”. Cambria is considered the “cash cow” among all communities in California by consultants. It is looked upon disparagingly by consultants and SLO County. The District has blown the huge Chevron damages award. Those funds are GONE. Where did they go? There were millions of dollars, all spent during the so-called moratorium when the District received far fewer development fees because of far fewer construction starts.

    The criteria that I believe should be used in forming a committee to study rates and reasonable increases must include total independence from the District, be composed of knowledgeable, qualified individuals who are not in any way part of the CCSD or its few supporters, and be not in any way limited by the District as to what records may be accessed and studied.

    I would like to see a reasonable schedule of rate increases in water and sewer services, justified by need, and with a careful study of the CCSD work force to get rid of superflous and excess employees. What is the work force budget today vs. 2004 and 1998? What have been the expenses for all consultants, but particularly for the Washington, D.C., Sacramento, and California Coastal Commission? It appears that the expenses have been $35,000 per month. What have they accomplished? How is their work measured on behalf of Cambria?

  3. Deryl Robinson says:

    dbuck,
    Have you examined the CCSD books? Have you sat in any closed sessions where they are briefed by their legal counsel on what their obligations are? If so please elaborate on your claims with this inside info.

    If CCSD is driven by the need to grow, then why haven’t they lifted the moratorium? Why did the enact it in the first place? Why did they decide to limit total buildout to 4,650 instead of the Coastal Commission approved limit of 5,250?

    Can you provide us with the names of the consultants who look disparagingly on Cambria so we can invite them to share with all of us?

    The Chevron funds should only be spent in one place: Building a water project to replace Santa Rosa Creek water. If the money is gone, then it’s been spent fighting efforts to stop such a water project by Cambria’s no-growth crowd, or on subsidizing operations while putting off a rate increase.

    Why do you modify the moratorium as “so-called”?

    You seem to be suggesting in your proposed makeup of the committee that “qualified” means being anti-CCSD. Really? By that logic, a qualified voter would be ones who already agree with you. Really?

  4. Amanda Rice says:

    Doug,
    Where did you learn of consultants’ opinion about Cambria as a “cash cow”? Policies regarding public bids and the process for awarding contracts concerns me…mainly because I don’t yet know anything about how the CCSD handles them. Anyone know about this?

  5. Amanda Rice says:

    I think I would want a committe stacked in favor of my position. As would everyone, I think. Which is why it might be a good idea to ensure any committee is made up of people nominated by as many of the various community interests/organizations as are willing to get involved. Local nonprofits may be a good source of possible nominees, as would the newly organized cambrians for fiscal responsibility group, as well as the lot-owners group, the CCSD board itself and perhaps even the water division and/or sewer division managers (since they are likely to offer an expert in water/sewer operations). Maybe some of the former CCSD board members who are on record as opposing the previous rate schedule would have a good idea or two about who would serve the community well on the committee…..All these sources for nominees may not be agreeable to everyone, but a diverse group of Cambrians chosen for their intelligence and dedication to the community (rather than allegiance to a particular position) are more likely to come up with a solution we can all buy into.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

AboutCambria was established as a no-cost, convenient forum where Cambrians could meet, exchange information and discuss Cambria's future. When commenting please remember: Be courteous, stay on topic, be succinct, contribute new information, cite sources and above all "PLAY NICE".