{NOTE:  MEETING VIDEO AT END OF THIS POST}

OK, LET’S TRY THAT AGAIN!  lol

Below is the list of proposed operational changes for the District that resulted from the “NON PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT MEETING” GM PETE KAMPA arranged.  Everyone in that Boardroom was aware the request was for a public meeting where Wes Barton’s questions could be asked openly and directly without interference from Pete Kampa or particular members of the board.   (President Johnson was not at the “accountant meeting” planning Board Meeting incidentally) – yet instead a private meeting was held in Modesto.

Another Kampa controlled inferior substitute” for what was requested and expected by the public attendees and some directors. (Emery Ross’s statement of missing the “eyes rolling” during any potential public questioning was quite humorous but made a valid point.  A lot can be learned from body language and how an individual responds to questions asked in a “real time” public setting.

What the public receives from KAMPA & KOMPANY are carefully constructed

NON-RESPONSIVE WRITTEN SUBSTITUTES FOR TRUTHFUL ANSWERS.)

Essentially just the same old stuff.  Recall the POST RETIREMENT MEDICAL BENEFITS issue which greatly increased District liability after several years of accepted policy change (other later employees were denied the additional benefits which had been discontinued by previous board action) until PETE KAMPA and KAMPA COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS LLC showed up and started turning over every  issue looking for ways to increase District costs and complicate matters which would then naturally required KAMPA’s professional expertise to remedy?  That issue was also going to be reviewed by an objective third party but ended up going to our CSD attorney.  And then, to conceal matters even further from the public, our own attorney’s comments/advice was closed from public view and understanding.

Transparency?

Although not a Brown Act quorum issue, since only two directors (Board President Danny Johnson and Vice President Dan Hankemeier) attended the “PRIVATE ACCOUNTANT MEETING”, it still raises a question…..How can two of five Directors, during a GM orchestrated PRIVATE MEETING with the accountant, decide the best way to respond to Wes Barton’s financial questions asked of GM KAMPA in PUBLIC BOARD MEETINGS for so many months ?

ARE NOT LEGITIMATE PUBLIC QUESTIONS (REGARDING DISTRICT FINANCES)

DESERVING OF HONEST PUBLIC AGENCY ANSWERS?

 How do two directors know what is best for the other 3 board members –  much less the public they are supposed to represent?

Transparency?

Oh please.

Just a word many disingenuous people use to obscure the facts of what they are really doing.

Case in point:

STILL NO ANSWERS TO WES BARTON’S LEGITIMATE FINANCIAL QUESTIONS FROM GM KAMPA WHO IS ALSO THE BOARD TREASURER IN CHARGE OF THE MONEY!

Over a year now KAMPA has successfully side-stepped answering these questions – among others such as those dealing with the district service area mapping project and the Lake Don Pedro CSD website failures.

<<<<<<<<<<<<< I interrupt this blah, blah, blah with a current news flash >>>>>>>>>>>>>

_____________________________________

May 3rd, 2017

UPDATE!

JUST NOTICED this morning that the 8 out of 8 NON-FUNCTIONING REFERENCE LINKS on the LAKE DON PEDRO CSD website have been removed!

Now let’s see if the outside Place of Use Resolution (2013-4) is posted as it should have been a long time ago!

_____________________________________

<<<<<<<<<<<<< Now back to the regularly scheduled blah, blah, blah >>>>>>>>>>>>>

   (remember those old TV notices?)

Wonder if Barton’s questions gave birth to the below suggestions?

Without even receiving answers?

Are these “suggestions” an off-handed acknowledgement that

FINANCIAL MATTERS HAVE BEEN HANDLED INCORRECTLY FOR A VERY LONG TIME?

Same old story.

Those who intentionally violate known rules, regulations and standard operating policies/procedures when caught, or fear being caught,  always attempt to re-direct attention AWAY from their culpable activities and TOWARDS “making sure such {wrongful} activity never happens again”.

ALL WITHOUT EVER ACKNOWLEDGING THEIR TRUE CULPABILITY!

 

(“Gosh!  Don’t you also thank our lucky stars Mr. Fox has some excellent suggestions for protecting our district hens and eggs!”)

 

SO here are the “suggestions” contained in #4 FINANCE below –

 

 

NOTE: GM KAMPA identified the projects (also referred to as “tasks” on the second page) as:

1. Administrative costs
2. Groundwater well project
3. IRWMP  (Integrated Regional Water Management Plan) costs
   IRWMP INFORMATION link
   
4. Lateral service line replacement costs
   

(No answer at the meeting as to whether #4 included Outside Place of Use “private water lines” which often run quite a distance outside the permitted service area and could be designated a “lateral service line” for further grant reimbursement money.)

NOTE:  Only Projects 1 and 4 are requested for reimbursement.

 

 

 

My best to you and yours, Lew