I feel that it's vital to clarify some of the information that's coming from the new Water Board (please see the recent message from Board president David Smernoff, attached below, following my message).
 
(1) If you'll carefully read David Smernoff''s message below, you'll see in plain English that THE TRUE INTENTION OF DAVID and presumably the NEW WATER BOARD MAJORITY is to REDUCE by at least 50% to 70% YOUR CURRENT WATER BILL "REBATES," THUS INCREASING YOUR WATER BILLS EACH AND EVERY MONTH. David says EXPLICITLY that he as Water Board president advocates REDUCING our community's collective water bill savings from over $100,000 per year (currently, according to David) to only $30,000-$50,000 per year. That means that the Water Board wants to RAISE the collective water bills paid by you and me and all of us to the tune of $50,000 to $70,000 per year!

 

(2) Some very simple math will show what this could mean to all of us in the Water District. As I believe there are somewhere in the neighborhood of 255 subscriber households receiving water in our District, dividing 255 into $50K and $70K shows that THE WATER BILL INCREASE FOR EACH OF US WOULD AVERAGE from $196 to $275 PER YEAR--probably for many years in the future--if the Water Board reduces rebates per David's suggestion.

 

(3) And by the way, if the rebates are eliminated altogether, as new Board member Perry Blackmon suggested at the last Board meeting, the average resident will lose $336 PER YEAR! Is that okay with you?

(4) David states below that the Water Board wants to "determine community desires for spending tax revenues on services that benefit our broader community." In their campaign for the recent Water Board election, the new Water Board members stated clearly that they want to develop some sort of park-recreation facility on Water District's Lake Road lands (one containing the lake and the other along lower Lake Road). I've attended the majority of official Water Board functions since the election, and to me it's quite evident that the Board's objectives haven't changed in the slightest. The objective now is to make a finding (probably by distributing a survey to the District) that the "will of the community" is in support of the park-recreation idea--so that they can proceed to spend the bulk of property tax proceeds to develop and maintain such park-recreation facilities.
 
(5) Here's the bottom line. As we all know, most of the time in life there's no free lunch. If the "will of the community" is to fund such new facilities, WE MUST BE VERY CLEAR THAT WE ARE THE ONES WHO'LL BE PAYING FOR ANY SUCH VENTURES--IN CASH OUT OF OUR POCKETS VIA HIGHER WATER BILLS--FOR EACH AND EVERY MONTH--FOR POSSIBLY YEARS AND YEARS INTO THE FUTURE.
 
(6) If, knowing YOU'LL be paying for such facilities, you want to support the efforts of the current Water Board, then fine--I can appreciate your generosity in being willing to pay higher water bills indefinitely. If on the other hand you'd prefer extra cash in your pockets each year (averaging $196 to $275 per year per Smernoff's preference or as much as $336 per year per Blackmon's suggestion) rather than giving it up for some yet-to-be-specified new community services at the whim of the Water Board, then I recommend that you make your opinion heard loud and clear to David and ALL other members of the Water Board.  

As the new Water Board Majority may well try to decrease rebates very soon at an upcoming Board meeting--even as soon as next Thursday, 4/20--THERE'S NO TIME TO LOSE if you disagree with what they're trying to do!

 

Please attend the Special Water Board Meeting - Thursday April 20th, 7:30 PM - 25 Joaquin Road

AND contact ALL Board members by e-mail or phone:

 

David Smernoff:  davids "at" acterra.org  851-9202
Charlie Krenz:  charleskrenz "at" sbcglobal.net  851-8085
Perry Blackmon:  pblackmon"at" hotmail.com  851-7840
Frazier Miller:  fraziermiller "at" yahoo.com  851-0559
Stan Gage:  stan "at" ostassoc.com  851-1924

Also, if you agree with my point of view, please copy me on e-mail messages you send to the Board members, so that I can make it a point to keep you informed about further Board activities in the future.

 

Thanks for your attention.

 

Your neighbor,

Curt Parkin
cparkin "at" altotech.com
 

P.S.  If you want to read on, here's some further information:
 

(1) You should be aware that at the current rate the water cost reductions actually amount to only a modest 53% of a full year of normal revenues of the District, generally in excess of $156,000. (There will actually be an additional windfall of $40,000 this year that will push the target for District revenues up to $196,000 this year.) In my opinion, if anything, THE WATER BOARD SHOULD INSTEAD BE VOTING TO INCREASE our rebates, NOT TO DECREASE them!
 
(2) There's the perception that the property tax funds that are going to the Water Board are some sort of new "windfall" to the Water District. Indeed, for several decades now, the Water Board has been receiving such tax revenues, and those revenues have been used all along to offset expenses and therefore to lower water bills for all water subscribers. The offsets have recently been labeled as "rebates," but the bottom-line effect is the same: The tax revenues allocated to the Water Board are currently still accomplishing the same goal as has been the case for decades--TO LOWER YOUR WATER BILLS.
 

(3) David and others on the Water Board want very much to use LAFCo concerns as justification for reducing our "rebates" that lower our water bills. Again, the true intention of the new Board is to retain as much funding as possible under Board control, so that the Board can provide unspecified "new services" such as park-recreation facilities. If the Board is truly concerned about LAFCo, the Board should start by considering ways to re-structure the rebates to lessen concerns about the "variable component" that David describes, RATHER THAN advocating the 50%-70% (or even as much as 100%) WHOLESALE REDUCTION of rebates. Again, the thinly veiled objective of the new Board is to remove $50,000-$70,000/year or even $100,000/year CURRENTLY GOING INTO OUR POCKETS and retain those monies under Water Board control to spend as the Board wishes for "new services." 

 

(4) We should all realize that the Water District isn't really acting as a water district when only a small fraction of its funds are directed toward true water-related services, but instead toward park-recreation activities as advocated by the new Board. Having a Water Board trying to masquerade as a park-recreation organization makes the District VERY vulnerable to legal challenge and could well result in loss of our tax dollars altogether.

 

(5) Our community also needs to be aware that new park-recreation facilities could come with a price in addition to our dollars to fund them. New park-recreation facilities, though expensive, might have some advantages for our community's use, but they could also pose considerable additional downside negatives to our community. New facilities could well act as a magnet to attract crowds, including persons from outside our community that do not share out interests. Our peaceful but crowded neighborhoods could face increased traffic, trash, garbage, risk of fire, even threats to property value and personal safely.