HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01161996 - D6 1
D.6
THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Adopted this Order on January 16, 1996, by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Bishop, DeSaulnier, and Smith
NOES: None
ABSENT: Supervisor Torlakson
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: East Bay Municipal Utility District
On this date, the Board of Supervisors considered correspondence from John
Coleman, Director, Ward No. 2, of the East Bay Municipal Utility District.
Mr. Coleman's letter addressed the reduction of the four-tier rate structure and his
concerns regarding the structure, as well as the legality of the seismic surcharge and the
charge on the property tax bill.
The Board of Supervisors discussed these issues and ADVISED that a joint committee
was proposed, and these issues may be appropriate for that proposed committee.
Board Members being in agreement, IT IS SO ORDERED.
It ereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervis , on the date shown.
ATTESTED: u e.,.r-/% /?IF6
PHIL SATCMELOR,Clerl of the Board
of Supervisors and younty Administrator
Deputy
C.C. County Administrator
Growth Management and Economic Development Director
Community Development
Correspondent
U RECEIVED
' Sp EAST BAY =OF
`/3 MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
December 23, 1995 CLERK BOARD SUPERVISORS
CONTRA COSTA CO.
Gayle Bishop, Chair
Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa County
651 Pine Street, Room 106
Martinez, California 94553-1293
Dear Gayle:
Thank you for your December 8, 1995 letter addressed to President John M. Gioia regarding
.your concerns over the District's water rates and seismic improvement increases.
As you are aware, a decision was made at the December 12, 1995 Board Meeting to reduce the
four-tier rate structure to a lower level. As you know, I voted "no" to lower the rate because
the motion did not go far enough. A credit or rebate of already collected money for the $3.44
difference to $1.95 should have taken place. In addition, it was wrong to raise the third tier and
to penalize one customer class over another.
As to the seismic charge, I, too, share your concern about the legality of the charge and,
moreover, the amount of money that will be collected from east of the hills customers relative
to the much smaller amount of benefits that will accrue to us. For these reasons, I voted against
the seismic surcharge and the charge on the property tax bill.
However, since the Board approved this program and the funding mechanisms, the California
Supreme Court has entered a decision in Santa Clara County Local Transportation Authority v.
Guarding which, if it becomes final, would impose certain election requirements on local taxes
adopted by counties, cities, and districts throughout the state. Previous court decisions had held
that local taxes, such as the District's parcel tax, were not subject to election requirements. The
Guardino decision is not yet final, and a petition has been filed requesting that the Supreme
Court reconsider its ruling. Until a final decision is rendered, the status of the law affecting
local taxes is uncertain, and the Board of Directors on November 14, 1995 has authorized the
establishment of a restricted account to allow for impoundment of parcel tax revenues until such
time as the legal issues can be resolved.
I am positive that with your support, the Board will eventually adopt a rate structure that is fair
to all District customers.
If I can be of further assistance, I can be reached at 510/283-3676.
Sincerely,
John A. Coleman
Director, Ward No. 2
JAC:mp
375 ELEVENTH STREET. OAKLAND. CA 94607-4240. (570) 835-3000
BOARD OF DIRECTORS JOHN A.COLEMAN. KATY FOULKES. JOHN M.GIOIA
FRANK MELLON. NANCY J.NADEL. MARY SELKIRK. KENNETH H.SIMMONS
R.,dW Paper