DKNB 

  (again)

This term looks like it could be on a stock market display yeah?

“DKNB had climbed one and a quarter at today’s closing bell”.

Perhaps representative of the file naming process where vowels are dropped to reduce the descriptive title length, ie,  “fraud 2014-2018” becomes, FRD 2014-2018; “theft” becomes THFT; “that no-good lying bastard becomes” THTNGDLNGBSTRD, etc.?

However, “Members of this DKNB” is a quality neutral assertion of fact without indication of potential desirability for inclusion in the group – absent the context in which it was used.  For example,

“Members of this DKNB”, which was formed through the mutual efforts of various churches in the area, attributed their community success to the cooperation between……” would likely be perceived as a good thing with which to be involved, whereas,

“Members of this DKNB” were quickly surrounded by SWAT personnel and the area closed to traffic”, probably not so good – and might indeed suggest using a different route home.

Obviously when the words forming DKNB are revealed it certainly appears derogatory and dismissive  yet this interpretation fails to appreciate the environment giving birth to the spontaneous shorthand.   So basically, blah, blah, blah … — …      🙂

OH YEAH…..

Lake Don Pedro Community Services District

9751 Merced Falls Rd., La Grange, CA 95329

• 852-2331 – ldpcsd.org

DIRECTORS

Danny Johnson, President Dan Hankemeier, Vice President

Emery Ross Russell Warren Nellie Sperry

 

 

Regular Meeting of the Board of Directors

9751 Merced Falls Road

March 19, 2018 at 1:00 p.m.

 

Mission Statement: The Lake Don Pedro CSD is dedicated to providing our customers with ample quantities of high quality water meeting all standards, in a fiscally responsible manner.

 

AGENDA

1. CALL TO ORDER: Presiding Officer: Establish Quorum, Pledge of Allegiance:

2.         PUBLIC COMMENT:

Any person may address the Board at this time on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Board that is NOT ON THE AGENDA. A maximum of three minutes is allowed each person and a maximum of 20 minutes per topic. Any person wishing to address the Board on an item ON THE AGENDA will be given the opportunity at that time. Speakers are encouraged to consult District Management or Directors prior to agenda preparation regarding any District matters, as no action will be taken on non-agenda issues.

3.      PRESENTATION ONLY:

1. Presiding Officer’s Report
2. General Manager’s Report: Peter Kampa
3. Chief Plant Operator’s Report: Gilgo

 

4.         APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA: The following items may all be approved in one motion or considered separately as determined appropriate by the President

1. Read and file the February 2018 Treasurer’s Report
2. Approval of the Minutes of the Special Meeting of February 21, 2018

5.         DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS

1. Review and acceptance of the 2016/17 annual audit
2. Consideration of request from internet service provider Cal.net for use of Arbolada Tank property for an additional wireless internet antenna
3. Discussion and action related to system water loss, loss reports, customer and system master meter accuracy and related actions/implications
4. Discussion and action related to Notice of Intent to submit an application for federal Hazard Mitigation Grant funding for the purchase and installation of fuel-powered generators to operate critical pumps during power outages
5. Adoption of a resolution amending the District Investment Policy

6.  ADJOURNMENT:

Lake Don Pedro CSD

Regular Board Meeting of March 19, 2018

Page 2 of 2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meeting agendas and written materials supporting agenda items, if produced, can be received by the public for free in advance of the meeting by any of the following options:

• A paper copy viewed at the District office, 9751 Merced Falls , La Grange, CA 95329 during business hours or mailed pursuant to a written request and payment of associated mailing fees
• An electronic copy received by Note – a form requesting email delivery of agendas and/or meeting materials must be completed a minimum of one week in advance of the meeting
• Viewed on the Board page of the District’s website
• A limited number of copies of agenda materials will also be available at the meeting

 

Americans with Disabilities Act Compliance: If you require special assistance to participate in Board Meetings, please contact the LDPCSD Board Secretary at (209) 852-2251 Ext. 2.

Advance notification will enable the District to make reasonable arrangements to insure accessibility.

 

 

____________________________________

 

 

 

 

My best to you and yours, Lew

Hello!  I have a bunch of stuff to do but wanted to pass on some of the important particulars of yesterday’s meeting….

Three meeting attendees: two customers and the LDPCSD Auditor.  Another packed board room.

The Chief Plant Operator Randy Gilgo was absent.

Full board (one a little late).

I read Wes Barton’s letter into the record during public comment (posted yesterday) and followed with mine below (yeah, I know, blah, blah, blah …)

“Oath Sworn Directors have a duty to this District to abide by CALIFORNIA STATE LAW in the performance of their elected/appointed positions.  Contrary to this duty, directors have rarely asked PERTINENT often OBVIOUS – COMMON SENSE QUESTIONS regarding the special interest direction GM/TREASURER PETE KAMPA and his limited liability management company has pushed this public agency.  The board’s dereliction of duty began in October 2014 with the failure to perform a routine employment background check prior to KAMPA (and company) being appointed as GM/TREASURER and provided access to over one million dollars saved after near bankruptcy.  Despite the total destruction of the LDPCSD Admin Office in February 2012, even a simple “in house” review of existing records would have clearly revealed KAMPA’s many PAST MISREPRESENTATIONS of the Place of Use issue when first employed here between 1993-1997 when very busy pushing LAFCO annexations into this district.  The Board’s failure to “represent the interests of the MERCED RIVER WATER ENTITLED CUSTOMERS OF THE LDP SUBDIVISION” have not only continued but have escalated in severity.   Even after many public meeting requests spanning over a year for the Board and/or GM to simply contact the STATE WATER BOARD and obtain the OFFICIAL PLACE OF USE MAP FOR MERCED RIVER WATER, directors rejected those COMMON SENSE REQUESTS choosing instead to continue following the district management direction established by Kampa.   This board has consistently approved the use of District resources for Kampa to continue attempts at completing what he started 20 years earlier with the many LAFCO ANNEXATIONS that could not develop without an ALTERNATE SOURCE – OF GROUNDWATER PRODUCTION.  Even a 900 acre proposed residential subdivision right across the road here was quietly approved in 1995 during Kampa’s first tour but actively kept a secret from the public until only a few months prior to Kampa’s unethical return in 2014.  Even today KAMPA once again requests the board to approve an extremely suspicious annual audit WITHOUT EVEN READING IT which has already been the subject of multiple corrective revisions for several months.  Unanimous board decisions mean little when dedicated to violating both the trust of customers and the law. You should all be ashamed, with the noted exception of newcomer Director Mrs. Sperry.”

AUDIT PRESENTATION – HOW ABOUT SOME “UP FRONT” SURPRISINGLY GOOD NEWS FOR A CHANGE?

The Board  DID NOT “BLINDLY” accept GM/TREASURER KAMPA’s suggested motion of approving the audit without reading the material!  (That suggested approval motion by KAMPA is not only outrageous but quite revealing as to another of his traditional methods of operation.) CONTROLLER’S  REPORT – additional information from prior years due to a new system being used by Controller.   During a JOURNAL ENTRY ADJUSTMENT discussion Kampa interrupted to explain a possible explanation for project discrepancies that were apparently identified in the audit that he meant to address the year before.

I asked about the significance of unsigned certificates in the agenda packet regarding assurance of sufficient funds to operate for the next six months – Kampa stated they only had to be signed quarterly and were just routinely included with the other material.  (Still think they would look better signed –or left out completely.)

The audit material will be sent to customers receiving electronic packet information (have you – you know what?) and will also be posted on the LDPCSD website.

Another pleasant surprise…..Kampa’s suggested motion of including WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COVERAGE FOR VOLUNTEERS WORKING FOR THE DISTRICT ALSO DID NOT PASS.  (KAMPA admitted there have been no such volunteers as of yet nor were any expected.)

I have been told that some time back there were volunteers working on a Financial Committee and assisting the district with financial matters – but not performing maintenance tasks.  I made a comment that such a plan was once again “putting the cart before the horse” and could easily result in much higher costs if volunteer “accidents” were to occur.

EDUCATING DIRECTORS

Regarding training for directors by the Special District Leadership Academy in Seaside, (an associate organization of the CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION which Kampa has been an active board member for approximately 20 years, I confirmed my support for educating directors – however, questioned what good such training would actually be IF STATE LAW could not be followed by directors or the GM?   Think about that for a moment….

PETE KAMPA is a “professional “ SPECIAL DISTRICT MANAGER AND OWNER OF KAMPACS, aka, KAMPA COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS (a SPECIAL DISTRICT MANAGEMENT LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY) ……  was previously employed at the LDPCSD between 1993-1997 working extensively on annexing much more property into the LDPCSD service area – whose land development projects would be dependent upon a GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM THAT DID NOT  EXIST YET.

Kampa has also been a board member on one of the most (if not the most) powerful and influential “not for profit” water lobbying organizations in the State of California for about 20 years – yet this “professional” explains to state regulatory agencies that there has been confusion for many years regarding the PLACE OF USE MAP for MERCED RIVER WATER per WL11395?

Additionally, consider that MR KAMPA was also apparently unable to read and comprehend the clear restrictive terms cited in that license which the LAKE DON PEDRO CSD has used since formation in 1980 to provide water to customers.

But wait…..Didn’t PETE KAMPA recently receive a TRANSPARENCY AWARD from a BIG NOT FOR PROFIT WATER ORGANIZATION?

So I wonder….

what good is specialized education without the personal and/or

business integrity to properly use it for the public’s benefit?

THE BIG ISSUE:  Although GM KAMPA refused to discuss aspects of the POU VIOLATION in his digital map presentation it was never-the-less confirmed that he has indeed sent that SAME INCORRECT DISTRICT POU BOUNDARIES TO THE STATE WATER BOARD IN RESPONSE TO THEIR SEPTEMBER 28^th, 2017 NOTICE OF VIOLATION REGARDING POU RESTRICTIONS.

I am still amazed that directors have difficultly answering simple questions like:

DID YOU READ THE NOTICE OF VIOLATION?  (Board President Danny Johnson said he “scanned it”.

DID YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE NOV CLEARLY DETAILED WHAT THE OFFICIAL POU WAS?

HAVE YOU LOOKED AT THE JUNE 1977 MAP ON THE WALL, WHICH ALTHOUGH ILLUSTRATING INCORRECT INFORMATION REGARDING “RESERVED WATER” FOR NUMEROUS LAFCO ANNEXATIONS, DID IN FACT CORRECTLY ILLUSTRATE THE LDP SUBDIVISION AS THE LEGAL POU – again, according to the STATE NOTICE OF VIOLATION?

(NOTE: That incorrect “reserved water” illustration on the June 1977 map also included the 1995 LAFCO approved 900 acre “slumbering subdivision” Kampa has actively kept a secret from the public since his 2014 return.   Incorrect maps are still being displayed on the LAKE DON PEDRO CSD website despite the contradicting factual information contained in the September 2017 STATE WATER BOARD NOV.)

Another closed session under GOVT CODE 54956.95  for PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION  (I asked for clarification of this Government Code Section as it appears to deal with district liability loss from potential law suits – President Johnson made a note of the request stating it would be addressed at the next meeting.)

 

REPORT OUT FROM CLOSED SESSION:

 

Just had a little bit of hail!  Naturally now that I’ve picked up all the tools it will likely clear up requiring them to be hauled back out for “good weather” work– but had I left them out….well you know – lol

My best to you and yours, Lew

I am sorry I will be missing the meeting, this may bring my absents over ½ dozen since 2006-2007.

It is Necessary, however. 

I am going to comment on your “audit” agenda item 5b, only.  If ever I’ve seen a pure “Kampa-ism”, this

Is It.  “I’ll put the check in the mail after you cash it”; “trust me”!     Sorry Pete, I for one do not trust you!

The difference between me and the folks you often “snooker” is I do understand you and your “model”

Of “talk and paper and talk and paper and talk and etc.”

 

 

[WES BARTON/lakedonpedro.file photo]

I have also studied business and practiced good Business; I know right from wrong and maybe.  I must say I have learned, from you,  how you take an honest

But weak organization, use its ignorance to con government and “crony” players to benefit you and said players.

Leaving the weak organization as an even weaker organization that fears leaving your bosom for you have exploited their weaknesses and destroyed any confidence that may have brought them to this organization with desire to serve the community.  Pete, you are something else!

Just glancing at the financial info you are providing this month shows a discrepancy must exist between the CSD periodic records and a proper audit any professional level accountant might prepare.  After the fourth Year of auditing an organization to now ask for 10 years of past records is near unbelievable, except here, by

Our “auditor”.    Ask your auditor if he is under investigation for audits of 2015, 2016 for questionable reports.  I’ve told you earlier, State Auditor has referred this CSD to the State’s local high-risk audit team, too.  It took a long time for the State to look at CSD’s water rule, boundaries  but they finally did.  Your accounting and

Financial controls structures are probably in “deep do-do” too.  Pete, knowing that there is not a person in the walls of CSD that can properly read financials, he is offering all an out by sticking their heads in the sand (or another way of saying it is to sign off on the audit before reading and you won’t see the audit again).

Note: I’ll try to keep it alive, however, until it passes the “stink test”; Nellie, I don’t know your background.   Hope I didn’t insult you with my comments; I do know the others.

I pray that the Board will remember Pete’s character  when they review his fairy tale presentation in the closed Meeting today, too.

 

PS Syndie, please give Nellie a copy, thanks

EXCERPTS FROM THE FEB 21 2018 PACKET,

THEN MIGHT I SUGGEST MUNCHING THROUGH THE ENTIRE ENCHILADA BELOW? lol

COVER LETTER TO ELECTRONIC AGENDA PACKET

(Ask for yours yet?  They might make nice souvenirs?)

AGENDA PACKET HIGHLIGHTS CURIOUS ACTIVITY

Page 1:  

Agenda Item 5.b. (more below regarding this highly suspicious proposal)

Kampa proposes ACCEPTING “LATE AUDIT REPORT” WITHOUT ANY ADEQUATE REVIEW? 

Typical Kampa method of operation – QUICK!  HURRY!  TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE!

Approve without a semblance of reasonable attention! 

That’s what got us into this KAMPA KOMPANY KRAP!

 

 

Page 7:  

39%

TREATED WATER LOSS FOR JANUARY 2018

NATURALLY NO OUTSIDE PLACE OF USE REPORT AGAIN

who knows what the raw water  loss between McClure and treatment plant might be?

Page 13

Yet another unsigned certification of adequate revenue for next six months?

Page 23

 WILL BOARD ACCEPT KAMPA’S RIDICULOUS PROPOSED MOTION?

“I MOVE TO ACCEPT THE 2016/2017 ANNUAL AUDIT”

 WITHOUT READING OR STUDYING THE MATERIAL FOR ACCURACY?

 

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$   START IMPORTANT BACK TRACK 411   $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$  

RECALL THE LAST AUDITOR’S VISIT WITH THE WRONG FINANCIAL INFORMATION ALREADY PREPARED AND FORMALLY BOUND FOR BOARD “SNAP” APPROVAL?

SAID THEY WERE GOING TO MAKE CORRECTIONS FOR A LATER APPROVAL – YET THE MOTION ON THE MATTER MADE NO MENTION OF THE NECESSARY CORRECTIVE CHANGES TO BE MADE FOR IT TO BE CORRECT?

I AM NOT POSITIVE, BUT BELIEVE THERE WERE TWO OTHER  OCCASIONS FOR SUCH NECESSARY AUDIT CHANGES SO THIS WOULD BE THE THIRD TIME.

AND WHAT DOES PETE KAMPA NOW PROPOSE IN THIS RESOLUTION?  

FOR THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS TO ONCE AGAIN IGNORE THEIR FIDUCIARY DUTY TO THIS DISTRICT AND BLINDLY TAKE PETE KAMPA’S WORD THAT THE NUMBERS ARE CORRECT AND NECESSARY CHANGES HAVE BEEN MADE TO PRODUCE AN ACCURATE AUDIT? 

 

Seems to me common sense would dictate a responsible review of this very important financial information prior to approval –

ESPECIALLY AFTER MULTIPLE FAILED ATTEMPTS TO APPROVE IT WITH MISTAKES!

 OLD POST WITH A VIDEO OF THE “KAMPA MOTION OF AUDIT APPROVAL” (WITHOUT MENTION OF THE CORRECTIONS TO BE MADE) AND WES BARTON’S COMMENTS ON RELATED FINANCIAL MATTERS:

LINK BELOW

There he (WES BARTON) Goes Again! and Thank You!

LINK TO VIDEO OF KAMPA AUDIT MOTION WITH POST:

<<<VIDEO of motion with original POSTING  >>>

 $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$  END IMPORTANT BACK TRACK 411 – RETURN TO FEB 21 2018   $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$  

Page 26

WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COVERAGE FOR DIRECTORS and

ALL PERSONS PERFORMING VOLUNTARY SERVICES

(Wonder if the 3-4 hard core meeting CUSTOMER ATTENDEES might qualify as DISTRICT VOLUNTEERS FOR COVERAGE?  lol)

 

Future WORKERS’ COMPENSATION for medical/psychological/psychiatric assistance due to the stress and discomfort involved in running a CSD the KAMPA KOMPANY WAY? 

(aka, cheating and exploiting the far majority of customers may be easy for some of these directors but the “getting caught” part might be a bit uncomfortable.)

Perhaps ADDITIONAL INSURANCE COVERAGE while wining and dining with KAMPA’S CSDA ASSOCIATES ON THESE PROPOSED “EDUCATIONAL JAUNTS”?

Page 29:  PRESENTATION OF COMPLETED DIGITAL “REPRESENTATION” of infrastructure, boundaries and related data  (Recall one of the reasons KAMPA’s $35,000 DIGITAL MAPPING PROJECT WAS DESIRABLE?  

Because it would be so easy to make paper copies for distribution – right?

JUST ANOTHER KAMPA MEETING “SAND BAGGING”

Why no paper copies of these KAMPA INFLUENCED MAPS (based on highly suspicious 24+ year old “shape file” information from an abandoned project when KAMPA was employed here between 1993-1997) in the agenda packet so CUSTOMERS COULD REVIEW THESE “DIGITAL REPRESENTATIONS” PRIOR TO THE WEDNESDAY MEETING?  

Kampa is apparently still pushing the infrastructure constructed for LAFCo annexed properties (and others?) that are OUTSIDE THE WATER LICENSE PLACE OF USE according to the STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

Alright then. There it is.  Still a little hungry?

Below is the whole greasy meal!

My best to you and yours, Lew

2018-2-21 Special Meeting Agenda Supporting Documents

MEISU

Guess we are all “broken records” to one extent or another when passionate about someone or a particular subject, issue, cause, etc…  A friend gently reminded me once again that I often invoke examples of things younger viewers may not appreciate due to my advancing age and their lack of experience with the activities I grew up with and reference  ….ah, ok – lol.

“Broken record”… those old flat vinyl grooved analog recordings utilizing a needle to transmit the sound through the “record player” or “turn table” to the amplifier, then out through the speakers (simplistic explanation).  Old time records if not handled carefully could get scratched causing that “stereotypic” (cute play huh?) repeating “click” and scratchy sound as the needle (traveling in the spinning groove) hit the damaged surface of the record.  Sometimes if the damage was severe enough, the needle would get stuck repeating the same snippet of music over, and over, and over, and over, and over,  …..

JUST LIKE ME AND THIS MERCED RIVER WATER PLACE OF USE STUFF!

   Lol 

True, Pete Kampa has also been a “broken record” on the subject of OUTSIDE POU use under WATER LICENSE 11395 for a much longer time (over 20 years) and for CLEARLY DIFFERENT MOTIVES, yet I don’t believe that is the most important distinction which defines our  adversarial- and repetitive “broken record” perspectives.

The way I see it is this – (you knew it was coming right?)   there is absolutely nothing wrong with repeating something you believe in (with heart AND mind) in a sincere attempt to influence others into appreciating your perspective and gathering necessary support for related activities.  However, if the repeated information being used is not truthful or worse yet, intentionally designed and masterfully used to misrepresent the truth to deceive others into a position of detriment or loss, well, that is not devotion or passion but simple propaganda – or repeated information designed to influence others for various nefarious purposes benefiting the one purveying the untruths, and/or the interests of those hidden behind the scenes that the “untruthful agent”  represents.

Simply put, any “deal” designed, dependent upon and sustained through untruths is likely not in the best interest of those being actively deceived.

Certainly not a rocket science sort of revelation, and as semi-recent cartoon character Homer Simpson might exclaim,

“Duh!”

My best to you and yours, Lew

 

 

My best to  you and yours, Lew

Why are

PUBLIC SAFETY

and

WATER RIGHT

LAWS

intentionally ignored?

MONEY!

 

OLD POSTING REGARDING THIS ROADWAY:

My best to you and yours, Lew

Certainly good news for the LAKE DON PEDRO CSD which has been severely constrained financially without those funds which have been expected for approximately one year.  Perhaps there will be more information at the next Board meeting regarding these funds and how they will be used?  Still no word on the Notice of Violation issued September 28th, 2017 regarding the WL11395 Place of Use issues or Pete Kampa declaring a new Place of Use in Lake Don Pedro for Merced River water.

Perhaps the issue of using public grant funds for proposed private land development projects through a GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTED SPECIAL SERVICE outside the Place of Use (and for remaining compliant with Water License regulations for properties already receiving substituted service) will continue to apparently be overlooked and not addressed?    Seems an extraordinarily long wait for such a simple question, but who knows?

My best to you and yours, Lew

---

 

 

The following is an email response from Wes Barton to LAKE DON PEDRO CSD Board President Danny Johnson.  Johnson had suggested at that last SPECIAL MEETING (Wednesday, January 17th, 2018) that Wes put his observations, comments and questions in writing and forward them to President Johnson.   You will recall many of Mr. Barton’s questions have gone unanswered for over a year as documented in meeting recordings posted on this website.

“Around, around the agenda GO ROUND

As customers chase the GM

The GM stops and laughingly says

HA!  We don’t have to answer!”

When General Manager/Board Treasurer Pete Kampa states he is confused about the legitimate WATER LICENSE 11395 PLACE OF USE RESTRICTIONS for Merced River water in the Lake Don Pedro area I become rather agitated because I have researched the matter extensively and the statement is just plain not truthful.  PETE KAMPA has over twenty years experience with such water issues – notably including four years of “hands on” experience in setting up these OUTSIDE POU ANNEXATIONS to the Lake Don Pedro CSD which he knew twenty years ago would require GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION in the future and was the reason for his UNETHICAL APPOINTMENT RETURN to the LDPCSD in October 2014.

Kampa has laughingly dismissed this (reason for his return) as a wild conspiracy theory while simultaneously refusing to answer legitimate questions as to his activities since 2014 regarding the SPECIAL BENEFIT GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM for land developers outside the WL POU.

The plan was to DIVERT AND  USE STATE AND FEDERAL GRANT FUNDS

(INTENDED TO DEVELOP GROUNDWATER WELLS FOR EMERGENCY DROUGHT USE FOR EXISTING CONSUMERS),

   TO FURTHER EXPAND A SPECIAL BENEFIT GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION SERVICE FOR LAND DEVELOPERS OUTSIDE THE MERCED RIVER WATER PERMITTED PLACE OF USE.

{Like the “slumbering annexation” for a proposed 900 acre residential subdivision adjacent to the LDP subdivision that was LAFCO approved in 1995 but only acknowledged a few months before PETE KAMPA returned to the LDPCSD?}

The <MR WECs> of the Lake Don Pedro subdivision have essentially been forced to fund this SPECIAL GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION BENEFIT for decades.

[October 2017, lakedonpedro.org file photo: PETE KAMPA

using his newly acquired $35,000 DIGITAL MAPPING PROJECT (approved by the Board of Directors

despite public warnings of likely potential misuse by KAMPA)

TO CHANGE the STATE RECOGNIZED PLACE OF USE BOUNDARY

FOR MERCED RIVER WATER per WL11395]

 

However, the only confusion that appears to have existed, and still does, is why PETE KAMPA refused, and still refuses to acknowledge the clear and decades old legitimate 11395 water use restrictions while ONCE AGAIN ACTIVELY VIOLATING THEM – EVEN AFTER A NOTICE OF SIMILAR VIOLATIONS FROM THE STATE WATER BOARD in September of 2017!  

(lakedonpedro.org file photo)

{OR IS THE LDPCSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS

KNOWINGLY ASSISTING PETE KAMPA WITH

THIS CONTINUING 3+ YEARS OF DECEPTION?}

As mentioned before, I am not much of a financial person and am quite satisfied when my bills are paid and the check book balances,  however, there are some BASIC financial matters that do not require extensive education or experience to understand that something is very wrong and I believe Wes Barton has discovered something OUTRAGEOUSLY SIGNIFICANT to Kampa’s continued and UNWARRANTED COMPLAINTS against the USDA and his “stated” CONFUSION as to why the USDA as failed to reimburse the LDPCSD for it’s expenses.

Let’s start with a few basic definitions.

 

USDA:  UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

G/L : GENERAL LEDGER: the principal and controlling ledger of a business enterprise containing individual or controlling accounts for all assets, liabilities, net worth items, revenue, and expenses.

REIMBURSE:

$ ? $ ? $ ? $ ? $ ? $ ? $ ? $

Danny,

Sorry for not replying to your request to explain my question concerning “request for money from USDA when

I didn’t believe we have paid the vendor thus how could CSD be reimbursed”.    I waited until I had G/L to check

A couple of points that I was sure were not pertinent but wanted to  verify.   Secondly, I’ll stay away from most

Numbers, but can support all in detail (from CSD records).

Brief history  and meeting (Jan 17, 2018) discussion:

GM Kampa (GM) indicated “confusion” as to why USDA had not paid apx $324k requested in Nov., 2017, after

Advising CSD Board final review/approval of funding was planned for 7/19/2017 (original req #1 form @$210k

Was presented to Board at that Time).  [To my knowledge, no later info as to any reason to believe there was

Any delay in USDA approval; as well as GM continued the process and applicable communication for funding.]

Also during the July meeting, GM requested an additional funding to Kennedy Jenkins for $60k and that CSD

Would then owe KJ apx $70k, $59.9 for services not originally budgeted.    From June 30, 2017 thru Dec 2017,

GM reports only $1129 spent (or accrued) per G/L on well projects.

12/14/2017 (Nov business), GM reported a “revised” USDA funding request #1 for $324.6k.  This report

Appears to show the increased $114k  ($324k-$210k)  made up of old cost before June 30, 2017, of apx

 $54k (nearly all NJ & sons and K J costs) and about $59k for KJ (dated Aug thru Nov 2017 include  a noted

Cost of $1.7k for the “future”).    GM booked this request as a billing and documented in the G/L & A/R.

Basis of my question, “why surprise no reimburse” or even “checks in the mail”:

If Grants “reimburse” only cash expenditures.    CSD G/L shows apx $1k cost paid/accrued since June thru

Dec 2017.  Revised Request #1 shows $59k spent since June 2017 but  CSD G/L denies this expenditure. 

GM requested $60k to be paid (budget) to KJ to obtain  the reimbursement from USDA.                 Simply put,

I wouldn’t expect USDA to reimburse if I had not paid so why would USDA pay CSD if they hadn’t paid.

[Since cash, other checks and balances would probably catch G/L issues/errors on these transactions if paid.]

I don’t like “gotcha’s”, either.  I reject that this is an unknowable to CSD, known only by me.  However, if one

Wants to “tag” this as a “gotcha” then it must be obvious CSD’s leadership and management is in “deep

Do-do” and need to look close at their organization and selves at least as far as “financial controls”.

Wes Barton, Jan 24, 2018

e-mail: lw.wes.barton@gmail.com

ps don’t have Nellie’s e-mail, please forward

$ ? $ ? $ ? $ ? $ ? $ ? $ ? $

.

.

.

.

 

So what do you folks think?

My best to you and yours, Lew

Ever read or hear something that just doesn’t make sense, but it’s hard to explain exactly why, or what it is? How it keeps chewing at your brain until that glimmer of recognition and understanding of its illogical nature materializes in another unrelated though humorously similar example?

That’s what I thought about GM/TREASURER PETE KAMPA’s self admitted continued questioning of state officials about one stated detail contained in the STATE WATER BOARD September 28^th, 2017 NOTICE OF VIOLATION regarding

Water License 11395 PLACE OF USE restrictions

that really had no effect on the primary issue for the violation notice.

OF COURSE it could conceivably be another extremely important component to understanding the surreptitious motives and plans birthed from decades of behind the scene “wink and nod” devious activities by governing, regulatory, enforcement, and managing entities and officials involved  with this Community Services District’s dark side;

the continuing absolute betrayal and victimization of the extreme majority of MR WECs of the Lake Don Pedro subdivision – which to me sounds very much along the lines of

FRAUD, DISCRIMINATORY FINANCIAL EXPLOITATION AND

DENIAL OF RIGHTS TO A SELECT GROUP OF INNOCENT

TAXPAYERS BY REASON OF THEIR PROPERTY OWNERSHIP

WHICH OCCURRED WITHOUT REASONABLE DISCLOSURES REGARDING

THE FINANCIAL LIABILITIES THAT ARE ASSUMED FOR THE SUBSIDIZATION

OF AN EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE SPECIAL BENEFIT GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION SERVICE FOR

PRIVATE THIRD PARTY LAND DEVELOPERS OWNING THOUSANDS OF ACRES

OUTSIDE THE SUBDIVISION  PLACE OF USE FOR MERCED RIVER WATER under WL11395;

(well, something like that)

the diabolical plan of using an UNPRECEDENTED STATE WIDE  EMERGENCY DROUGHT situation to obtain government grants ostensibly for EMERGENCY DROUGHT WATER FOR EXISTING CONSUMERS yet all the while PETE KAMPA was aware of both known and unknown COMPLIANCE FAILURES to SUBSTITUTE GROUNDWATER for the MERCED RIVER WATER ILLEGALLY LEAVING THE PLACE OF USE (POU) and intending to even further expand this GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM to potentially thousands of ANNEXED ACRES outside the  license POU leaving costs to the majority of MR WECs of the Lake Don Pedro subdivision;

and now?—

yet another unrestrained and arrogant demonstration by PETE KAMPA (supported by his APPROVING Board) of utter contempt and conscious disregard for long established STATE WATER BOARD and MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT published PLACE OF USE MAPS for  MERCED RIVER WATER per WL11395.  

Yes, the CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION (CSDA), a not for profit lobbying organization, must be very proud of their twenty year active Board Member Pete Kampa – a government transparency award and everything!

Perhaps Pete is shooting for a diminished capacity defense plea?  You know, insanity?

-or-

Is he again playing everyone for fools with his elaborate twenty plus year secret plans?

Does he have sufficient agreeable and influential contacts within the State water industry to pull off a quick POU Change with some “administrative” remedy circumventing a full blown change petition and further investigation of the facts?

I always understood a formal change petition would be way too expensive both financially and politically because it would involve considerable, and understandable, push back from down river users – especially those with prior water allotment revisions and reductions.

Why would KAMPA in light of the clear statements in the NOTICE OF VIOLATION regarding the ACTUAL 11395 POU – proclaim and institute a NEW POU in the LDPCSD and, once again, stop the mandatory outside POU compliance reporting OF KNOWN PROPERTIES OUTSIDE THE BOUNDARY?

Seriously, he received another 90 days to answer for KNOWN POU VIOLATIONS, yet he announces a NEW POU BOUNDARY FOR THE LDPCSD which is OBVIOUSLY INCORRECT AND CONSTITUTES ADDITIONAL NEW POU VIOLATIONS WHILE WAITING TO ANSWER FOR THE ORIGINAL PREVIOUS VIOLATIONS THAT GAVE RISE TO THE STATE’S NOTICE OF VIOLATION BACK IN SEP 2017!

WL11395 POU RESTRICTIONS were, and still are clear and easily understood by those NOT ATTEMPTING TO CIRCUMVENT THEM (who knows whether or not Kampa “influential contacts within the state water industry” are busy right now attempting to change this long established POU?)

Yup, RESTRICTIONS clear as big red reflective octagon stop signs and/or flashing red lights.  Humm, a traffic violation analogy might actually be helpful in attempting to understand Pete Kampa’s apparent approach to this STATE VIOLATION NOTICE.

A STATE VIOLATION NOTICE which, incidentally, has been an ABSOLUTE BLESSING as to providing important missing information to this forty (40) plus year fraud against the “extreme majority” of MERCED RIVER WATER ENTITLED CUSTOMERS owning property in the Lake Don Pedro residential subdivision.   An EXTREME majority of MANDATORY CUSTOMERS who are essentially forced to subsidize this special benefit groundwater substitution service for those lands annexed into the LDPCSD by county LAFCos which also completely ignored the water restrictions in WL11395.   yeah, yeah….sos

OK, onward with the traffic citation analogy…..

A CHP officer on patrol observes violations of law contained in the California vehicle code for which the officer has obviously been educated, trained, and provided the authority and jurisdiction within which to enforce those laws.   The officer observes a violation, initiates a traffic stop, contacts the driver and conducts a basic investigation (license, registration, insurance, driver’s physical/emotional condition, etc.) and if the violation is not serious enough to warrant immediate “in custody status” (handcuffing, placing in patrol unit, etc.), he issues a citation listing alleged violations along with a date, time and location to appear before a judge.  Only one thing is missing…. acknowledgement of the driver’s “follow-up responsibilities” documented on the citation and agreed to, as evidenced by the driver’s signature.

Most of you already know this, but for those who may not, a signature on a citation documents the driver’s promise to later appear in court and IS NOT an admission of guilt – remember, that innocent until proven guilty concept?  Just promise to take care of this later.

The driver’s signature is the “bond” (like bail bond) guaranteeing the driver will appear in court in the future to answer for the alleged violations listed on the citation, however, if the driver refuses to legitimately sign the citation for whatever reason, the officer will then on the scene take physical custody of the person by handcuffing and transporting to a facility/jail for identification, booking and then obtaining that signature as a promise to later appear in court.   If still no signature at that time they will likely remain “in custody” until appearance before the judge where a monetary “bail” is set. (Of course I am referring to the old days so there may be some procedural changes based on specific arrest circumstances.)

Now in this NOTICE OF VIOLATION for water license PLACE OF USE violation it would seem as though GM/TREASURER PETE KAMPA, …………………using the CHP analogy above,

has been attempting to engage the traffic officer in an argument over an insignificant aspect of the violation for which the citation was issued rather than focusing on preparation for the formal court appearance.  In other words, Pete Kampa is demanding to know exactly how a state water board officer determined how a related issue appears to have occurred rather than examining and addressing what triggered the original violations and represents a potential for continued POU violations in  the future.

HINT: This is likely why KAMPA CHANGED THE PLACE OF USE FOR MERCED RIVER WATER FOR THE LDPCSD LAST WEDNESDAY IN HIS SURPRISE INFO DUMP (or so he believes?) —- IT WILL BE EASIER TO MEET THE KNOWN EXISTING GROUNDWATER COMPLIANCE DEMAND AS WELL AS PROVIDE ADDITIONAL OUTSIDE POU CONNECTIONS IN THE FUTURE – ALL WITH PUBLIC MONEY – if the high consumers are removed.

[RECALL how the COUNTY OF MARIPOSA owed $40,000 plus for reimbursement to the LDPCSD because the LAKE DON PEDRO WASTE WATER FACILITY had been using the wrong water meter for years and only paying for a fraction of the GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION actually being consumed.   That extra FREE WATER was probably also helpful with the processing of the liquid leachate from the Mariposa County landfill that was transported to the LDP Waste Water Facility in tankers during all times of the day and night during periods of heavy precipitation.  No doubt helped to keep residential sewer costs down around the golf for a while.  Hum, wrong meter?  Sounds recently familiar.]

Of course, in this STATE WATER RIGHTS CASE, it was PETE KAMPA and the LDPCSD that indeed furnished the STATE OF CALIFORNIA with clearly incorrect and contradictory map information regarding the PLACE OF USE restrictions under water license 11395.

Rather like OUR DRIVER providing a counterfeit license, altered registration, or false insurance paperwork to the arresting officer, but when confronted about the discrepancies, starts jumping up and down, waving his arms, and screaming, “how do you know I don’t have valid insurance right now, right this minute?  Maybe I just left the insurance place!   You can’t prove I don’t have it right now, can you?  You can’t prove right now for sure that I don’t have insurance – right now –  can you?”

lol

Reminds me of a humorous sign in the Mariposa County Building Department many years ago:

“Arguing with a building inspector is like rolling in the mud with a pig. 

The pig loves it and you just get dirty.”

Then, even after being granted a 90 day extension to prepare an answer for the court appearance (STATE WATER BOARD HEARING) our driver (GM/TREASURER) continues to pester the ISSUING OFFICER (State Water Board) to provide specific details of the evidence giving rise to the initial vehicle traffic stop (violation notice) while committing similar more serious violations as the officer drives away?

Naturally such information (if provided) would be quite helpful in determining what sort of defense would be appropriate when ultimately appearing in court and attempting to “beat the ticket” – that is, if Pete Kampa isn’t going for a diminished capacity gig.  lol

BUT WAIT!

WHY does PETE KAMPA even need to respond to the STATE WATER BOARD

since he has already established a new POU by again discontinuing the compliance reporting and public information regarding consumption figures while stating they are now entitled to MERCED RIVER WATER based on a map from an abandoned project 24 years ago which clearly contradicts the STATE WATER BOARD and MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT ESTABLISHED OFFICIAL POU MAPS?

(curious)

Remember how I have become rather “expressive” during meetings regarding these POU maps?

No, it didn’t happen again fortunately, but probably should have – regardless I sure as hell would have had a PUBLIC COMMENT

IF GM/TREASURER PETE KAMPA HAD INCLUDED HIS

NEW PLACE OF USE 11395 BOUNDARY

FOR MERCED RIVER WATER, and

 REPORT OF ANOTHER

43% TREATED WATER LOSS

IN THE NOTICED AGENDA PACKET LIKE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN

RATHER THAN ANOTHER UNATTACHED MEETING SURPRISE GM REPORT 

aka a

“DUMP OF CONCEALED IMPORTANT DISTRICT INFORMATION”

(which of course can’t be discussed at the meeting because it was not part of the “sometimes numbered agenda packet” and will most likely be lost like so many other “SUSPICIOUS UNATTACHED DOCUMENTS” in LDPCSD HISTORICAL RECORDS.)

That OFFICE ARSON PRIOR TO KAMPA’s RETURN is beginning to make much more sense now.

AS DOES MARIPOSA COUNTY LAFCo REQUESTING LDPCSD HELP WITH THEIR OWN ANNEXATION MAPS.  

Recall how I accused GM/TREASURER PETE KAMPA of INTENTIONALLY USING THE WRONG POU MAPS ON THE WEBSITE AND LEAVING THOSE INCORRECT PAPER COPIES ON THE BOARD ROOM WALL FOR THE PUBLIC TO SEE?

(Tell a lie often enough and it becomes a management/board truth and hopeful defense to the State Water Board?)

Well, I stand by what I said and would like to try and clear this KAMPA MAP GARBAGE up right now WITHOUT the distraction of all the audio/video stuff, ok?

 

BELOW IS THE MAP PETE KAMPA CONTINUES TO DISPLAY

ON THE LDPCSD WEBSITE AND BOARD ROOM WALL

This is the June  20, 1977  MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT MAP illustrating the Place of Use for Merced River water whose boundary is titled:  SIERRA HIGHLANDS WATER COMPANY,

however this map also contained added diagonally hatched areas identified in the title block as

“AREAS RESERVING WATER FOR FUTURE USE”. 

This map was evidently submitted to the STATE WATER BOARD FIRST during licensing in an attempt to include these other LAFCo ANNEXED PROPERTIES but they were apparently detected as incorrect and a revised map on June 20, 1978 resulted – without the hatched “reserved water” designation.  THOSE HATCHED AREAS REPRESENT THOUSANDS OF ACRES THAT WERE ANNEXED INTO THE LAKE DON PEDRO COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT BY TUOLUMNE AND MARIPOSA COUNTY LAFCOs (LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSIONS). 

THESE AREAS, HOWEVER, WERE CLEARLY OUTSIDE THE PLACE OF USE FOR MERCED RIVER WATER YET ANNEXED ANYWAY CREATING MUCH TURMOIL.   MANY WERE ANNEXED BEFORE THE LDPCSD CONSTRUCTED THE FIRST WELL IN 1993 AS A “REMEDY FOR OUTSIDE POU WATER LICENSE VIOLATIONS”.  That original well, RANCHITO #1, IS STILL OFF LINE FOLLOWING ITS FAILURE DURING ALL THE DRILLING FOR NEW WATER TO SELL OUTSIDE THE POU.

WHY ANNEX LAND INTO A DISTRICT

(SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO SERVE WATER)

WHEN THAT DISTRICT

COULD NOT LEGALLY SERVE THEIR

ONLY SOURCE OF WATER?

(Does the large print help with clearly illustrating a legitimate question that has begged for an answer for decades?  lol)

WAS THE LAKE DON PEDRO CSD SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED, FORMED AND INTENDED FROM DAY ONE TO INTENTIONALLY CIRCUMVENT MERCED RIVER WATER STATE RESTRICTIONS CONTAINED IN WL11395 THROUGH A SURREPTITIOUS GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM PAID FOR BY THE THOUSANDS OF UNSUSPECTING PROPERTY OWNERS OF THE LAKE DON PEDRO SUBDIVISION (half absentee) WHO CONSTITUTE THE  DISTRICT’S EXTREME MAJORITY OF MANDATORY CUSTOMERS?

DOCUMENTS SUGGEST SOME OF THESE MAJOR ANNEXATIONS (EVEN OTHERS NOT SHOWN ON THE BELOW MAP OF annexed and proposed annexed lands) TOOK PLACE BEFORE THE CALIFORNIA PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION ACTUALLY APPROVED THE TRANSFER OF SIERRA HIGHLAND’S FACILITIES AND ASSETS TO THE NEWLY FORMED LDPCSD!

Regarding the above RESERVED WATER that Pete Kampa insists is some sort of a SERVICE RIGHT for these ANNEXED PROPERTIES, the SEP 28, 2017 STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD NOTICE OF VIOLATION , PAGE 1, THIRD PARAGRAPH clears up this continuing false information by Kampa:

Curiously, a very large portion of that “middle hatched area” was also a 900 ACRE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION ANNEXATION that was LAFCo  approved in 1995 (when PETE KAMPA was employed at the LDPCSD the first time and advocated thousands of acres be annexed into the district), yet that ANNEXATION WAS ACTIVELY KEPT A SECRET for over twenty years until PETE KAMPA was returned to complete these annexation projects by developing an ALTERNATE SOURCE of groundwater production designed, developed and operated with public funds yet intended for private annexed land development and benefit.  Cute huh?

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

BELOW is the June 15, 1978 REVISED MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT MAP illustrating the Place of Use for Merced River water – which, for the POU, is exactly the same as the June 20, 1977.

This is the official POU SERVICE MAP ON FILE with THE STATE WATER BOARD.

NOTICE THE ANNEXED LANDS “RESERVING WATER FOR FUTURE USE” ARE ABSENT.

THIS IS THE MAP (above)

PETE KAMPA AND HIS BOARD OF DIRECTORS HAVE REPEATEDLY REFUSED TO OBTAIN FROM

THE STATE WATER BOARD

AND NOW CONTINUE TO ACTIVELY IGNORE!

 

 

Remember this guy?  “WOODSTOCK” from the Peanuts comics?  Lucy and Charlie Brown?  yeah, I’m old.  Anyway, I’ve always thought our district boundary resembled Woodstock a bit (of course his tail became much larger with the South Shore Club 2,010 acre project off Bonds Flat Road that was annexed into the LDPCSD but never developed due to the developers failure to meet approval conditions set by the State Water Board.  That’s why they are called “conditionally approved projects”.  Conditions must be met to obtain approval.  Unfortunately, those fixated on obtaining water only hear the two words “approved project” which of course is not so lol for those who end up paying for the negative results.)

So with Woodstock’s outline above in mind, notice that the county line “dip” on the top of his “map tail”, is CLEARLY ABOVE THE NORTHERN SUBDIVISION (POU) BOUNDARY.  The school is between this county line and the subdivision boundary.  (Some continue to interpret and claim a portion of this county line is a road.  WRONG!  (Please return to map reading 101 for a refresher.)

The school has always been outside the subdivision (thus POU) and this fact has been known since before it was constructed, yet once

again PETE KAMPA and HIS SUPPORTING BOARD contend everyone else is wrong – including, among others, the State Water Board, the Merced Irrigation District (holder of WL11395), previous boards, GM’s, attorneys, blah, blah, blah – everyone is wrong except Pete Kampa who set up a lot of this over twenty years ago.

At this last meeting (Wednesday, January 17, 2018) PETE KAMPA with his BOARD’s SUPPORT has proclaimed the TRADITIONAL HIGHEST CONSUMER OF GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION – and six other OUTSIDE POU PROPERTIES,

as now being

KAMPA-GANDA’d into

AN ENTIRELY NEW

PLACE OF USE BOUNDARY

for MERCED RIVER WATER under

LICENSE 11395!

This GM/TREASURER has now refused to release the consumption rates for known OUTSIDE PLACE OF USE PROPERTIES while also attempting to “low key” the fact we just had yet another 43% water loss last month – and that’s only treated water!  Raw water loss (between lake and treatment plant) is traditionally quite substantial as well.

PETE KAMPA is apparently not asking the STATE WATER BOARD for an administrative change in the Place of Use for Merced River Water under the license, nor is he seeking a formal change petition (IF I WERE A LICENSED DOWN RIVER USER I’D BE IN CONTACT WITH MY LEGAL COUNSEL AND ASKING UNDER WHAT AUTHORITY CAN A GM/TREASURER OF A CSD UPSTREAM UNILATERALLY CHANGE THE PLACE OF USE OF A WATER LICENSE DURING A WATER LICENSE VIOLATION INVESTIGATION for THAT VERY WATER LICENSE POU ISSUE?  

SPEAKING OF LEGAL STUFF– that’s another thing….what’s with all these “GM EVALUATIONS” held under Government Code Section 54956.95 which deals with liability and loss issues of a district?

What is actually taking place in these so called AND agenda titled CLOSED SESSIONS for

“PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Government Code Section 54956.95 Title: General Manager”

Seriously, does the following government section under which these “evaluations” are taking place sound like a General Manager Evaluation to you?

??????????????

Government Code – GOV

TITLE 5. LOCAL AGENCIES [50001 – 57550]

  ( Title 5 added by Stats. 1949, Ch. 81. )

DIVISION 2. CITIES, COUNTIES, AND OTHER AGENCIES [53000 – 55821]

  ( Division 2 added by Stats. 1949, Ch. 81. )

PART 1. POWERS AND DUTIES COMMON TO CITIES, COUNTIES, AND OTHER AGENCIES [53000 – 54999.7]

  ( Part 1 added by Stats. 1949, Ch. 81. )

CHAPTER 9. Meetings [54950 – 54963]

  ( Chapter 9 added by Stats. 1953, Ch. 1588. )

54956.95.  

(a) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent a joint powers agency formed pursuant to Article 1 (commencing with Section 6500) of Chapter 5 of Division 7 of Title 1, for purposes of insurance pooling, or a local agency member of the joint powers agency, from holding a closed session to discuss a claim for the payment of tort liability losses, public liability losses, or workers’ compensation liability incurred by the joint powers agency or a local agency member of the joint powers agency.

(b) Nothing in this chapter shall be construed to prevent the Local Agency Self-Insurance Authority formed pursuant to Chapter 5.5 (commencing with Section 6599.01) of Division 7 of Title 1, or a local agency member of the authority, from holding a closed session to discuss a claim for the payment of tort liability losses, public liability losses, or workers’ compensation liability incurred by the authority or a local agency member of the authority.

(c) Nothing in this section shall be construed to affect Section 54956.9 with respect to any other local agency.

(Added by Stats. 1989, Ch. 882, Sec. 3.)

????????????????????

Consider also that since Pete’s return in October of 2014 a “formal” GM Evaluation has never taken place although scheduled multiple times yet the board is again waiting for the GM/TREASURER to essentially evaluate himself.  Yup.

Since the LDPCSD has a history of doing many things ASS BACKWARDS, perhaps I should follow suit and provide the end of the meeting now?

The SPECIAL MEETING ended at 1459hrs (2:59PM).

I packed up all the camera/recording equipment and exited to the parking lot.  I talked with Wes Barton a bit in the parking lot and entered my pickup.  While Directors were in CLOSED SESSION I finally decided to wait in the parking lot again to hear the “report out” from their “GM EVALUATION”.

The exterior door to the BOARDROOM was closed so I moved my truck from the original parking space close to the door and backed into another space near another vehicle so I could keep an eye on the closed boardroom exterior door without looking over my shoulder or using the vehicle’s mirrors (A real pain in the neck the last time on CODE 5 – lol)

1518 hrs:  Director Russ Warren opened the BOARDROOM door, and while standing in the open doorway began surveying the parking lot looking for something.  When it appeared as though he was going to re-enter the boardroom and close the door again, I yelled out of my open passenger window something to the effect of”  “Are you done?  Ready for the report out?”  (I was concerned if I did not speak up they would later say “no one was in the parking lot so we adjourned the meeting and you’ll have to wait until next month’s packet to read the report out in the Minutes for approval”.)

Director Warren scanned for a bit more and located my vehicle’s new position in the parking lot and inquired:

“Did somebody knock on the door?”

I responded that no one had been near the door.  Warren entered and closed the boardroom door behind him.

1519hrs, (one minute later) BOARD PRESIDENT DANNY JOHNSON exited the boardroom with paperwork in hand.  I asked if they were ready for the REPORT OUT of the CLOSED SESSION?  JOHNSON replied no and that he just needed to make some copies.  (Gee, wonder what copies were needed for a GM evaluation?  This CLOSED SESSION had been planned for some time, why weren’t copies made in advance?  Were the originals furnished by the board or the GM/TREASURER?

1522hrs, DANNY JOHNSON returns to the boardroom and exterior door is again closed.

1528hrs, GM/TREASURER PETE KAMPA exits boardroom with brief case and proceeds directly to the Administration Office.

1552hrs, Operations Supervisor Randy Gilgo and another employee return to the LDPCSD compound in separate District vehicles.

1615hrs, Director Warren again opens the BOARDROOM door, I asked if ready for report out?  Warren replies they are waiting for Board Secretary Syndie Marchesiello.

 

and the

MR WECs

have been paying for such

UNETHICAL GARBAGE FOR DECADES!

 

Later,

My best to you and yours, Lew

 

PS: Sometimes I write and post things I believed humorous at that time, however, upon a later rereading with a bit more reflection (usually after a good night’s sleep) wonder if the attempt to produce a laugh or two might have gone too far in some fashion and caused distress to others or even hurt feelings – which was certainly never my intention.  You know?  Crossing some invisible line subjecting the joke itself to speculation as to whether it secretly reflected a personal belief or agreement with whatever the intended point of the attempted humorous comment may have been?    That’s why I use the “lol” so frequently in posts, as a reminder of the tongue in cheek nature of so much of my written expression. (It is much easier to appreciate the intended humor when “in person” and witnessing simultaneous facial expressions, body language, tone of voice, etc. during such a joke presentation.)

Unfortunately, after starting the rather lengthy YouTube uploading process for this video and passing that “POINT OF NO RETURN” (should probably get another computer) I realized I likely, and quite unintentionally, may have offended an apparently very large segment of the population with what many, including myself, would consider to be an innocent albeit stereotypical humorously intended comment with absolutely no ill-will what-so-ever to the referenced individuals themselves.

OK, with that said, the above may be the way I perceived my joke made at someone else’s expense while trying to make a serious point with a couple of laughs, but that other person (the joke comparison) may not think the comment so funny, but actually disparaging, intentionally mean and hurtful, and just plain ignorant.

So in the event my sometimes excessive attempts to snag a laugh or two may have indeed offended or even angered some folks, I do sincerely apologize for the 420 comment.  I do not believe for a nanosecond such consumption is responsible for the extremely pathetic performance of our “BOBBLE HEADED APPROVE ANYTHING KAMPA BOARD” which has repeatedly ignored multiple public requests for the district to acquire easily obtainable, legitimate, and truthful water license facts from the STATE WATER BOARD.    Oh yeah, I also do not believe such consumption alone would necessarily cause an otherwise honest individual to become corrupt and unethical – especially when Oath sworn to represent the interests of the public.

Obviously there is something else at work here.