📋
Extracted from Consolidated Report
This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.
Trinity County Grand Jury
• 1998-1999
Trinity County Waterworks District #1: Hayfork Sewer Project Complaint
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings 3 findings
F1
Page 10
It appears that good faith efforts were made to commu- nicate the project need, costs, sources, etc., to the im- pacted property owners through special and regular meet- ings of the Water District Board and written communi- cations from the Water District Executive Director to impacted owners.
F2
Page 10
The Water District contracted with the Trinity County Planning Department to perform a review of potential environmental impacts. Planning Department staff de- termined that there would not be any significant disrup- tion to the environment and a Negative Declaration was filed. It appears the Negative Declaration was appropri- ate.
F3
Page 10
There was a difference in the number of Effective Dwell- ing Units (EDU’s) projected in the Feasibility Study and the actual number of ballots cast. This was due to the necessity to negotiate with school districts and others on the number of EDU’s assigned to them. The negotia- tions are a requirement, not an option. According to Water District officials, this will not change the assess- ment amount contained in the Feasibility Study. It will remain at $13.52 per EDU. However, due to limited grant money to assist lower income owners, some will have to bear the cost of fill- ing their septic tanks and the cost of pumping sewage to the sewer connection. The Water District has discussed this with several local-lending institutions who, accord- ing to the Water District, will be willing to loan the needed funds without requiring collateral.
Recommendations 1
-
R3Page 10The Grand Jury would hope that the Water District make every effort to keep the assessment at the projected level as a means of keeping faith with those who cast supportive ballots for the project based on that assess- ment. The Grand Jury would recommend that the Water Dis- trict attempt to obtain additional grant money targeted to lower income persons, such as additional CDBG funds, to assist in septic tank and pumping issues. CONCLUSION: Officials have a serious obligation to provide citizens with as much information as needed to make informed decisions about projects the size of the Hayfork sewer system. It appears that Water District Officials and oth- ers took many steps to ensure that affected property owners knew what was taking place. This effort seems sufficient in our opinion although there may still be some citizens dissatisfied. 30-DAY RESPONSE REQUESTED: None Response of the Board of Supervisors May 4, 1999 Jerry Boosinger Trinity County Grand Jury P.O. Box 1258 Weaverville, CA 96093 RE: Finance and Administration Committee Complaint on Hayfork Sewer Project - Trinity County Waterworks District #1 Dear Foreperson: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Grand Jury Finance and Administration Committee’s report on the Hayfork Sewer Project complaint. The Board of Supervisors agrees with the findings and recommendations of the report. The Board agrees that the economic development in Trinity County will be enhanced by infrastructure im- provements and that those improvements should be made with ample involvement of the public. The Board of Supervisors thanks the Grand Jury for its time and efforts in preparing this report. Sincerely, TRINITY COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Robert Reiss, Chairman