News, nature, and community throughout the Emerald Triangle
Might need to cut those showers short… [Stock photo]Garberville Sanitary District (GSD) customers will see a rise in their utility bill starting in July. The GSD board voted unanimously to impose the scheduled rate increase adopted in 2020 and accepted the proposed budget presented by GSD Consultant, Jennie Short.
Might need to cut those showers short… [Stock photo]
GSD billing charges a base rate to have water and sewer connections. Additional charges are added for use of those utilities based on water and sewage usage. Water usage is broken up in three tiers based on the number of units used. One unit is equal to 748 gallons of water. Unit rates increase in each tier, charging more per unit of water for those with higher water usage amounts.
There is also a base rate surcharge for Upper Zone customers in the Meadows subdivision, plus a dollar per unit surcharge added to the tiered rate.
Sewage rates are measured by water consumption per month.
The base rate for water and sewage service will rise by $8 per month, a 6.95% increase. The biggest hit will come in the tiered rates, with the minimum water tier seeing a 42.85% increase in per unit rate in tier 1, a 20% increase in tier 2, and a 9% increase for tier 3. Sewage rates per unit will increase by 33%.
According to an internet search, the average family of 4 uses of 12k gallons of water use per month, just over 16 units. However, GSD Administrative Secretary, Mary Nieto said that the average GSD household uses approximately 8 units per month.
Currently, an average GSD household using 8 units per month is charged $153 monthly for water and sewage. That rate will rise to $175 a month starting in July. For upland area customers with the same usage, their current bill is roughly $170.50 monthly and will increase to $194 a month in July.
An average usage of 16 units per month would run a GSD customer $207 monthly at the current rates, with an increase to $243 a month after July. Upland customers with 16 units of usage are currently paying $232.50 a month but that will rise to $270 a month with the rate hike.
Although some board members vocalized their reluctance to raise rates, they expressed that it was a necessary move to keep pace with the rising costs of operation.
“We looked at a lot of ways to make this less painful but the final operating cash flow for most years has been negative. I think we need to move the rates up and get out of that habit,” stated board member Dan Thomas.
Short presented the board with a slide show of the current budget compared to the actual year-to-date (YTD) revenue and expenses, as well as projected costs for the district for 22/23. The district has a $700K reserve fund and that remains intact for the time being, though according to Short, without the rate increases to off-set the rising costs of operations, the district may not have enough revenue to leave the reserve fund untapped.
Short cited increased costs of fuels and insurances as the primary reason for inflated operations costs, adding $64,675.00 to the 22/23 budget. She also noted a rise in payroll expenses of $16,518.58. Short also stated that required insurance premiums increased $5,010 over the 21/22 costs. The recently purchased vac-trailer added to the annual loan costs $18,582.05. With the rate increases, Short estimated the district will see an increase of $118,335 in annual revenue.
In total, the district has a net cash of $874,994.26 per Jennie Short’s report, increasing the district’s savings by over $60K for the fiscal YTD.
Whether due to the drought or the increased water rates from 2021, the district’s residential customers used less water than projected, resulting in $49K less in expected revenue. Revenue from commercial customers within the district, however, is predicted to exceed the budgeted amount for the 21/22 by $31K, with an additional surplus of $11K in late fees predicted by fiscal year end. Essentially, the residential customers are using less water therefore, the district is not receiving the predicted amount of revenue but is almost making up for it in commercial use and late fees.
Other substantial deviations from the 21/22 budget came from payroll with sewage collection wages projected to be $27,564.36 over the budgeted amount, in large part due to overtime costs associated with manually operating the Sunny Bank pump station while repairs were being made.
The projected net income for the 21/22 year is $17,478.53 over the budgeted amount. However, Short warned the board that without the rate increase, the surplus will be disappear, leaving the district in danger of dipping into the $700K reserve fund. Short predicts that due to the nature of the grant funding that will cover the costs of the three tank replacements in the district, the district will need to use part of the reserve fund to pay for the replacement before the grants will reimburse the district, replenishing the reserve fund.
Of note, in January, Short advised the board that the district had a projected surplus of $40K, potentially allowing them to make additional purchases. Ralph Emerson, GSD General Manager, shared an equipment/project wish list. Purchasing a used vac-trailer was of high priority for Emerson and staff. The equipment is used to suction water and mud from dig sites as crew work to fix the district’s aging infrastructure. At the time, the district was paying contractors to rent and operate vac-trailers for specific projects, though operator Danny Arreguin said that if the district had the equipment, it would be utilized more often.
At that meeting, Emerson reported that a used vac-trailer would cost between $8-$15K. The board agreed that Emerson should look into the purchase of the equipment. In the beginning of May, the board held a special meeting to approve the purchase of the vac-trailer. Emerson stated that the equipment was hard to find and used units were much more than he had projected. He requested the board approve the purchase of the new $74K vac-trailer, the board obliged unanimously.
Although the equipment is financed and touted as a financially beneficial investment, no reports were presented to show the cost of renting vs. purchasing the equipment, nor the life-expectancy of the vac-trailer.
Emerson has discussed renting the new equipment out to other local districts, a move that could off-set the cost of the vac-trailer. In May, Emerson discussed renting the vac-trailer to the Miranda Community Services District and mention renting the equipment to the Redway Community Services District (RCSD) in the General Manager’s report to the board on May 25th.
Emerson wrote that he was in talks with the RCSD Manager, Codi Cox, about the possibility of renting the newly purchased vac-trailer and hydro jetter. Additionally, the two discussed RCSD providing the GSD with a place to “dump the trailer when needed”. Emerson will explore costs and equipment wear as he continues to discuss a mutually beneficial arrangement with the neighboring district.
Twenty days after approving the large purchase, the board unanimously voted to raise rates.
“It’s really hard to have to do it. It’s the worst to have to make this decision but we have not raised rates, we can’t keep operating the way we’re operating with the projects we have going on. We have to look to the bigger picture, …everything has gone up …and unfortunately this has to go up as well,” said Julie Lyon, GSD Board Member.
“What hasn’t had to go up during these times? I’m so very sorry it has to happen,” Lyon said.
Emerson acknowledged the financial hardship experienced by many GSD customers and said that he, Short and Administrative Secretary, Mary Nieto, have been looking at financial assistance options for GSD customers. Previously, the district had applied for an arrearage program to help customers affected by the COVID pandemic pay past due water and sewage debt. In addition to state programs, Emerson said that there are some in-house options for GSD customers that qualify by age or income.
In the General Manger’s report, Emerson wrote, “Customers are struggling with prices rising in all areas of our life and it is certainly seen with water and sewer service, which is why we are working hard to find assistance programs which will help our customers.”
Neither Emerson nor any of the staff are customers of the GSD. Although all the board members live in the GSD boundaries, only Lyon and Thomas are customers of the GSD, therefore affected by the district’s rate increase.
Meter Refund for Connick Creek Resident
Connick Creek resident, Peter Connolly requested a refund of $8K for a secondary meter which he had paid to be installed but it never was. In addition, he asked for relief on a February bill for over $1000 worth of water he says he did not use.
Connolly’s property is one of the Connick Creek properties outside the district’s boundaries served by a master meter that connects to the subdivision’s water lines. When division of the water used between Connick Creek residents became an issue, the GSD installed one water meter per parcel without charge. Connolly said he did not receive a meter at that time, instead choosing to use his property’s spring water for his residence and agriculture needs.
In 2020, Connolly decided to have GSD water service to his residence in addition to a second agriculture meter. A meter was installed without charge for his residence. Connolly stated that he had paid the installation cost for a second meter, but it had not been installed yet, ten months after the payment had been made. In the meantime, he has decided to forego the residential meter, instead, designating the single GSD water connection to his property as an agriculture meter and reverting back to spring water use for his residence.
As this would mean that an additional meter would not be installed, Connolly requested the district refund the $8K he had previously paid for the second meter.
In addition, Connolly said in December he personally turned the GSD service off to his property due to a possible leak, choosing to go back to using his spring water for his residence. In February, Connolly received a bill for just over $1000 for 100 units of water, water he said he did not use as the water remained turned off to his property. “I know I didn’t use it,” he stated.
GSD employees tested the meter and said that it was functioning correctly.
Doug Bryan, GSD Chairperson stated that the meter is the only measurement tool the district has to account for water usage. Given the employees confirmed that the meter was functioning properly, he believed that Connolly should be held financially liable for the units of water measured by the meter to his property.
The bill was then reduced to a commercial rate, as technically, the meter was considered an agriculture meter. The commercial rate lowered the bill amount by over half. Connolly seemed content with the outcome.
The petition to provide potable water to the Southern Humboldt Community Park (SHCP) is moving forward.
Short reported the proposed order would likely be adopted in June, allowing the GSD to provide potable water service to the SHCP.
The proposed order prepared by the Administrative Hearings Office (AHO) for the State Water Resource Control Board (SWRCB) would cap the water usage of the SHCP to 3K cubic feet per month, not exceeding 26 cubic feet per year, equal to 194,494 gallons.
According to the order, Short had requested that the limits set forth by the GSD not be included as a condition of the permit. However, the SWRCB disagreed, writing, “Without these limits, the district’s 12-month deliveries to the park could be as high as 679,828 gallons, the park’s total estimated annual demand stated in the 2019 CEQA Addendum.” The limits will remain.
The proposed water usage at the park at this time is to provide potable water to the two residences and to install water fountains although in which order or timeframe they choose to install their plumbing infrastructure is up to the park.
According to the proposed order, Redway Community Services District (RCSD) expressed concern that the issuance of a potable water to the park would possibly affect the RCSD’s ability to divert water for their district. The AHO found that to not be an issue relating that the 26 cubic feet of potable water allotted would not significantly affect any downstream water users.
The park, if the permit is approved, will be limited to use GSD water within the 18 acres of the park considered within the GSD place of use.
-Emerson reported that the late spring rains have resulted in higher water flows in the South Fork of the Eel River than last year. However, historically speaking, the Eel was below the median flow rate at the time of the board meeting.
-Short reported to the board the current water usage plus any projected water usage both from proposed development and possible development. Taken those into account, Short told the board that the district has 9,640,473 gallons available of the 80 million gallons of the district’s water diversion allotment, leaving a 5 million gallons of water as a buffer.
-Emerson told the board that “there is somebody either stalking me or obsessed with my activities”. The GSD General manager said he received what he described as a harassing email shortly after participating in a hospital fundraiser. Emerson stated the email said he should not attend events like the hospital fundraiser. He did not elaborate further on the contents of the email or if he knew who the author of the email was.
Emerson stated he isn’t concerned about the harassing email, however, he said, “It shows the type of people that are in the community.”
The next GSD board meeting is scheduled for June 28th at 5 p.m. at 919 Redwood Dr., Garberville. (The south end of Ray’s Market parking lot.)
Earlier: Garberville Sanitary District Reviews Drought Plans, Service Agreements & Emergency Preparedness
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.
NOTE: This author is a rate paying customer of the GSD.
Join the discussion! For rules visit: https://kymkemp.com/commenting-rules
Comments system how-to: https://wpdiscuz.com/community/postid/10599/
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Ouch. I don’t know anything about the GSD but I do know that the cost of everything is going up and up, for entities like GSD.
But it still feels like a death from a thousand cuts for the customers.
The only cost going up, up, up for GSD are employee salaries and benefits. GSD is a public agency and should start conforming to their mandate, not just doing what ever they want to do or spending public funding on new service trucks, equipment, overtime, personal assistant and consultant. Paid for all on the backs of GSD ratepayers while at the same time jacking up water and sewer rates to pay for everything they do not need! GSD can do all this, because they know their ratepayers will not attend Board meeting and question what they are doing.
I do want to thank RHBB & Lisa Music for covering these GSD Board meetings, it does make a difference!
So the lowest tier gets the biggest rate hike? That’s a big incentive to save water.
That is one unhappy cat… About as unhappy as GSD customers.
It’s pretty ridiculous that even if they shut ur water off you still get charged monthly. Years ago I was having a really hard time keeping up, they shut my water off, yet my bill kept getting higher. They charge almost $80 a month for the “ability to get water” or some crap. Took me a year to finally catch up.
Can’t afford to drive anywhere, can’t afford to buy anything, now some can’t afford to flush the toilet or take a shower.
We’re heading back to the days of horses, outhouses, and raising crops to feed your kids.
Good luck with that. They have at least five empire agencies to regulate your plan.
Only if you pay top dolla to water the crops, unfortunately .
In Garberville, they will be happy to appoint “Boards” to raise costs… As far as the cost of water in the greater Garberville Area, about the only way to stop this, is to move away, which many have already done. Your water cost is determined by: “how many plants”. Marijuana controls everything in SoHum, and if you have something there, you are just temporary… The stewards of Garberville, should make it so expensive to live there, that nobody but the rich can afford to stay. That’s how Trump made his money, by charging high prices in lean times and certain locations, using his daddies’s money and influences from Organized Crime. Garberville is a good place to avoid, unless you need some drugs. Or you need your “scissor injury” stitched up…
So since the customers did their part and conserved water last year, they are now being punished because it brought in less revenue? That’s totally F’ed up!
“ We looked at a lot of ways to make this less painful but the final operating cash flow for most years has been negative.” … was one of the ways considered was to have the GSD take a pay cut?
… to have the GSD board take a pay cut?
Board members of the Garberville Sanitary District don’t receive pay. https://publicpay.ca.gov/Reports/SpecialDistricts/SpecialDistrict.aspx?entityid=1980&year=2020
So I take that as a ‘No, they haven’t considered it’? 🤷♂️
Hi Kym, here is the last 5 year contract for Ralph Emerson as GM for GSD from June 2020:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ZRozCIettOMyhvTBKEAxeneKAoI0pXxz/view?usp=sharing
We have no idea how much Jennie Short is paid per year, she is a independent outside contract consultant for GSD, not an employee for the District. She is paid $75 an hour, here is her last billing invoice to GSD included in the May 24, 2022 BOD agenda, page 66, it seems to be her average monthly income:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NP83TD4iZAWEP8rr0S7QZCx0RM5LBRIc/view?usp=sharing
And according to GSD financial records from the May 24, 2022 Board meeting agenda, Check Register Report for March 2022, GSD Board members are paid on a monthly basis, i.e. for March 2022, Daniel Thomas-$100, Doug Bryan-$150, Julie Lyon-$150 and Rio Anderson-$100. That = between $1,200 to $1,800 per year per Board member. That’s $6000.00 per year total, the GSD ratepayers are paying for.
If I was a GSD ratepayer, I would question why GSD is paying Jennie Short $75 an hour to perform day to day and month to month duties that the GSD GM or Administrative Secretary/Office MGR could do and already being paid to do. Why is GSD outsourcing these services at between $90K to $100k per year to someone who lives outside the GSD District Boundary and according to this report, “Neither Emerson nor any of the staff are customers of the GSD. Although all the board members live in the GSD boundaries, only Lyon and Thomas are customers of the GSD, therefore affected by the district’s rate increase.”
Ask GSD how much they paid out to Jennie Short to work on the Park Boards request to get a water service connection, it was a $5,000 and GSD gave the Park Board a $8,000 new water service connection fee at no charge. So a total of $13,000 paid for by the GSD ratepayers, not the property owner.
Here is the last Contract Agreement (2021) between Jennie Short dba ‘4Js Consulting Service’ and GSD:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1bGO4qDDb2sZDe6uaLb7PT9BibtnM0VGx/view?usp=sharing
As water gets increasingly difficult to acquire get ready for many more dramatic price increases. This may be the year the Eel River goes dry…..
It went dry last year,(South Fork),at Dyerville, for the first time.
I was the first to document it…
The main stem went dry in a previous year, near Fortuna…
$2000 a year for basic water/sewer connect? Wow garberville . One more reason to move.
At least they haven’t figured out a way to charge us for the air we breathe…
Soon they will charge us for it, but only after we breathe it out, a general carbon tax for all CA residents.
$175 for a necessity of life!? Garberville GSD Ralph Emerson and every board member should be publicly shamed. They make very poor decisions. From May 2016, here on rhbb: From the letter the auditor wrote, that got Tina Stillwell fired: “One of the costs of the GSD delivering water include the three year phase-in of a $3,500.00 per month raise for the General Manager [$3500 a month PLUS what he was already getting!] beginning with his new contract in August of 2016. According to the annual auditor’s report on pages 54 through 56, which is included in the January 2017 board packet, is a draft letter to the GSD board from the auditor. The letter lists seven “material weaknesses” for the Board to consider. The seventh weakness the letter lists is “outside employment.’ The auditor’s letter says “…we discovered the General Manager holds several postions at three other districts. Since this District employs him full time, there should be some accountability for the time he spends at his outside employment.” Another concern raised was “[d]uring the audit we noticed that the District’s credit was used to purchase a tool for another district. Although this tool was replaced, it is a major internal control concern.”
Ralph needs a pay cut. He’s stealing his paycheck by working for 3 other districts on GSD time [and nothing has changed about that. Mary won’t talk back to him or tell the auditor] and yet he was signing checks illegally PLUS using the company card to cover benbow water district tools. It only got replaced bc Tina called him out on it.
In the meantime, this is a district that has almost no reserve. They’re charging customers a kings ransom every month for a life necessity and they have almost no reserve for emergencies. That’s why every repair comes with a boil water notice for several months. They have to go in the back and sweep the pennies off the floor to get the new parts.
And furthermore it’s a bunch of racist sexism over there. Not only did they fire the Indian secretary and replace her with a cute young, white girl, but then Jenny short does all the actual work that should be on Ralph’s desk. You read these reports and Ralph’s answers are loops of nonsense that all end with “I’ll ask Jenny and get back to you.” Why doesn’t gsd save 60Gs by firing Ralph and keeping Jenny. Since they already pay her. It says in there when the board was asked how they were going to pay this extra $45,000 a year, Broderson said “by raising rates to start with.” Plus they fired Tina and the long time operator within the next few months.
-Emerson told the board that “there is somebody either stalking me or obsessed with my activities”. The GSD General manager said he received what he described as a harassing email shortly after participating in a hospital fundraiser. Emerson stated the email said he should not attend events like the hospital fundraiser. He did not elaborate further on the contents of the email or if he knew who the author of the email was. Emerson stated he isn’t concerned about the harassing email, however, he said, “It shows the type of people that are in the community.”
First off, without showing any kind of proof this happened, why bring it up? Is Emerson just making it up, so people will feel sorry for him? And what did he mean by “type of people”? And I agree with what this mystery emailer stated, if true. Emerson should not wine & dine or rub elbows with the Hospital Board and Foundation, its a major conflict of interest, since you need to go thru Emerson to get that 5 million gallons of water a year from GSD for the new hospital, let alone the millions more the Hospital Districts plans for building 2 new apartment complex’s and converting the old hospital into a SNIF. The Hospital District needs to keep Emerson fat, happy and in their pocket with all that future water and waste water services the Hospital District wants!
Get immediate notification in your email inbox for latest articles on Redheaded Blackbelt!
We don’t spam! Read our privacy policy for more info.
Check your inbox or spam folder for an email confirming your subscription.