HomeMy WebLinkAbout04. (Handout) Written Public Comment _Scott Rafferty (Handout)
Item 4.
From: Katie Youno
To: Roger Bailev; Kent Alm
Subject: FW:Threat of Litigation
Date: April 20,2023 11:34:45 AM
Board Members,
This was just received. I will be reading this during Public Comment Period today.
Thank you,
Katie Young,Secretary of the District
Central Contra Costa Sanitary District
5019 Imhoff Place,Martinez, CA 94553
Direct: (925) 229-7303
kyoung@centralsan.org
ENTIAL SAID
• F
From: Scott Rafferty<rafferty@gmail.com>
Sent:Thursday, April 20, 2023 11:28 AM
To: Kent Alm <kalm@centralsan.org>; Roger Bailey<rbailey@centralsan.org>; Katie Young
<KYoung@centralsan.org>
Subject:Threat of Litigation
Dear Mr. Alm:
I had hoped to speak with the General Manager before taking this step, but since he was
not available yesterday, I am notifying the district that I am conferring with prospective plaintiffs in
anticipation of litigation to address the district's violations of statutory duties related to the failure to
conduct and publish the cost-of-service study needed to support the rate changes agendized for
action this afternoon.0 If the Board proceeds to enact rates at today's special meeting, I will likely
submit demands to cure-and-correct the action on rates and to cease and desist from further
violations, in order to secure compliance with the Brown Act.
Central San defines the scope of the cost-of-service study to include both allocation of costs
to class and the subsequent design of rates. My request sought relevant documentation on each
topic relevant to the calculation of the proposed rate change. The disclosure that the cost-of-service
study"does not exist" indicates obvious non-compliance with Article XIIID, §6(d), Government Code,
§54999.7(c), 53756(a), 53758(c) and Board Policy 30.
Central San must assess the need for a new cost-of-service study prior to each proposed rate
change. A cost-of-service study was conducted in 2014 but was not provided in response to my
Brown Act request. On January 15, 2019, manager Gammell disclosed that there was "no
documentation for existing cost of service" and provided an "update"to the board, without
producing a new study. She also disclosed that regulatory costs in the capital improvement
projection would almost triple (from approximately$20m to $60m) between this year and next year,
and double again over the following three fiscal years, until they constitute more than 2/3 of all
capital improvement costs. The public deserves an explanation of this development. She also
discussed other substantial changes, including a tripling of high-school capitation rates "based on
[21
industry standard." She projected a substantial increase in the share of revenues recovered from
multi-family units with almost no change to non-residential. On August 6, 2019, the Board
instructed that "the policy language should specify that an appropriate level of cost-of-service study
be conducted any time rates are considered." Later that year, the district revised BP 030 "generally"
to require cost-of-service studies to be conducted every five years, and providing an administrative
procedure to determine, prior to each rate change, whether an update was necessary.0
A presentation made to a board workshop in January referred to a "January 2022 cost of
service study." Today's agenda refers to a cost-of-service study begun in October 2022, which
appears to provide analyses (not included in the 2015 study) as the basis for today's action. None of
these documents have been made available. To the extent that documents are exempt from
disclosure under the public records act as drafts,they cannot satisfy the requirements of§53758(c).
I request all documents received by a majority of the Board relevant to Agenda item 4, including
those relating to cost of service and rate design.See Government Act, §54957.5.
For many years, I have been proud and supportive of Central San. The failure to prepare
documentation to explain, support, and justify the impending rate increase betrays the trust and
confidence that the district's ratepayers have placed in the Board.
Sincerely,
Scott J. Rafferty
L11 This is compounded by violations of the Brown Act,which required that documents whose location is known and
that are not in use be made available as soon as possible,and that the known non-existence of documents be
promptly disclosed. On the evening of April 6, 2023,the district secretary assured me that the information would
be provided "shortly." To the extent that the delay in responding to my request of April 6,2023 reflects a ten-day
statutory period, please note that this relates only to copying.
The requirement in Government Code,§54999.7(e)to provide certain information to municipalities does not
preempt the rights of individuals under the Brown Act.
L21 Another issue that I expected a new cost-of-service study to address is compliance with AB 1826,
which requires 75% reduction of organic wastes by 2025.
L319/5/19 meeting, item 10.
Scott Rafferty
1913 Whitecliff Ct
Walnut Creek CA 94596
mobile 202-380-5525