NCSD Undeveloped 35 percent of Vote vs. 25 percent of Cost


Letter to the Editor

Water project too expensive
To the Editor:

The Nipomo Community Services District has set up the assessment district vote to force the supplemental water project
down the throats of the community of Nipomo.
Because of the weighted dollar value of the undeveloped properties assigned by the NCSD, it will take everyone voting to
turn this project down.
Due to the way the NCSD set up the assessment district vote, it is so the undeveloped parcels have a higher dollar value
attached to their assessment vote than the developed parcels do. This means existing homes and businesses — developed
properties — do not have the same dollar value in their vote. They have a lesser dollar value in their vote than the
undeveloped properties do.
There are a lot of undeveloped properties here in Nipomo.
In this election, the side with the highest dollar amount or $1 over the other side wins the election.
This is nothing more than a rigged election. This is for the developers who want to build here in Nipomo, and the NCSD
is going along with it.
The NCSD has not been responsive to the community questions. Officials would not debate the supplemental water
project issues in any way shape or form, with anyone. They are following the advice of the public relations firm of True
North, with help from the Wallace Group.
We were told that this project was mandatory. None of the Santa Clara court’s records or the final stipulation make it
mandatory.
This project is too expensive and not affordable for this small community of Nipomo.


Vincent McCarthy
Nipomo

What causes the difference in the percent vote?

NCSD's "share" of the project after the costs covered by the grant is $6,000,000 plus $8,481,892 plus $4,704,422 = $19,967,602.

Of that developed parcels share of the cost is $13,314,397.

Of that NCSD has decided that rather then returning reserves it would take the reserves and connection fees for a total of $6,000,000 collected from existing development and apply it directly to the project.

The vote is based on the dollar value such that the decision to apply the $6,000,000 rather then return it deprives the current customers ability to vote on those dollars.

So the "developed parcel Benefit Units" share 75% of the cost and share 65% of the vote:

Calculations of

the NCSD area's __"developed parcel Benefit Units" share 75% of the cost and share 65% of the vote:the NCSD area's "undeveloped parcel Benefit Units" share 25% of the cost and share 35% of the vote:

 

The spreadsheet calculations

The results for NCSD area's "undeveloped parcel benefit units":

Total Undeveloped Benefit Units (BU's) = 35.68% of NCSD area's vote
Total Undeveloped Benefit Units (BU's) = 24.52% of NCSD area's costs

Copy of chart in a PDF file:

The Chart:

NCSD assessement percent vote vs precent cost

 

The picture overall:

Over all the undeveloped parcels BU's and cost can not be calculated because NCSD refused two times to elease the complete list of parcel information they have such as: acres, development, assessment categories and BU's etc.

But for an estimate if you take NCSD undeveloped benefit units and a few of the large Woodlands landowner and do not include GSWC and RWC’s undeveloped parcels you get

Undeveloped parcel’s share of cost is about 27.0%
Undeveloped parcel’s share of vote is about 34.6%

 

 

 

 

 

3/14/12 Board meeting with agenda and board packets E-1, E-2 and E-3

 

3/14/12 Board meeting agenda

E-1) consideration of benefit assignment changes requested by property owners for proposed supplemental water project assessment district [recommend review and approve proposed changes]

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-1

E-2) consideration of the following resolutions related to the to the formation of assessment district no. 2012-1 (supplemental water project). [recommendation adopt the the following resolutions]

A) a resolution of the board of directors of the Nipomo community services district declaring its intention to order improvements for proposed assessment district no. 2012-1 (supplemental water project) pursuant to the municipal improvement act of 1913 and in accordance with article XIIID of the California constitution, and taking certain other actions in connection therewith


B) a resolution of the board of directors of the Nipomo community services district preliminarily approving the engineer's report in connection with proposed assessment district no. 2012-1 (supplemental water project) and setting a time and place for hearing protests pursuant to the municipal improvement act of 1913 and in accordance with article XIIID of the California Constitution

C) a resolution of the Nipomo community services district adopting procedures applicable to the completion, return and tabulation of assessment ballots for the Nipomo community services district assessment district no. 2012-1 (supplemental water project)

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2

 

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 All Assessment Report

 

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 All Assessment Rolls

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 NCSD Assessment Roll

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 GSWC Assessment Roll

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 RWC Assessment Roll

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 WMWC Assessment Roll

 

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 All Assessment Maps

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 NCSD Assessment Map

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 GSWC Assessment Map

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 RWC Assessment Map

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-2 WMWC Assessment Map

 

E-3) review form of notice of public hearing and proposed assessment and form of ballot related to proposed assessment district 2012-1 [recommend review]

3/14/12 Board meeting packet E-3

 

 

 

 

2/29/12 Board meeting audio 162mb