Eye On Modesto

Thoughts and observations about Modesto and Stanislaus County

Archive for the tag “Modesto Irrigation District”

A Message To All of Modesto From Dave Thomas

Good afternoon, I hope you have time to read the attached.  It pretty clearly outlines my personal thinking and is generally supported by the STA.  Some of you might find some of my comments controversial.  Well, that is me, I am willing to step up and say what I believe is the truth.  I am far more interested in saying and writing what I believe is the truth, than sparing someone discomfort over their own actual public actions. 

        If you think something I say in the attached .pdf is wrong, please message or phone me and I will provide you the document(s) or other material that will tell you why I said it.  You might not want to believe some things that governments do to you, but there is plenty of documentation that is readily available in the BEE and on line.

        If you just do not like what I say, tell me why.

        If you think this information is worth sharing, please send it on to your friends.

        Thank you very much, Dave

My dear friends:

After reading this morning’s BEE, I am disheartened. Our

governments are no longer even remotely responsive nor responsible

to you and me. What is it that makes good friends and neighbors

mindless rubber stampers who grovel in front of a government staff.

Why do most elected officials become zombies after being elected?

Their peers vilify the ones who continue to think after being elected

when they try to inject common sense into an issue.

Today’s BEE challenges even the most cynical amounst us with

3 stories. The first page tells us that now, the City government is

going to regulate camping out. That is not restricted to illegal

camping out, or squatting, but even your children’s back yard fun. I

can understand vagrants who invade and ruin public property. But,

no, the City “leaders” had to make your children felons if they leave a

tent up in your back yard for more than 5 days. Apparently, your

kids cannot camp in your backyard unless the property owner goes to

the cops and gets a permit to erect a tent for no more than 5 days.

Councilman Dave Lopez told us that we desperately need a law

to “safeguard the public” against “illegal camping”. Well, Dave, if it is

already illegal, did what you voted for last night make it even MORE

ILLEGAL?

Councilman Joe Muratore told us, “We are not creating a police

state.” Really? When you support a new law that allows the cops to

come into your backyard and arrest your children for having a family

Tee-Pee in it?

Councilman Dave Geer promised us that he “…trusted police

officers to enforce the ordinance with common sense…” Really.

REALLY? If illegal camping is already illegal, and the cops are not

enforcing those laws, why would he trust the cops to enforce this law

with common sense? The BEE says, “These campsites are often

strewn with trash, are a health and safety nuisance, and are occupied

by parole violators and others with criminal records..” Well, do the

cops not have a reason to arrest parole violators, other criminals, and

address health and safety violations ALREADY??

You know, it just occurred to me; this deal may be just like

Kristin Olsen’s sophomoric demand for a dumpster diving law – which

I understand has never been charged against anyone. Could it be

just another payoff to some complaining friend of a Councilperson?

Could it be a way for a Council crony to get even with a neighbor for

noisy kids in a nearby back yard? Hummmmmmm.

Well then, if that does not make your day, read the story on

the first page of Section B, “Council votes to raise rates.” Now HERE

is a remarkable story about your neighbors spending $400,000 on

something that may never happen. The deal is to double or triple

your water rates so the City can fix the MID’s water treatment plant.

You read that right, the MID build a water treatment plant, owns the

water treatment plant and screwed up the water treatment plant. It

does not work; it is a pile of useless concrete and steel junk. It must

be torn down. The City has no rights to that plant, and absolutely no

authority to trespass on it or fix it. The City has no rights to do

invasive testing of materials, or any other diagnostic work.

Does it matter that no one alive today knows how much it will

cost to fix? Several people have told me that it will cost more than

$40 MILLION dollars and as much as $65 MILLION. It is not a

remodel; it is not wallboard and bathroom fixtures. It is CONCRETE

and STEEL that does not work!! MID engineers have already found

over 100 “deficiencies” in this plant, and they are not known for

being thorough. There could well be 300 deficiencies that will be

found only after the fix gets started. MID General Manager Allen

Short promised me with his very own lips that this plant would come

in for less than $30 MILLION dollars. It has cost us about $85

MILLION to build so far, and no one knows HOW to fix it, let alone

how much it will COST to fix it.

The final act of insanity is that the CITY has sent MID a

demand letter to give the City permission to fix the plant, take over

all the legal battles that will go on for 3 to 5 years, and when the

plant is fixed – at an unknown date or cost – they want MID to simply

“hand over” the property ownership to the City…for free. And this

Council (except for Council Woman Burnside, who actually gets the

insanity of this all) is charging over the cliff as if MID has already

agreed to the Mayor’s demand.

The catch is, MID has not even read the demand. The City told

me it is not a public document, and refuses to release it to the

Taxpayers Association. The MID will not even begin to discuss this

ridiculous demand for 2 weeks, if then. Please tell me, what would

make the MID want to give away profit-making assets for nothing?

They make a huge profit (relatively speaking – ask me for details)

selling water to the City. They support plant employees with HUGE

salaries and benefits. They control the water and they control the

price of water. MID is broke, wallowing in debt and it NEEDS those

profits. What are the odds that they are going to bend over and give

away these assets?

Finally, read the Op/Ed piece by Tom VanGronigan on page A-

13. Full disclosure requires me to tell you that Tom and I have

served on several Boards and committees since the early 1990’s. We

know each other. I rarely agree with Tom. His politics and ideas are

not similar to mine. Nonetheless, we have remained cordial if not

friendly for a long time.

The comments contained in Tom’s piece simply are not

germane to the discussion of selling our precious water. Remember,

there are reasons to do things, and there are ways to do things.

Tom, in my opinion, confuses the two issues. Tom’s comments all

relate to the fact that MID is broke. It needs money, and it needs it

ASAP. OK, MID really IS broke, and that is a REASON to fix the being

broke part. But the WAY to fix the broke part is NOT to sell the most

important, precious asset we have, our water and attendant rights.

The WAY to fix the being broke problem is to get real with the

unions. MID cannot continue to pay average employees $140,000,

with bloated benefits. MID overhead consumes most of its massive

profits from electricity, and its enormous debt service eats the rest.

MID must renegotiate with the unions, get salaries in line with

reality, get its huge law suit problem solved, raise irrigation rates

from $10 per Acre Foot to at least $25 per Acre Foot, fix the water

plant and sell the water it has already contracted with the City to the

City. Selling the water will not fix the real problem, which is very bad

management.

Thank you for your attention. If you think this is worthwhile

information, let me know, and send it on to your friends.

Dave Thomas

Public Information Request by Dave Thomas

Mayor, et al, as president of, and on behalf of the Stanislaus Taxpayers Association, we request under the tenets
of the California Public Records Act, Government Code sections 6253.1 through 6276 the document described to us by the Mayor as a “Term Sheet” which is being used as a tool to negotiate with MID on issues relating to Phase 2 Surface Water Treatment Plant.  
 
Frankly, we made our first request on May 24, in person.  That constitutes a request under the Act, and we beleive the 10 day requriement starts on the 24th.  Thus, we expect a response no later than close of business on June 4th.  ( I must mention an e-mail request and a telephonic request after the 24th.  As of this moment, I have not received a response, even though the Mayor promised to send us the Term Sheet twice during the meeting of the 24th.)
 
I have enclosed a discription and summary of these Code sections for the benefit of Council persons who may not have taken the time to read it.  I have included, below, part of these sections, starting with III. WHAT ARE PUBLIC RECORDS?
As you can see, the Act was created “…to cover every conceivable kind of record that is involved in the governmental process…”
The fact that the Mayor discussed this Term Sheet, including specific terms included in it, as well as the fact that the document is published in a BEE story, certainly makes this document a public document.  Finally, it simply cannot be denied that this document is used in conducting the Public’s business, as it involves a dramatic change in the City’s water policy, a huge potential fiscal and legal liability and will have a dramatic impact on every Citizen in Modesto and eight other cities and neighborhood.  The Public deserves to know what City officers are doing, especially considering the Mayor’s public policy of total transparency.
 
Mayor, unless you can site a specific exemption under the law, you must release this document as soon as humanly possible.
 
We respectfully request release of this document to us as soon as possible, by electronic means, at no cost to us.
 
Thank you very much, Dave Thomas, STA
 
 
 

“III. WHAT ARE PUBLIC RECORDS?

  1. Writing.
    1. Includes handwritings, photographs, films, sound recordings, maps, magnetic tape, computer disks-virtually any means of recording any form of communication.7
    2. Computer data is clearly within the definition of a public record.8
  2. Containing information relating to the conduct of the public’s business.
    1. The requirement that a record relate to the conduct of the public’s business is broadly construed, and rarely contested.9
    2. According to the legislative history of the PRA:

      This definition is intended to cover every conceivable kind of record that is involved in the governmental process. . . . Only purely personal information unrelated to “the conduct of the public’s business” could be considered exempt from this definition, i.e., the shopping list phoned from home, the letter to a public officer from a friend which is totally void of reference to governmental activities.10

    3. Includes the names of public employees,11 although it may not include home addresses and phone numbers of state employees.12 Note, however, that access to names of public officials and employees is increasingly disputed. Seeking access to names of pubic employees who are the subjects of investigations or controversies may be justified.13 However, as a practical matter, you will probably get more information sooner if you agree that names of such employees can be withheld.
    4. Note that the names and contract information for private citizens may also be exempt from disclosure, particularly those who submit information or

-2-

complaints to the government with an expectation of confidentiality. Agreeing to allow public agencies to withhold such information may also expedite a request.

C. Prepared, owned, used or retained by state or local agency.

The records do not necessarily have to be in the actual custody of the public agency, if they are prepared, owned, or used by the agency.

D. Regardless of physical form or characteristics.

Information retained in an electronic format must be made available in any electronic form in which the agency holds the information.14″ 

Are you Concerned about the Proposed MID Water Sale?

Here is some interesting information from Reed Smith.

Attached please find a transcription of the Thursday, May 18 SFPUC’s Deputy General Manager and Chief Operating Officer, Michael Carlin’s, presentation on behalf of SFPUC GM, Ed Harrington, to the Bay Area Water Delivery and Conservation Agency Board of Directors meeting.  The section includes both Mr. Carlin’s presentation, and the questions and answers directly following and pertaining to his presentation. 
 
I think you will find the area bounded by a RED BOX on page 17 interesting.
 
Without prognosticating the inference of the key statement.  One might suspect that MID Director Wild’s assertion this past MID Board meeting on May 22, 2012 that his support for the 2,240 AF sale to the SFPUC is solely to make money for infrastructure ( a concept publicly not shared by GM Allen Short ) is probably out the window.  It appears that MID will be spending all of it’s income from this “drop in the bucket” (as characterized by Mayor Marsh) on litigation costs.  Net result: no income benefit to MID from the sale.
 
So, let’s see what the next excuse in favor of the sale from Director Wild is.  I can hardly wait . . .
 
 
 
 
 
From: Aaron Porter
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 08:09:58 -0700
To: Reed Smith
Cc: “Allison C. Schutte”
Subject: RE: BAWSCA May 17, 2012 meeting?
 

Hi Mr. Smith,

 

Attached is the requested section of the transcription of the May 17, 2012 BAWSCA Board of Directors meeting.  The section includes both Mr. Carlin’s presentation, and the questions and answers directly following and pertaining to his presentation.  I hope this adequately meets your request, and if you have any further questions or requests, please let me know.

 

Regards,

Aaron Porter

BAWSCA

PagesfromBAWSCA-MAY2012-BoardofDirectorsMeeting

 

Modesto Mayor Wants MID Water Treatment Plant?

Here is one citizens response.

MODESTANS BEWARE:  “Modesto’s bid to gain ownership of the plant would require opening a 2005 amended transfer and delivery agreement that spelled out the terms of expanding the water treatment plant”  There you have it in one sentence.  Don’t fall for it.  The Mayor appears to using this “negotiation” to stop the City from suing MID for it’s Anticipatory Breach of Contract and stop MID from stealing the City’s water, something Mayor Marsh, according to Councilman David Lopez during the Council meeting on May 22, voted in favor of in closed session on May 8.  If the Mayor can derail the upcoming lawsuit by the City with new “negotiations”, that frees up MID to sell Modesto’s water to San Francisco, who does not need it.  Why would Mayor Marsh want to open up negotiations on a signed binding contract that the other signator to, MID, is already breaching?  Why Mayor Marsh?  Do you have some personal interest in derailing the City from protecting it’s contracted water rights?  If “negotiations” need to take place, they should be shelved until MID has voted to NEVER sell water outside the District for more than one year, and AFTER four of the present MID “WATER-THIEF” BOARD are recalled.  Only then will the City have an entity with integrity enough to “negotiate” with.

A Quick Peek Behind the Curtin at MID

Where do we know Martino Graphics from?  

 
The answer is simple, co-owner Marian Martino competed in the political forums to replace Kristin Olsen after Olsen abandoned her City Council position to be a State Assemblywoman.

 
At the time, when asked, Ms. Martino chose not to supply a reasonable explanation as to why she  bailed out of the running for the council after she was proclaimed one of the three finalists (and in many viewers minds one of the best selections).  Marian has been seen occasionally at MID meetings.  She never speaks but one has to wonder if political consultant Mike Lynch traded his support for MID Director in exchange for stepping back as a candidate for council.
 
MID General Manager Allen Short confirmed the money paid to Martino Associates, a Graphic Design firm,  actually ended up in  political consultant Mike Lynch’s wallet.
 
Nothing that MID Directors Tom Van Groningen, Glen Wild, Paul Warda or the people in the shadows behind them do can be taken at face value. 
 
And it appears that the evil emperor Allen Short has persuaded Director Nick Blom to join the dark side.

Dave Thomas’ Public Information Request to the MID

Mr Short, on behalf of the Stanislaus Taxpayers Association and under the tenets of the California Public Records Act, Government Code sections 6250-6277, I request the following documents:
       
            1.  There have been negotiations between MID and SFPUC regarding the contract to sell and buy water.  I request all handwritings, sound recordings, maps, computer discs, printed documents or                 any other recorded documents that have been used or given to any MID employee or MID Director that have been used in these negotiations.  This includes all documents dated May 8                     thorough May 22, inclusive.
            2.  This includes all records relating to the conduct of the public’s business, broadly construed. 
            3.  This includes specifically any and all documents or communications delivered or otherwise conveyed to any and/or all MID Directors, even those which might be marked as restricted.

        It is now about 2:35 PM on May 22nd.  I expect you to deliver all these requested documents no later than 3:00 PM on June 1st.  I expect that you will produce these documents with a minimum
            staff time, and at no cost to the Association.  If you have any questions, comments or want me to modify this request, please contact me at my e-mail address, above, or call my office
            at 577-4373.

                    Thank you very much, Dave Thomas, President, STA

E A R T H Q U A K E ! ! !

No we aren’t having an earthquake.  This is the title to Reed Smith’s Earthshaking  Good News email to the Modesto City Council.

 
Councilpersons:

I have some great news from the Bay Area.  According to Peter Drekmeier, Program Director for the Tuolumne River Trust, Thursday evening at the Bay Area Water Supply and Conservation Agency (BAWSCA) meeting, Mr. Steven Ritchie, Assistant General Manager, of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, made a presentation regarding the proposed MID water sale.  During a response to a question from the audience from Drekmeier, he informed the BAWSCA audience that a revised contract was due to be returned to MID and one of the significant modifications from the first DRAFT was that the SFPUC would no-longer be responsible for ANY legal cost associated with litigation directed at MID (please keep in mind that this news is 2nd hand).  I am in the process of obtaining the audio file of the meeting, and will forward it to you as soon as it is available.
 

Anticipated modification to:      DRAFT MID-SFPUC AGREEMENT Page 6 of 15  G. Litigation; Cooperation in Litigation. The Parties will vigorously defend any legal challenge to this Agreement or its implementation. The parties will reasonably cooperate, to the extent permitted by law, in the defense and any settlement of any claims challenging the validity of this Agreement or its implementation; including but not limited to claims brought under CEQA, NEPA, the Clean Water Act, state or federal Endangered Species Acts The parties agree to jointly retain outside counsel. Unless otherwise provided in this Agreement, SFPUC agrees to pay litigation fees and costs, including costs of the outside counsel.

 
Subsequent to that event, Mr Todd Sill was advised by MID Director Glen Wild that Sill should “throw away the original DRAFT proposed contract, as it is going to be revised”.  This begs the question as to whether a revised document, containing the SFPUC modification to financial responsibility for legal costs, was distributed to Directors on Friday, prior to COM’s letter being hand-delivered.  Friday morning, MID staff stated that a revised contract was expected to be posted on the website soon.  This raises further the assertion this past Tuesday that Director Wild’s support for the sale is solely financial, that being that his justification of the sale is to get money for MID infrastructure needs.  With the arrival of millions in potential legal costs as a co-habitor of any contract to sell water, the income from the 2,240 AF sale becomes revenue neutral to MID on day one, thus erasing Director Wilds apparent hard-fought invention of a justification.
 
Ah, but I digress.  The community has expressed grave concern regarding making the SFPUC the lead agency on EIR’s for waters being transferred in this sale agreement.  Of course, we feel that MID and it’s constituents should maintain primacy in all environmental assessments, not the SFPUC.
 
Parallel to that concept, we feel that MID should maintain primacy in controlling and financing all litigation resulting from their insightful and studied decision to sell our surface water to the SFPUC.  Certainly MID’s General Counsel has never strayed from accurately predicting positive outcomes for his clients, e.g., Valley Bio-Energy v MID.
 
I wanted to share this good news with the you, the City’s fiduciary decision makers, as this turn-of-events raises the question regarding the probability of the COM recovering legal costs from MID, should the COM determine that MID’s majority of Director’s ethics have failed their constituents when they knowingly breach the Amended Treatment and Delivery Agreement.  
 
It was a rather grotesque moment when MID’s General Manager, Allen Short, told the Stanislaus Farm Bureau Board on May 1, 2012, (parodied –  na, na, na, na, na, na) “we expect at least three lawsuits, and it is no big deal, ’cause the SFPUC is paying for all MID’s legal costs.”  (parodied – we can be as stupid as we want, ’cause there is NOTHING you can do to stop us, ha, ha, ha.)  Well this situation appears to have changed . . .  oopsie, no more FREE big-time SF lawyers?  

Will this change in legal financial responsibility cause MID’s Directors to pause when considering voting for the proposed sale on June 26, 2012?  Not if the May 22, 2012 Board meeting is any indication.  For the record, any observer will conclude there are four (4) intractable Directors who have clearly declared they are for this sale, no matter what the contract says.
 
I commend you for initiating the first steps in securing your water rights.  I am sure your constituents expect nothing less from you.

Check out “What’s on America’s Mind” at 7:00 Tonight

Tonight MID’s Secret Lobbyist Mike Lynch,  Who let the cat out of the bag at the city council?, Arizona’s Sec who is a birther and wants to take Obama off the ballot and many more issues we all need to be concerned about especially women.

So don’t be late.

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/centralvalleyhornet/2012/05/24/whats-on-americas-mind-with-emerson-drake

MID uses Deception to Hire an Old School Lobbyist

By Emerson Drake

It was revealed at Tuesday’s MID board meeting that General Manager Allen Short and MID Board President Tom Van Groningen used a company named Martino Graphic Design to funnel money.   This money went to a local political consultant named Mike Lynch, on MID’s bill paying ledger, under the guise of public affairs-2012 in the amount of $4582.97 for the month of March alone.  Mr. Lynch has his own consulting firm called, no surprise, Lynch Consulting, so why the deception?

Lynch has been going around to local political wannabees and others like Ruben Villabos,  Modesto School Board President and OFFERING his services to them when they run for election or re-election as necessary. One of Lynch’s most obvious Charlie McCarthy dolls (ventriloquist dummies) is Josh VanderVeen (LCR member), stepson to Modesto Councilman Dave Lopez. Both of these men and three others spoke for the water transfers.  As a long time MID meeting attendee it needs to be said none of these people ever came to a MID meeting until Mike Lynch became involved.

But Lynch found his “mother lode” in the LCR or Latino Community Roundtable. This organization which consists of 195 members, many of whom are politicians ($10.00 to those over age fifty, and then you get to vote for yourself) who have stood in front of the LCR hoping for endorsements.  LCR represents no constituency other than themselves and whom could only field 18 members at a recent political forum they held at, surprise, the Modesto School board office thanks to LCR  member Villabos.  While I’ll be one of the first to say LCR has many well-meaning members of the general public they also have those craving a seat at the local political table and Mike Lynch holds out his “free pass” to the promised land.

PART of your electric utility payments are being used to finance the posturing of political wannabees

Now campaign consultants have been making promises to candidates  for quite some time, after all it’s how they make their money, but to my knowledge this is the first time a public organization like MID has PAID  a consultant to potentially alter the political landscape using Public/RATEPAYER money.

Mike Lynch personally contacted each and every Modesto City Council member and asked for the Letter to MID not be written (it’s available on this website). Then Lynch sent Ruben Villabos, apparently his personal emissary, to a “private session” of the Council with foreknowledge of what was to be discussed.

Which Councilmember tipped of f Mike Lynch and Ruben Villabos about the secret topic?

That was the question at last night’s City Council meeting. Former Modesto Mayor Carmen Sabatino appeared in front of the Council last night to question the minutes of last weeks meeting which DID NOT mention Vallabos’ appearance. Sabatino questioned the validity of Villabos appearing and was reassured by City Attorney Susan Acala Wood his appearance was legal under the Brown Act. The Council said the minutes would be changed to reflect Villabos’ appearance.

But the over-riding question spoken by Councilwoman Stephanie Burnside was “who tipped Lynch/Villabos off?”  Nobody was forthcoming regarding this.  Looks went around the room but no one was willing to fess up. Needless to say  Diogenes is still looking with his lamp.

So where does this leave us?  Well, our electric payments are going to a political consultant without our consent who is bent on giving away our water, and our best hope, is the City Council sticking to their guns.

Where Have all the Watchdogs Gone

By Emerson Drake

Once upon a time you could expect your local newspaper to keep a close watch on things, but as we’ve all noted in recent years the Bee has vacated their responsibilities in this regard.  Now don’t get me wrong,  they were very forthcoming in the SCAP scandal but everyone had to notice when it came to the NSP2 funds all of a sudden things became quiet. 

The business community led by the Chamber of Commerce and others put pressure on the Bee to rein in their questioning of people with dirty hands like Councilman Muratore.  His taking of the $62,000 was noted, but quickly put aside when he returned the money, while failing to mention taking the money was a felony.

Just like they did with Joe Gibbs, the businessmen who stood to profit from the NSP2 funds, urged the Bee to back off.  Remember with Gibbs was guilty of hit and run in connection with a death,  but Sheriff Christianson violated his own policy and  listened to those he termed good Rotarians and allowed Gibbs to serve his time under house arrest(via an ankle bracelet). 

Now the Bee has recommended the MID proposed water transfer to go through albeit for the 2,200 acre feet.  By reading the contract, the Bee couldn’t have missed the  right of first refusal for San Francisco on any future water deals and their position of being first in line for all water rights (even before Modesto’s) and allocations during droughts.

After these unconscienable  conditions had been negotiated by MID’s General Manager Allen Short and attorney Tim O’Laughlin and approved Tom Van Groningen, Glen Wild, and Paul Warda, the Bee incredibly also added their stamp of approval. 

We the People have had to Become the Watchdogs

If it weren’t for Director Larry Byrd (whom the Bee refused to endorse because of his stance on this issue) and members of the public, this blatant giveaway would have been a done deal weeks ago.

The well-known adage of the Chamber of Commerce  is “if a Modesto businessman can make a buck then it works for us.”  And when their money men got on the phone after one of their backroom meeting, strings start being pulled. 

But sometimes, just sometimes, things start to go in Joe and Josephine Average’s favor.  In this case it was average citizens like John Duarte, Reed Smith, myself and a whole host of others who have been stridently against this water transfer/giveaway since June of last year.  The many people who have been speaking out at the MID meetings, County Board of Supervisor and City Council meetings were sighting statistics and gathering data and waking up the public to the injustice being done to the citizens of the central valley by this so-called water transfer.

Every thinking person has to question the integrity of any MID Board members who champions this flight of fancy of Allen Shorts. Not do so would be naive.  Now Short and Van Groningen are waffling. Their failure to safeguard citizens is obvious and  they are now saying the contract could be changed.  Why now?  Because their duplicity has been exposed?   Is it concern about the best interests of the community they serve, or because friends and neighbors are questioning their unfathomable thinking process and  motivations for endorsing the  “special arrangements” favoring San Francisco which are found in the contract?

It was gratifying to see the Modesto City Council stand up to MID and threaten a lawsuit to stop the misguided water transfer. Fortunately many had gone to  Council meetings to protest the giveaway of Modesto’s water rights. The letter to MID from Modesto can be found on this site in an earlier article and until now it was the only place it could be found. All of us thank the Modesto City Council for preventing this fiasco.

Make no mistake, we aren’t out of the woods yet.  Given a chance VanGroningen, Wild and Warda would vote for Shorts version in a heartbeat. Nick Blom seems to be sitting on the fence, but if one believes his campaign promises he’ll vote against the transfers. One thing for sure, we’ll find out if Director Blom is a man of his word or just another politician who’ll say anything to get elected and then kowtow to the local power brokers after they get in office like Councilman Dave Lopez did over the NSP2 deadwood ie:Councilman Joe Muratore.

Vigilance is the price of freedom. And vigilance is what we need to ensure the MID Board is making good decisions because for years now, by following Allen Short’s leadership, they’ve come down on the wrong side of almost every major decision. From the Geothermal project to Mountain House to the Four Cities to TANC they haven’t gotten it right yet and I see no signs, that without strident guidance from the public,  they’ll ever improve.

Post Navigation