Graton sewer district operations questioned

Where the opposite of too big to fail might be “too little to
succeed” you might find the Graton Community Service District,
based on findings and recommendations released last week by the
2009-2010 Sonoma County Grand Jury.
The small sewer system with 652 users continues to face mounting
operation and engineering expenses and a challenging task to
convert to tertiary treatment standards at a possible cost of $7
million, according to the report.
A 5 percent rate increase was approved in May, raising the
annual single dwelling fee to $1,428. That’s a 73 percent increase
over rates ($826) imposed when the district was formed in 2004.
Spurred by “several complaints about increases” the Grand Jury
conducted a nearly year-long investigation finding major consulting
engineering costs, lack of outside peer review of management
practices and doubts about the district’s “economic
feasibility.”
In a final recommendation in its published report, the Grand
Jury said “serious consideration should be given to a joint venture
with the Forestville Water District.”
“In all probability, if the consolidation of smaller districts
and zones had been implemented, GCSD rates would not have increased
over $500 in five years,” the report concluded.
From its very inception, the Graton community has prided itself
on its independent and innovative sewer system where “zero
discharge” was once sought by irrigating a large stand of planted
redwoods, among other “sustainable technology” practices.
The GCSD was formed in December 2003 by an election of voters
who largely opposed a Sonoma County Water Agency plan to connect a
series of small treatment plants throughout western Sonoma County
to a new facility in Guerneville.
Since then, the GCSD has been seeking to become the “little
engine that could,” pursuing its own grants, consulting engineer
agreements and homegrown management team.
The GCSD is led by an elected 5-member board and employs a
manager, plant operator, two assistants and a bookkeeper. The
district’s annual operating budget is just under $3 million.
The Grand Jury commended the district for its “continuing
efforts to develop environmentally friendly wastewater treatment
and disposal solutions.”
District representatives, interviewed by the Grand Jury,
complained about “mistakes” by other agencies and a general lack of
cooperation by other agencies and regulators for some of the
current fiscal troubles.
The North Coast Regional Water Quality Control Board issued a
“cease and desist” order to the district last year, ordering the
district to meet tertiary treatment standards by October 2010 at
the estimated costs of $7 million.
The order was issued, in part’s because the NCRWQCB found the
redwood tree irrigation project insufficient.
The Grand Jury faulted the district for a lack of alternative
plans and said “too much emphasis” has been placed on
“experimenting with unconventional filtration means.”
The jury also recommended the district hire a full-time licensed
sanitation plant manager instead of the part-time consulting
general manager now employed.
Bob Rawson is the consulting manager. He also owns Industrial
Wastewater Solutions and was a previous employee of both the Sonoma
County Water Agency and the Sonoma County Public Works Department,
the two previous operators of the small treatment system located
north of Graton near Atascadero Creek.
Finally, the Grand Jury called for the GCSD to “periodically
review their rate structure, preferably at an open forum, to ensure
that fees charged to users are realistic and meet the goals set
during the LAFCO investigation prior to the formation of the
GCSD.”
An official written response is required from the GCSD board in
reply to the Grand Jury findings.