Weott CSD Board Members Jump Ship as Help Arrives

red and white life preserver ring saling through air with a rope attached

[Stock photo from Can Stock Photos]

This month’s meeting of the Weott Community Services District’s board was held at the district’s office to allow for remote access to the meeting on November 22. The small office was crowded with about twelve people in attendance in addition to the three-person board.

Board member Lou Iglesias was notably absent from the meeting having turned in his resignation after the tumultuous meeting in October. The board was already short one board member to complete the five-seat board.

Help has Arrived

Two new WCSD staff members were introduced to the WCSD customers in attendance. The board hired Dan Arreguin, a licensed operator with the Garberville Sanitary District, to serve as their part-time general manager as he trains Kyle Valk as Valk works towards his certification, with the ultimate goal for Valk to assume the general manager position.

Under Arreguin’s watch, the leak under Highway 101 that caused a turbidity and low-pressure situation has been repaired. Arreguin credited WCSD employee, Greg Teasley, for getting the repair completed at a fraction of the estimated costs received from outside entities, saving the district upwards of $10K.

The boil water notice is still in effect even though the repair has been made. After a turbidity issue, the state generally requires three test samples within normal limits to drop the boil water notice, however, Arreguin believes that due to the ongoing issues the district has faced, the state will be extra cautious in relinquishing the notice.

One of the original conditions of the most recent boil water notice was that the district had to hire a licensed operator. With Arreguin, that requirement has been met. He told the board he’d be speaking to the regional director to see what other metrics the state would want before the boil water notice could be lifted.

Ongoing Issues

Customer complaints about billing and accounting continue to plague the district. Administrative Secretary, Julie Santibanez, encourages residents to visit her at the district office for clarification on financial statements she provides at the meetings, stating that the board meeting is not the appropriate place to deep-dive into the financials. However, Chairperson, Marcella Gauna, and several residents in attendance, stated that the financials should be clear enough to decipher at the board meetings where the board votes to approve the financials that Santibanez provides.

When asked about a statement of the district’s outstanding debt, Santibanez said she did not have those records available at that time but could provide them at a later date. Board Member, Alan Aitken, said that the board was provided those records with the financial statements monthly and asked that Santibanez make those records available at every meeting.

Competency and allegations of fault between Santibanez and the postal system continue as customers claim that billing inconsistencies persist; surmising that the fluctuating outstanding debt and shutoff notices could be impacted by the billing inconsistencies. Santibanez has stated repeatedly that she mails the bills on time every month and is not responsible for what happens to the bills within the postal delivery system.

Aitken has previously stated that a board member verifies the bills once Santibanez has them prepared and personally hand delivers the bills to the post office – even going as far as delivering them to neighboring post offices to see if the delivery issues persist.

It was stated that bill payment checks are not being cashed in a timely manner also. One resident stated that she received a second bill and her bank had yet to cash the payment for the previous month’s balance.

Arreguin said that he will be working with Santibanez to provide a clearer financial picture to the board.

Rising Rates

Joining the meeting remotely, Mary Fleming from RCAC, presented the board with a rate study the district needs in order to determine the solvency of the district and what rates it will need to charge its 137 customers in order to continue to provide service.

Fleming based her initial determinations on information from previous years financials as she has not been provided with the most current information. The rate study initiation was implemented by the former general manager who unexpectedly passed away at the end of August.

Complicating matters further, the district has not yet passed a budget or had a yearly audit. Aitken has been searching for an auditor willing to provide the small district with the services needed to complete the yearly required financial review. Arreguin confirmed the shortage and the difficulty other districts have had finding available auditors.

With the information that Fleming does have, she presented several options of rate increases to meet operating costs and fund three reserve funds within five years. Fleming based her reserve fund goals on current operating costs, inflation, and the cost of the district’s equipment.

Fleming estimated the district would need a $12.5K operating reserve budget, an account that would fund district operations as revenue collections fluctuate between billings or in an emergency situation where incoming revenue was compromised.

She also stated that the district would need to fund an emergency reserve in the event of sudden system failure where the WCSD would not be able to wait for loan or grant funding to replace critical elements to the system to ensure customers access to safe drinking water and a reliable sewer system.  Fleming set that savings goal for $25K at the end of a five-year period.

The last reserve fund the district needs to fund is a Capital Improvement (CIP) Reserve Fund. The fund, unlike the other two, is constantly in use, money being pulled out to upgrade aging infrastructure, and replaced with revenue factored into the yearly budget. Fleming offered three options that would fund the CIP reserve with approximately $30K per year, and one that would put $20K per year into the CIP reserve.

Recently, the WCSD has had to tap into a county savings fund for operational costs as the district is not currently bringing in enough revenue to cover the expense of running the district.

Accounting for 5% inflation, Fleming took the operating costs and reserve goals into account, spreading the rate raises over a five-year period and offered the district four options. Each of the options would do away with the base water allotment that is currently included in the residential water base rate. Fleming explained that the allocating of water with a base rate was not in compliance with state regulations. One customer cannot subsidize the water use of another; essentially, the water conserver is paying the same amount of money for less water than a customer that uses the entire base rate allotment resulting in the water conserver paying more per gallon of water.

Due to this, Fleming set up rate plans with a base rate that pays for the service connection to the residence or commercial building, along with a charge per 100 CF (cubic foot, 100 CF is equivalent to 748.052 gallons) used. The more water used, the higher the bill.

Different sized meter connections will be charged different base rates, while the vast majority of customers will fall in the 3/4″ connection range for residential connections.

Currently WCSD customers receive 1350 CF of drinking water included in their base rate of $55 a month. Sewer charges are currently $47 monthly. A residence with both services pays $102 a month if they do not exceed 1350 CF usage.

Fleming stated that, monthly, 42% of WCSD customers use 500 CF or less, 42.5% use 500-1000 CF, with approximately 11% using 1000-1500 CF, and just under 5% of the WCSD customers are using over 1500 CF; meaning that over 95% of the WCSD customers are using less than their current base rate allotment of water resulting in no more than a $102 monthly water bill.

The district cannot continue to operate without raising their rates – rates that have not increased since 2009. The financial burden of operating and repairing the service district falls on a relatively small number of customers; the impact greater than if there were more customers operating on the same system.

Water

Option #1, year 1, usage table [All tables were provided by RCAC unless otherwise noted]

Option #1 would see the base rate for water raised to $56.61 a month in 2023 will each 100 CF costing WCSD customers $4.35 each. For those using 500 CF a month, their water bill would raise from $55 to $78.36. Those that use 1000 CF a month, their water bill will raise from $55 to $100.11.

With a built in 4% increase yearly, by 2027, option #1 would have a base rate of $66.22 and $5.09 per 100 CF used. For those using 500 CF a month, their water bill will be $91.67 per month in five years, and those that use 1000 CF a month, their water bill will rise to $117.12 in 2027.

Option #2, year 1, usage table [Note: there is a title error in the heading of the table stating option #1, it is in fact, option #2]

Option #2 would see the base rate for water raised to $60.65 a month in 2023 will each 100 CF costing WCSD customers $3.65 each. For those using 500 CF a month, their water bill would raise from $55 to $78.90, comparable to option one. Those that use 1000 CF a month, their water bill will raise from $55 to $97.15, a slight savings from option one. Option two ups the base rate while lowering the CF rate allowing for greater savings for those that use larger amounts of water than with option one.

With a built in 4% increase yearly, by 2027, option #2 will have a base rate of $70.95 and $4.27 per 100 CF used. For those using 500 CF a month, their water bill will be $92.30 per month in five years, and those that use 1000 CF a month, their water bill will rise to $113.65 in 2027.

Option #3, year 1, usage table

Option #3 would reduce the base rate to $53.50 a month in 2023, will each 100 CF costing WCSD customers $2.42 each. For those using 500 CF a month, their water bill would raise from $55 to $65.60. Those that use 1000 CF a month, their water bill will raise from $55 to $77.70.

With a built in 10% increase yearly, by 2027, option #3 will have a base rate of $78.32 and $3.54 per 100CF used. For those using 500 CF a month, their water bill will be $96.02 per month in five years, and those that use 1000 CF a month, their water bill will rise to $113.72 in 2027.

Although seemingly the more cost-effective, option #3 would see the district fall short of its capital improvement fund goals, contributing $20k to the fund each year instead of the $30K the other options provide.

Option #4, year 1, usage table [Note: there is a title error in the heading of the table stating option #3, it is in fact, option #4]

Option #4 would keep the base rate at $55 a month in 2023 will each 100 CF costing WCSD customers $5.01 each. For those using 500 CF a month, their water bill would raise from $55 to $80.05. Those that use 1000 CF a month, their water bill will raise from $55 to $105.10.

With a built in 10% increase yearly, by 2027, option #4 would raise the base rate to $64.34 a month and cost customers $5.86 per 100 CF used. For those using 500 CF a month, their water bill will be $93.64 per month in five years, and those that use 1000 CF a month, their water bill will be $122.90 in 2027.

There aren’t significant customer cost differences within the four options that Fleming provided for those using the 500 – 1000 CF. Options 1 & 2 have a steeper base increase for 2023 with a smaller 4% rate raise per year, while options 3 & 4 keep the base rates the same or reduced but will have a 10% rate raise each year.

The other differences are whether more of the funds are generated from the base rate or the water usage. Options 1 & 4 would benefit water conscious users and those with less people in their household with a lower base rate and higher water usage charge. While Options 2 & 3 would benefit those that use more water monthly with a lower water rate but higher base rate.

Sewer

Those on WCSD sewer will also see a rate increase. Unlike the water, no CF usage is calculated resulting in a flat month rate based on service size. Currently, WCSD customers are paying $47 a month for sewer.

Fleming provided three options to meet the projected district needs.

Option #1 would see the sewer rate nearly double to $89.18 per month with a 4% increase per year ending with an approximate monthly charge of $104.33 in 2027.

Option #2 would implement a $80.53 per month with a 7.4% increase per year ending with an approximate monthly charge of $107.14 in 2027.

Option #3 would raise the sewer charge to $79.97 per month with a 12.5% increase per year ending with an approximate monthly charge of $116.88 in 2027.

Aitken summed up the options, “Pay now, or pay later.”

Summary

wcsd proposed rate grid

WCSD proposed rate options over a 5-year period [Calculations done by Lisa Music]

Water Option #3 paired with sewer option 3 is the cheapest rate raise for all water use across the board and will cost the least for all customers over the next five years. That combination of options will result in a higher monthly bill on year five but averages out to afford the WCSD the most savings in the five-year span.

However, selecting water option #3 only funds the CIP reserve fund with $20K a year instead of $30K. We’ve created a table above to estimate the differences in costs for customers based on water consumption.

Water option #2 paired with sewer option #3 is the least money for residential customers over the five-year span while adding the goal of $30K to the CIP fund yearly. That option combination would have WCSD customers paying a $5.39 additionally per month for low-usage consumers, up to $26.47 per month for high-usage customers.

The decisions the district faces come down to funding the CIP fund and having lower rates now, versus higher rates later or vice versus.

After the presentation, Arreguin told Fleming that he and Santibanez would contact her with the financial information needed to provide the most accurate accounting for the rate study. The board will be looking over the options that Fleming provided and reduce the options down to two for Fleming to reevaluate before presenting the community with the final study.

The general consensus was to call for a special meeting in December in order to move forward with the rate study process, though the board had previously planned to forego the monthly meeting.

And Then There Were Two

In a surprise announcement during the last minutes of the meeting, Chairperson Gauna announced that she will not be resuming her position on the board after November, leaving the board with just two board members – Alan Aitken and Marge French. Gauna stated that she wasn’t quitting, her term is up, and she’s elected not to run for the position again. In the last election cycle, no one filed for placement on the board.

Although Gauna term has come to an end, contention seems to have played a part in her decision. In parting remarks, she stated, “I’ve had it up to here” and claimed she was tired of being disrespected.

On a positive note, community members expressed gratitude for Gauna’s service on the board. Gauna additionally added that she’d be happy to help the district in any way that she could aside from sitting on the board.

Arreguin stated that without a quorum, the county would step in to appoint someone to the position, with Supervisor Bushnell potentially stepping in to fill the seat until appointments can be made.

As of the publication of this article, no future board meetings have been scheduled. Those interested in attending the next board meeting should routinely check the district’s website for notification of the next meeting by visiting weottcsd.com.

Previously, the WCSD board met on the fourth Tuesday of each month at 7 p.m. Meetings are regularly held at the Weott Community Center located at 175 Lum Street in Weott.

Note: If your connection is greater than 3/4″, you should contact the WCSD to discuss the proposed rate change options for your service connection.

Note: Santibanez reached out to us after this article went to publication to state that she deposits district revenue every two weeks.

This article is written by Lisa Music, a local freelance journalist. To reach Lisa about tips, questions or comments, email her at [email protected]

Reporting for this article was funded by the Humboldt Journalism Project, a DreamMaker Project of The Ink People. To donate to the Humboldt Journalism Project, click here.

 

Facebooktwitterpinterestmail

Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules

Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

9 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
in the background
Guest
in the background
1 year ago

Lisa M usic water sold by the Weott CSD is measured in Cubic feet @ 7.48 gallons per cubic foot…. Not in cubic feet per second which is a measure of rate of flow.

Guest
Guest
Guest
1 year ago

Thanks, I noticed that, too.

7.48 gallons per second, for $55.00 per month, sounds like a pretty good deal…

But, only 1,350 “seconds” would be over pretty quickly, leaving most of the month left over…

That’s only 22 1/2 minutes…

🤔🧐
One long, (albeit intense), shower 🚿…
😁

Seriously though, another great article, Lisa Music, very informative, and I’m sure that it is a relief for the folks in Weott to know that improvement is in the works…

Unfortunately it looks like it will come with an increased cost…

And feel free to ignore this rowdy section of the peanut gallery…

Your doing an outstanding job…

suspence
Guest
suspence
1 year ago

We ought to move closer to civilization.

Guest
Guest
Guest
1 year ago
Reply to  suspence

All there asking for is clean, affordable, dependable, Weotter service.

Last edited 1 year ago
Guest
Guest
Guest
1 year ago

(humor font)

🤔🧐

About that headline, Lisa Music…

‘WEOTT CSD BOARD MEMBERS JUMP SHIP…’…

Wouldn’t that be going overboard…???

😁

Guest
Guest
Guest
1 year ago
Reply to  Lisa Music

🙂

I didn’t mean to imply, necessarily, that it was you that went overboard, but the headline, along with the resignation, definitely made a splash…

Last edited 1 year ago
Bye bye!
Guest
Bye bye!
1 year ago

We’ll see how long Julie has that chip on her shoulder when the audit kicks in. If no wrong doing cool but in my experience, blaming the post office for so much mail seems real far fetched. Also blaming an accounting program seems far fetched too. It seems someone got this job gained based on nepotism. Seems someone doesn’t want to lose a salary not deserved. Word of advice Julie, you better start looking into alternatives cause it sounds like your time is coming to an end when this audit hits. Whatever you’re hiding will be found out sweetheart.