— from Lesley Liddle —
I have been carefully considering the letter of initiative that many of us recently received after September 18, 2014 from the EWUA manager Paul Kamin. I wish to protest the sudden enactment of this hitherto unknown initiative.
Members with a “guest” house, whether large or small, built after 1970, are to be charged $3000 for a second “half meter” for that guest house if signed up before Dec 31st, and thereafter this new half meter is to cost $6000, plus an extra monthly fee of around $22/monthly or $66 added on top of the present lowest level 3 month billing of $135. These new surcharges are for any size “guest” house existing on the property after 1970.
Going forward those in the lowest usage category with a guest house could therefore expect a $200 bill every 3 months for water regardless of how large or small the guest house or the primary home is, or how much water has ever been used by that tax parcel. In addition to this for the next 3 years another $250 is proposed to be added to these quarterly bills as payment for this new half meter.
Members who are small water users could be seeing an amazing water bill for $450 every three months for the next three years if this initiative is enacted. “Guest house” is defined as any liveable space which has a bathroom and cooking facilities, regardless of the size of the main house or the guest house. Once again that overall water comsumption does not honestly appear to be the issue addressed at any point here, and a guest house includes any size trailer, or anything else with a toilet and cooking facility which is on one’s property whether or not it is hooked up, and which another person could potentially live inside whether or not there is anyone actually doing this.
Paying just for water and this new half meter comes to a whooping $1800 bill each of the next 3 years and to $800 per year thereafter. The EWUA says it will begin a search to collect from all those who think they can avoid signing up – and this is retroactive so everyone with a 1971 or newer guest house will be paying at least a $3000 new 1/2 membership. Those who do not come forward will be found and penalized with double that fee… They also claim that one must either make this massive payment in 1 lump sum or spread it over the next 3 years. This will likely pose an insurmountable hardship for a number of folks who are living sustainably and who suddenly have to come up with extra money which they do not have.
Such a letter is disturbing coming from our water association. Many long term islanders have lived for decades in very small homes with equally small guest houses on a single tax parcel, and continue to use very little water, while large houses with many people and huge water needs have been built and will still be allowed to have one meter. How is that fair? The original EWUA one meter fee structure was considered adequate to measure all water usage per residential tax parcel. That makes sense and it is fair. Levying extra membership fees on small homes and low water users is not only unfair but makes life difficult for those who were connected legally decades ago post 1970 but who have always been conscientiously conservative with all their utilities.
The only “grandfathering” allowed in this initiative is for those guest houses built before 1970. Who decided on this particular grandfathered date and why? When was this initiative itself concocted? In thirty eight years of living here this is the first time I have heard about this initiative.
My protest over this initiative is about reasonable and fair water fees for everyone. My own Buckhorn tax parcel is probably “Grandfathered” in as it is part of the original Buckhorn Lodge Resort, which was alive and well in the 1920s. The resort included 34 small cabins surrounding the old Lodge. When the resort was eventually sold and subdivided, two elderly summer cabins in serious decrepitude still existed on each of four residential tax parcels next to the lodge. These sat for a while getting moldy and then were purchased by four of us back in 1977.
One meter came with each tax parcel. My best cabin had young trees growing out of the roof. When it was barely liveable, I cleaned up and then erected a tiny art studio over the foundation of what had been my second cabin, and I have had an art studio there ever since. In 1990 I was able to improve and reconstruct this building, adding a guest apartment of just 400 sq feet on a second floor. This was in order to accommodate my elderly parents toward the end of their lives.
Two small houses with bathrooms have existed on my property for nearly one hundred years. This fact was certainly known when the original single meter was installed on each of our Buckhorn Lodge properties. We have each chosen to rebuild, remodel and restore our small cabins over these many years. With from one to three people living on my property at any time during thirty-eight years of my EWUA membership, my overall water usage has been and stays within the lowest usage category. As a low water user, Grandfathered or not, I do not need or want an extra half meter. Of this I am certain.
Enacting this unfortunate initiative retroactively is a poor idea, arbitrary and punishing. It should be repealed, re-examined or at the very least intelligently revised. This initiative proposes to suddenly levy heavy fees on some of the most conservative water users on the island, also probably some of the oldest residents as well, and that is simply unfair and unreasonable. Fees should be based on the amount of water used, and one meter can measure that on each residential tax parcel.
In conclusion, this initiative put into retroactive effect by EWUA management truly has nothing to do with how much water a single residential property is using. Instead the thinking is focused on how many houses we have which in fact tells us nothing about our water usage. Tiny guest houses make affordable housing for many and are conservative by nature. When they are not obviously out of line with land use they should be encouraged – especially at this time when there are many people without housing options on the island.
One meter can monitor all water consumption per residential tax parcel and that is stated clearly in the original EWUA documents. One meter is enough. Beyond the property line all plumbing is paid for by private property owners themselves. The EWUA is neither the Planning department nor is it the Assessor’s office. It would better serve its members by levying monthly fees based on actual water usage.
For all the above reasons, I protest the proposed actions suggested in the letter sent by the EWUA board.
Wow, what on earth would be the reason for this proposal??? Isn’t water used the only way to measure fairly??? I’d love to hear someone defend this (if they can…) Merry
Thank you Lesley. This is a big deal, even if you don’t own a guest house or live in the EWUA area. Many of these units are housing for our working class, elderly, or young family’s. This step would not help making these units affordable or accessible in the future. Does EWUA need this money so bad they are willing to take it from our fixed income seniors, teachers, and working family’s? We will see.
Thank you Lesley. I’ve been concerned since getting the letter, too. For one thing my house is only 816 sq.ft. and is considered by the county to be a “guest house” or “studio” and there is room on the property for a larger house. I do not plan to build, but hopefully that will be a good selling point when I put my house on the market in the near future to move to my daughter and son-in-law’s. Hopefully there will be a revision to this new plan.
I live by one main rule. “Just because you can do something like exercising your personal or Corporate power doesn’t mean you should”.
EWUA will smile while they twist the knife. I expect this from a certain political party but from EWUA? In Yiddish “It’s called a Shonda”.
They need more money and are changing the rules mid stream. This does not effect me as I bought extra memberships years ago; however I do pay the base rate for all my future need memberships regardless of usage. I feel your pain but this train has probably left the station. Once we were a friendly island where an unused Orcas Center ticket would be refunded. No more! You get no refund and they sell your ticket again. The EWUA situation is the same thing. By the way, this is a Board decision.
EWUA Response to Liddle Guest House Opinion In Orcas Issues
EWUA is a non-profit private association that operates under bylaws developed and approved by the membership. The EWUA membership’s bylaws require that properties with 2 living units have an upgraded membership. This has been the case since the early 1970’s. This is not a staff policy; this is not a Board of Director’s policy. This is the member’s long standing policy.
This policy is in alignment with State Department of Health regulations which require EWUA to track the additional demand on the water system that properties with 2 living units create. San Juan County code also requires that properties developing guest houses must evidence additional water capacity from their water system as part of the permitting process.
Dozens of EWUA members have upgraded their membership in accordance with the Bylaws as part of the process of developing a guest house or 2nd living unit on their property. When questions of fairness are raised, perhaps consideration should be given to the members who are paying what it cost to be compliant with the rules.
EWUA’s current Guest House Upgrade Initiative has been developed to encourage those members with previously “undocumented” guest houses to bring their membership into compliance with long-standing Association rules. To even the playing field if you will. The Guest House Upgrade Initiative is offering members a chance to correct a problem with their membership at a 50% off discount from the normal guest house membership cost, with no judgment about when and how the guest house was developed.
If a property owner came to EWUA wishing to develop a new single family home with a guest house, the guest house portion of their membership fee would be $6,000. Through the end of the year EWUA’s Guest House Upgrade Initiative is offering current members the chance to bring their membership into compliance for $3,000, and is offering a payment plan to further reduce the financial hardship.
Why are guest houses suddenly an issue? For several years EWUAs has been inspecting the memberships linked to properties being sold. The purpose of the inspection is to insure that the membership transferred at time of sale is current and up to date. In this process we have found multiple cases where a 2nd living unit has been developed on the property without the EWUA membership to support it. A membership issue should not transfer to a new property owner, and therefore EWUA has had to seek untimely remediation of issues that complicate a property sale. This is to no one’s benefit.
To date EWUA has heard from 36 members related to this Guest House Upgrade Initiative. Two members have expressed concern about the initiative. The 34 others have requested to have their membership upgraded as part of this program. Most of the 34 simply did not know that the development of their Guest House required an upgrade to their EWUA membership.
EWUA’s privacy policy does not allow EWUA representatives to discuss the specifics of any EWUA membership without the owner’s permission. I have contacted Ms. Liddle to discuss her concerns. As always, members are encouraged to bring their concerns to the EWUA Board, whose next meeting is Tuesday Oct 21st. Please contact me if you’d like to be added to the meeting’s agenda.
Paul Kamin General Manager
Water must be the most scarce, essential resource on Orcas, and no one wants to conserve it–and reward conservation–more than EWUA. If we have grown accustomed to inexpensive water, I’m afraid that might be a bubble whose time has come. In my opinion, overseers such as Mr.Kamin will ensure against Mr.Aldort’s ghoulish knife-twisting. When we trust our existence to community resources–and earnest, competent resource administrators beg for our input and attention–that might be as good as it gets.
In defense of Paige McCormick’s interpretation of my semi satirical comments by referring to them as ghoulish knife twisting, in my defense I must remind you that Halloween is right around the corner. I had a very cordial meeting today with Paul Kamin when I was paying my bills. He is extremely accessible.
I live alone in two small, vintage cabins. They were built in the 1920s and are grandfathered as far as the county is concerned. At about 500 square feet each, they are not well described as a “main residence” and a “guest house,” but that is the only interpretation the EWUA bylaws can make of them. They are not grandfathered by the EWUA because they were not connected to Eastsound Water until after 1970.
Therefore, the EWUA wants me to purchase an extra half membership ($3000 with a special discount now, $6000 after December 31) and pay for an extra half ERU on my quarterly bill from now on.
I already have a water meter, and it clearly demonstrates that my water use, going back 37 years, is that of a single, conservative individual. The definition of an ERU (Equivalent Residential Unit) is: “The amount of water used by a typical full-time single family unit.” My use is probably about a quarter of that.
Is the intent of this “initiative” to punish people who use a minimal amount of water just because there is more than one structure on their property? Shouldn’t water charges bear a direct relation to actual use?
Maybe the reason these bylaws were unevenly applied up until now is that someone sensed that they were inadequately conceived in the first place.
I think the EWUA board should rethink this “initiative” and take the time to conduct a bylaw review, allowing for informed discussions appropriate to a member owned organization.
Right on James! You nailed it. Thanks for writing the obvious, now I don’t have to.
Not to make this Harvey and Paige’s pretty good conversation: Me, too, Harvey! I always appreciate your wit and observations!
I have the utmost respect for Paul Kamin and I believe we are fortunate to have someone of his caliber managing our water system and planning for the future. When I discussed w/ Paul the possibility of revising the split in our water bills between the base rate and the amount charged for usage, he said that he had proposed such a revision and did not get adequate support from the EWUA Board.
Given that the digital world we live in today is dramatically different than the world when our bylaws were written…and that technology today allows for dramatically different accounting, billing, metering, and cost-allocation analysis, surely it’s time to take a fresh look at those bylaws, and perhaps re-structure the billing philosophy in order to reward those who practice water conservation.
Hopefully such an initiative can be undertaken by the present EWUA Board without delay…if not, I would advocate that the recent effort to police the long-ignored stipulation for half memberships for guest houses be deferred until after a couple of election cycles for EWUA board members.
I am really encouraged that this issue is generating some intelligent discussion from other concerned Eastsound water members. I hope we can come together and really look critically at the present billing structure. We need to sit down and consider how to reconstruct or amend the bylaws to fairly bill and justly promote water conservation for all rather than slapping inappropriate surtaxes on minimal users. Please attend the board meeting next Tuesday Oct 21st.
I have never understood why we pay a base rate regardless of
the quantity of water used. I would think that EWUA should be
able to calculate on consumption rather than a fixed rate. I
don’t have a guest house, but I can’t understand why a second
meter is necessary. I have always practiced conservation even
if it doesn’t pay.
EWUA’s policy of a minimum usage rate that covers as many gallons as it does presently is not encouraging water conservation. I understand that a certain number of dollars must be raised to keep the system in operation regardless of usage, but surely a different formula could be devised that would not punish those of us who are very minimal in our water use. The guest house issue does not affect me personally, but it affects our community, and I fully agree with those who say that a revamping of the bylaws is called for. We must have a policy that makes sense, and allowing a home with many residents and/or wasteful water usage to have a single meter, and mandating an additional one for a single careful individual just because their living structures are separate, makes no sense at all. At the very least, have an appeals system that can and will make case-by-case exceptions. I will try to come to the board meeting on Oct 21.