scsd regular meeting of the board of ...

scsd regular meeting of the board of directors january 15, 2008 6:30pm

There are 25 comments on the www.saltoncsd.ca.gov story from Jan 11, 2008, titled scsd regular meeting of the board of directors january 15, 2008 6:30pm . In it, www.saltoncsd.ca.gov reports that:

SALTON COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT AGENDA FOR THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

2098 Frontage Road, Salton City, California 92275

(760) 394- 4446 Tel (760) 394- 4242 Fax

REGULAR MEETING OF JANUARY 15, 2008

Closed session: 6:30 p.m. Open session: 7:00 p.m.

1. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 p.m.

2. ROLL CALL

3. CLOSED SESSION ISSUES: N/A

4. OPEN SESSION: 7:00 P.M.

5. ANNOUNCEMENT OF CLOSED SESSION ACTIONS:

6. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:

7. PUBLIC APPEARANCES/PRESENTATIONS:

8. PUBLIC COMMENTS:

9. CONSENT CALENDAR:

a. Approval of the minutes of the special meetings of December 6, 2007

b. Approval of the minutes of the special meetings of December 21, 2007

c. Approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of December 18, 2007

d. Approval of Best, Best & Krieger’s invoice in the amount of $ through December, 2007

e. Current Demands for the month of December 2007

f. Approval of the minutes for the safety meeting of January 2008

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.saltoncsd.ca.gov.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
AKA SCSD Director Barrett

United States

#1 Jan 11, 2008
As always, free of charge, you can view all of the SCSD Directors "backup" material on www.saltonseawest.com
The "backup" items will be posted not later than 8pm on Saturday January 12th, 2008.
"Be informed, Be involved, Be effective"
AKA SCSD Director Barrett

United States

#2 Jan 14, 2008
Item "13f" of the agenda is just another attempt by the SCSD to silence Director Barrett's Whistleblowing.

For example, item "13d" has to do with the sewer standby fee that is assessed on every vacant lot.

In 1979 (and every year since) the Board of Directors has set the standby fee above $10/year.

What this means is that since they exceeded the $10/year threshold talked about in the Community Services District Law then they were mandated by the same law to adhere to the requirements of the Uniform Standby Charge Procedure Act, Something they did not do.

Thus, every sewer standby charge imposed from 1979 to present was/is valid.

Let's see the Board of Directors Try to weasal out of this one, and beleave me they'll try.

As far as censuring Director Barrett for things that he said (in his capacity as a citizen) on this blog I have only this to say: You can shoot the messenger but it won't kill the truth of the message.

BTW this topix page editor (Imari Love) filed a complaint, which is the subject of the censure, with the Board of Directors because she was offended by things that Citizen Barrett said to her on this blog.

So much for the 1st Amendment Imari....you are quit the "Little Bitchler"
AKA SCSD Director Barrett

United States

#3 Jan 14, 2008
Oops meant to say "invalid"...which the Sewer standby fee is.

(too much overtime at work)
Not Listening to Hear-say

United States

#4 Jan 14, 2008
You, as a Director, swore to defend and protect this District. However, you have continously found ways that the District should refund monies that (you say) are illegal. OK -- I am willing to listen, and accept that.
But, please tell me -- If the District refunds all of this money, how can it possibly survive?
I understand, on one hand, that you are trying to give back what (you feel) is not legitimately collected; but in so doing how can you possibly believe that the District can survive such a financial reflux?
I personnaly would much rather see the District continue receiving my flushed toilet and shower water on a daily basis than to receive any kind of refund I might be due from years past. I have already paid it, and don't miss it. However, I certainly would miss the fact that I could not flush my toilet.
Let's face it. If the current District did not exist, then Coachella Vally Water would do both water and sewer. Do we honestly (in our wildest dreams) believe that they would only charge $20.00 dollars per month?
It really appears that you as a sworen Director is personnaly trying to destroy the District as an entity.
Are you that vengeful toward the other Directors?
AKA SCSD Director Barrett

United States

#5 Jan 15, 2008
As a Director I swore that I would uphold the Constitution of the United States and of California….that is exactly what I’m doing.

There are specific legal ways to raise the capital that the District needs to survive….legally.

It is not for you or I or any Director or management to decide what laws are to be followed depending upon the Districts (and the Peoples) needs, Bonnie & Clyde had needs too..ALL THE LAWS MUST BE FOLLOWED!

All of the illegal and improper conduct of the District that I’ve been uncovering is a culmination of years of legislative neglect by past Boards AND Management. Some didn’t have the mental capacity to understand the law, some didn’t care enough to invest their time to learn the law and a few didn’t care about the law at all because what was number one to them was the solvency of the District, not the rule of law.

Voter apathy is partially to blame also, people like you seem to think that “the end justifies the means”…However a Directors oath didn’t have that phrase in it.

Like I said before, there are specific legal ways to raise the capital that the District needs to survive….legally. But I’ll be damn if I’ll educate the rest of the Board on what I know about all of the financing mechanisms available to the District if the Board continually refuses to set straight there past (and some current) unauthorized activities.

We need to clean house before we lay the new carpet….Got Broom?
Not Listening to Hear-say

United States

#6 Jan 15, 2008
OK. I'm willing to listen. But before you break the working system, what is your proposal for repairing, or replacement?
You seem to continuously criticize the current system and want to fix it; but I have yet to hear (from you) a better way of doing it.
Give us some alternatives. Give us a better way of doing this. Let us know how to fix this system that you continuously say is broken.
Assure me that your way -- whatever that is -- is better than paying $20.00 per month to receive all of my waste water!
In other words -- let us know what your solution is! Don't continuously criticize the current system, and then not have a way to fix it.
AKA SCSD Director Barrett

United States

#7 Jan 15, 2008
If the Board won't acknowledge that the current system is broken then what good would it be to explain the solutions to them.

Take Director Butler for instance. At tonights meeting, even when he had copies of all the legal mumbo jumbo about the Sewer Standby Fee, Director Butler still thinks that the Sewer Standby Fee was/is done correctly.

Fortunitely for the people, tonights meeting was a success. The Districts legal counsel will prepare an opinion on the legality of the Sewer Standby Fee and then the Board will have a Public Study Session on the matter.

I also presented the Board with my "claim for damages" paperwork. I've paid this illegal $21/yr standby fee for the last 6 years....my claim for damages is for $126.

I'll be putting a generic partually filled in claim form on www.saltonseawest.com this Sunday so other property owners can demand their refunds also. They'll just need to fill in their name, property location, how many years they paid the fee, and then sign it before presenting it to the District.

A "claim for damages" request must be presented to a government agency before you can sue them.

I think that when the District receives a bunch of requests then they'll take we the people more seriously.

Stand up for your rights or sit down and shut-up!
Not Listening to Hear-say

United States

#8 Jan 15, 2008
I hope you are as bold when 'the people' are paying $30.00-plus dollars a month to CVWD for sewer fees and have to wait for someone to come from Coachella to fix a sewer problem!
Go ahead! Refund all of the money the District has collected all of these years.
Say good bye to the parks, the golf course, the pool, the fire department, and simply having a local entity to call and ask for a local phone number.
Thank you, Director Barrett, for taking our small town community away from us!
We really appreciate your enthusiasim.
Not Listening to Hear-say

United States

#9 Jan 15, 2008
By the way -- I didn't ask you to explain to the current Board what your solutions to the 'broken system' were ---- I asked you to explain to me, and eveyone else, what they were.
What is your solution for revenue -- what is your solution to keep the golf course, fire department, pool, and parks open? How are you going to pay for street lights?
As an elected official you do not have to educate the current Board, however, to make the accusations you are making you do have to explain to me (the public) how you are going to fix the system. You do need to tell me what your solution is. You cannot just state that the system is broken and that the current Board does not know what they are doing, and then not offer a better way of doing things.
Don't profess that you know better, and then not give a solution.
You do not have to educate me. You NEED TO ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!!
Where do you profess the money will come from to provide the services we are already used to receiving? Without the District, all of our current survices will not exist.
Imperial County hardly recognizes we even exist. They provide street maintenance (such as it is). Who is going to pay for the street lights? Who is going to maintain the parks? Forget about the golf course, the pool, and the parks!
WHAT THE '----' are you thinking!!
Too bad you were not up for re-election THIS year!!!!!!
observer

United States

#10 Jan 16, 2008
correct me it I am way off but doesn.t about half of our sewer maintenamce money come from stand by fees so if that goes away the sewer rates would double. can anyone spell recall before we are destroyed.
AKA SCSD Director Barrett

United States

#11 Jan 16, 2008
observer wrote:
correct me it I am way off but doesn.t about half of our sewer maintenamce money come from stand by fees so if that goes away the sewer rates would double. can anyone spell recall before we are destroyed.
For the life of me I just cannot understand the mindset of these type people that believe it is ok for a governmental body to impose illegal fees simply because they need the money. Who's playing God now?

There are many ways that the District can fairly and legally collect the required revenues to run the District. Unfortunately past Boards have continually failed to do due diligence on researching and implementing the revenue producing tools that the State Legislature has given them. And then when a Director that just happens to be "a little rough around the edges" in his approach, tries to correct all of the Districts illegal activities, he gets pounced on by the rest of the Board for his "style"?

The SCSD CAN collect a Sewer Standby Charge on lots where the sewer system is readily available. But there is a legal procedure for doing it. That is all I have ever asked of my Government...do it the legal way, period.

The Uniform Standby Charge Procedures Act requires that the SCSD procure an Engineers report covering the need for a standby fee. Then the Board must pass a resolution to assess a standby fee based upon the findings of that report. Then the SCSD must send a mailed notice to the property owners that would be subject to the proposed fee informing them of a Public Meeting and provide them with a YES or NO ballot. At the meeting ALL OF THE BALLOTS RECEIVED would be tallied. If there were more NO votes than YES vote then the standby fee could not be imposed.

The Engineers report just may justify an increase in the Sewer Standby Fee, but that increase would be based on fact and fairness, not folly.

You do want to be fair don’t you? Or would you rather shift the cost of flushing YOUR toilet onto someone else?
Not Listening to Hear-say

United States

#12 Jan 17, 2008
Can you prove to me that that an Engineers study was not done at the time, when the standby fee was imposed?
You state that the 'old entities' didn't know what they were doing and that they imposed fees (that we have all accepted and lived by) and now that is not the case -- because you say so.
You want to refund past fees, that the current District, cannot afford. You will take away the volunteer fire departments, the parks, street lights, the pool and the golf course and double, or more, the current user fees just to make a point!
Yes, maybe you are right. All of this has been collected without warrent. But just tell me how you are going to make up the shortfall. Just tell me why I, as a home owner, all of a sudden have to pay twice as much to flush my toilet, because the 'entities' of the past didn't do things correctly? You may be right, but at whose expense?
Tell me why I have to pay for the Boards of the past.
You are not gaining any votes, for the next time around. I will still be here in two years, and you do not have any votes from this household. You really need to focus on what today's world wants and needs -- not what was done wrong in the past!
AKA SCSD Director Barrett

United States

#13 Jan 18, 2008
It's strange how you talke about focusing on "what todays world wants".

If "today" your share of flushing the toilet is $25 a month then why should someone else pay a portion of YOUR bill.

...and this will really cheer you up; When the Board moves to legally enact the sewer standby fee this time, the only people that get to vote on it are the vacant property owners that would actually have to pay it if it was imposed. Courtesy of Proposition 218 which I presume you voted for.

(Now its your turn to shoot the messenger to try to kill the message)
SCSD Meeting Attendee

AOL

#14 Jan 18, 2008
Friends don't allow friends to vote to re-elect Director Barrett!
AKA SCSD Director Barrett

United States

#15 Jan 18, 2008
FYI "SCSD Meeting Attendee" is actually Imari Love (Sheri Nguyen)- thus saith the reverse ISP lookup matrix.
Not Listening to Hear-say

United States

#16 Jan 18, 2008
It's $20 a month, not $25.
The idea of the $21 a year 'standby' fee is the eventual availability of a sewer system throughout the entire existing District. At this point in time the financial statements show that is still possible, even though 33% of that does go to support the General Fund involvements.
Let us not forget the loan on behalf of Desert Shores that still has some twenty-plus more years payments ahead.
I asked more than a few times ---- what alternatives are you offering? What better way do you have of doing things?
Part of an elected officials job is to offer new ideas. Not to the Board, but to the people who are watching all of this and trying to decide who is best qualified for the job.
Being a 'whistle blower' is not a bad thing; but maybe some solutions would be an even better thing!!
AKA SCSD Director Barrett

United States

#17 Jan 19, 2008
IF it actually only costs $20 to flush your toilet then why is it so important to have sewer standby fees subsidize the yearly expense of running the system?

You are right about the purpose of the standby fee; to have the system available to the vacant lot owners for when they are ready to build. However in actuality there IS NOT enough funds in the Districts possession at this time to fulfill this responsibility.

All the sewer standby fees collected so far should have been used to MAINTAIN the sewer system; that is what a standby fee is for, not to subsidize your sewer bill. There are three or more “wet wells” that are in dire need of replacement at a cost of almost $100,000 each. These are the types of capital costs that the standby fee was designed by the State Legislature to take care of. But if the District continues to spend all the standby fees on subsidizing your sewer bill then how can the system be maintained?

What possibly could be my motivation in offering the Board ways of raising additional capital (legally) when past practice PROVES that the Board IS NOT capable of properly (and legally) using the revenue that they currently collect?

By the time it is all said and done and the new Salton City sewer ponds are completed at a cost of $3,000,000, the sewer construction fund will have less than $1,000,000 left in it. Unfortunately there are still about 2000 lots that still need a sewer lateral ran by them; this will cost more than $1,000,000 ($500 a lot). And by law sewer standby fees CANNOT be used to extend service.

When the District signed a contract with the original sub-dividers/developers in the early 60’s the developers PAID $250 per lot for those sewer laterals AND treatment facilities.
Despite this the Board imposed a $1,000 a lot “capacity fee” back in 2005. I believe that this is also unauthorized under law; seems like a double tax to me.

Am I to turn my back on this also?

As far as me having solutions, I believe I have a few. However they may need some “polishing” based on additional review of legal statute and the willingness of the other Directors to start doing things legally.

There’s a saying that goes,“it costs what it costs”, and that is so true in our situation, but the costs have to be paid for legally and as morally fair as possible. We cannot continue as a society to constantly shift the burden of providing ourselves services at the expense of those that are not here yet.

On that vein of thought I must say Good Day so I can go to work to pay someone else’s Social Security Benefits…..

Get the point? Fair is Fair.

“I'm a Multifacted Personality ”

Since: Nov 07

West Shores of the Salton Sea

#18 Jan 19, 2008
AKA SCSD Director Barrett wrote:
FYI "SCSD Meeting Attendee" is actually Imari Love (Sheri Nguyen)- thus saith the reverse ISP lookup matrix.
No wrong as usual Director Barret, buy a vowel, get a clue...but stop trying to smear me with your feces.

You have been told by the SCSD Board of Directors and District Counsel to STOP using your title, but you still haven't listened. I guess you enjoy being censured.

I have stayed out of your "fray" until now. Take your poision, and infect your own web board, not this one. People tire of reading your rhetoric.

I
AKA SCSD Director Barrett

United States

#19 Jan 19, 2008
The Board of Directors has no say in what screen names I go by. There is not one person that reads this Blog that can honeslty claim that they believe that I am speaking for the Board when I post here under the name "AKA SCSD Director Barrett".

I have on tape the district lawyer saying this:

I just wanted to say, your right (Director Barrett), you do have the 1st amendment right to say whatever you want and use that title (SCSD Director Barrett). But what the Board is saying is that if you do exercise your 1st amendment right in that way you’re creating a situation where there could be potential liability for the District. And so they’re saying would you please not do that any longer. Yeah you can do it, but we’re saying please don’t do it because it could result in a lawsuit against the District, that's all.
Not Listening to Hear-say

United States

#20 Jan 19, 2008
Paying someone else's Social Security benefits! I understand completely.
On the point of using the standby fee to allow me to pay only $20 a month user fees is really not the point I was attempting to make.
The point was that, if the District repays all of those fees since 1979, we most certainly will then be paying something close to $50 a month to use the sewer, if the District can survive such a financial impact.
Besides, who gets paid back. The current property owner who purchased the property two years ago, not the person who paid those fees since 1979.
AND the people who have paid for the standby fee all of these years most certainly would have to pay for not only their actual sewer connection at the time but probably the running of the line to their property.
IID has done that all along. If the new resident requires electricty a half mile away from the last pole, they pay for that cost.
Currently the District runs the main sewer line to the property and only charges the same connection cost as the new resident building in a populated area.
Who wins here. YOU because your right, or the vacant property owner who will eventually build here?
I can afford $50 a month to flush my toilet because I have to. But what are you doing for future growth, if it costs some (let's say)$20,000 to run a sewer line to your property in addition to the connection charge?
IN ADDITION, I might add, of the rising costs that IID and CVWD have continously charged to new homebuilders simply because they decide to do so.
Keep in mind that CVWD has continuously charged a STANDBY fee also, but yet currently charges outragious fees for current connections!
I am all for doing things legally, but please, re-think what you are proposing,(and consider what the other utilities are doing).
No one seems to even question what they are doing.
There is nothing wrong with questioning. Just consider the end result.
Are you really improving a broken system, or are you breaking the current one??

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Salton City Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
looking for Slab City Love Wed Sick 1
The Legend Of Zelda (Aug '10) Jan 13 Brittney Ford 2
News Red Earth Casino Now Open In Salton Sea (Apr '07) Nov '17 Jim banks 62
Capt'n Jims bar open on Fridays at 6:00. Oct '17 kamperco 1
News Proposal would commit California to acting on s... Aug '17 Solarman 3
I want to buy cheap land near the salton sea (Nov '08) Jul '17 castilloviejo 35
What type of business are lacking in the Salton... (Sep '08) Jun '17 maryanorvell 26

Salton City Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Salton City Mortgages