Life is wonderful isn’t it?  I mean we are blessed and afflicted with its consequences, but all and all, a blessing.  So many aspects to our linear existence.  Coincidence is amazing for example.

Yesterday I telephoned the Merced Irrigation District to find out how to request the outside MID POU reports.  I was directed to a representative who was in a meeting and unavailable but I was able to leave a message with call back number.  I did not receive a return telephone call yesterday so I tried again this morning at 0932hrs.  Was able to get through and explained what I was trying to obtain.  She said I could just email the request but explained a certified letter might be better as I may be contacting other agencies as well.

Finished the request and drove to the La Grange Post Office about nine miles away but timed it wrong and caught the lunch break.  Always a silver lining if you recognize them because I had the opportunity to converse with a long time La Grange local for about half an hour or so.  Very pleasant conversation.

Once the postmaster returned and opened the office the request was off.  Pretty reasonable cost – less than seven dollars with confirmed return receipt.

Here’s the request and mail receipt:

Returned home started preparation for the next slaughter of weeds but later discovered I had missed a call at 1157 from a deputy director at MID.   The message advised he would be able to speak with me between meetings but the time had already passed.   Resumed the attack on unwanted vegetation with the sprayer.  I am still amazed at how much they grew in just a couple of days.   Must finish soon!

Tonight while checking emails I found an electronic agenda notice for a Special  LDPCSD Meeting of the Board of Directors, Tuesday February 16, 2016 1:00p.m.  (Incidentally, a big thank you to the folks that passed along the information just in case I had not received the news. I knew others cared about their district!)

Can the rest of you[1] guess what is on this SPECIAL MEETING AGENDA?     That’s right!

AGENDA ITEM 6 c.  “Approval of a Resolution rescinding previous Resolution 2013-4, a Resolution that prohibited the commitment of water supplies to properties with LDPCSD water service available, but located outside of the boundaries of Merced Irrigation District’s Lake McClure water supply Place of Use.”

This may well turn out to be a very interesting ride for the next few years.  Extremely expensive backup ground wells created with grant funds for a disadvantaged community water system?  Those wells intended for existing, (and future subdivision availability paying[2]), customers in the event of continued or new drought emergency in the future?    GM and Board to now abandoned the Resolution previously supported by our GM, District Engineers and legal counsel that restricted service only to those entitled under the water license?   Wow.

My best to you and yours, Lew

SOME POINTS OF CLARIFICATION

Familiar with the SO GOSIP (Same Old Group of Special Interest People) and their penchant for spreading untruths, I would once again like to reiterate some basics about my blog postings.

Perhaps a clarification of what the SO GOSIP are would be helpful.

“SO GOSIP” is a term referencing those folks who support things that are often in conflict with, or contrary to, normal operating procedures and don’t make much sense.  I thought it humorous because a common activity of this SO GOSIP is to repeat untruths so many times those who do not know (or understand) the truth begin to believe the SO GOSIP and their disinformation.

Their activities are often directly tied to a clear and tangible benefit to real estate and land development interests.  Some of them are in the real estate industry.  (PLEASE!  I am not saying real estate people are bad, however, like in all professions or trades, there are always those who fail to perform as required and they are usually found near issues that can be exploited to their benefit.)

Past examples include, but are in no way limited to, the LDPOA failing to enforce CCRs during massive uncontrolled subdivision growth, or the LDPCSD catering to developer’s projects and having a land development corporation employee actually on the board of directors often instructing on the the day-to-day business activities. (Being the former, and first GM of LDPCSD certainly assisted in this role.  Conflict of interest?)

Other times a clear community detriment could be perceived such as the proposed selling our undeveloped natural parks to this land developer, or expanding water service beyond what the water license permits and using expensive ground water substitution to do so.

JUST SHORTHAND

Anyway, the term does not refer to any particular individual(s) and the actual number of their participants fluctuates greatly depending upon the “cause at the time”; what people want or are willing to believe; or how many discover the truth, realize they are being used by experienced handlers and stop making unintentional fools of themselves.  The SO GOSIP are always recruiting and a favorite intern spokesperson often will appear from anonymity at any given time to cheer lead the cause.

 

THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT REGARDING THIS  WEBSITE

First and foremost this website is my weBLOG, or BLOG and is nothing but a public journal of my thoughts, ideas, photographs, videos, comments and of course the dreaded OPINION.   Lord have mercy on us all.  lol

I do not set out to offend or upset anyone so please excuse any failed attempts at humor to make a point.  Please also appreciate this is still a free country and each of us has the right to freely express ourselves within socially acceptable parameters.  But there’s the rub.  Some people are offended with others who just don’t agree with their position and re actively/emotionally strike out with nasty, vulgar personal insults, and untruths.  Such behavior is not only unnecessary and impolite but is often acknowledged as evidence that their position is weak or completely devoid of merit and name calling is all they have in defense.

REGARDING THE LDPCSD GM

There is no doubt in my mind our GM possesses years of professional water industry training; hands on water facility experience; a multi-perspective from both the private and public sector side[1] of water treatment; and as president of his own water management company has honed his “can do” persuasive skills to a very high degree.

Obviously there are different approaches to problem solving and accomplishing goals in the public realm and not everybody agrees with what is considered acceptable activity for their community, county, state or even country.   (Private business is held to a different standard.)

Some folks don’t believe regulations should be followed if they conflict with a beneficial goal because a certain amount of risk can often achieve much more in a shorter period of time. Others believe regulations should be followed regardless of inconvenience or obstacle to the goal because they (regulations) were designed to prevent known and foreseeable negative consequences if violated.

Recently our LDPOA Board has provided the GM with extraordinary powers of management to accomplish goals due to a serious drought and the time estimated by the GM to complete necessary projects for uninterrupted water service to existing customers.   I believe the far majority of customers would support such an endeavor as stated.

Unfortunately, I fear this extra “granted” power[2] has been deliberately and secretly used to obtain the necessary infrastructure (water wells) for the GM, with the approval and support of the Board of Directors, to fundamentally change the intended function and operation of our surface water treatment plant.  This apparently continues the GMs previous LDPCSD employment history of water service expansion beyond the permitted areas under the water license under which the LDPCSD operates.

The extremely expensive project of constructing and developing ground water wells (for third party use) was accomplished by the GM and Board of Directors under the guise of protecting current customer water availability during a prolonged emergency drought. This re-configuration of our surface water treatment plant’s intended function and operation, I believe, is a complete betrayal of public trust by those directors supporting the program.

Would study of the numerous grant applications reveal the ulterior motive or provide evidence of intentional concealment of any facts?

Let me rephrase that, were Grantors or administrators of funds advised the LDPCSD already had an approved functioning “alternate water source” for over 20 years and the reason that source had not been further developed was due to the fact that ground well was the  legal remedy for past multiple violations of water license restrictions?

As a classified disadvantaged community seeking special consideration for grant funding is it not disingenuous, or even illegal, to request funds for a public agency for one purpose while specifically planning to use them for another?

Was grant money applied for to specifically circumvent the prohibitions of district service to properties not entitled to the water our LDPCSD pumps, treats, stores, and distributes under L11395?

Would the LDPCSD still have received those funds for construction of new water wells if the grantors knew they were necessary for expanding water service connections EVER FURTHER outside the permitted use area under the license of which it operates?

If these wells were supposedly developed for sustainability during drought or other emergency, aka, to “keep the water flowing for existing customers”, that should be their ONLY FUNCTION FOR PERPETUITY.  Not as a special benefit to those outside the legal area of the water license.

NOTICE THE SIMILARITY?

Lake Don Pedro is a microcosm of the entire nation.  Take for example my recent post with that sign I first thought was a “For President” advertisement.  It probably upsets some folks who think Hillary Clinton is trustworthy, a great leader, and truly presidential material.  Fine, that’s their opinion.  You already know mine.  So what?

I don’t hate those who support and believe Hillary Clinton did nothing wrong by having a privately owned computer server where United States top secret information was stored and evidently hacked by other hostile governments.  I don’t despise those folks who want to vote for a woman who very likely (because of what she had done), has indirectly been responsible for untold deaths and major changes in the geo-political/military movement arena due to her intentional storage of classified information in an unsecured server where it could be stolen.

No I do not loathe Hillary or those that support her but rather chalk it up to what they believe to be satisfactory public service by a politician with a rather tarnished detailed history spanning  decades.  Observing what others support or applaud provides an opportunity to assess their viewpoint of the world and what they believe to be truth.

Whether something makes sense, is logical, or thought to be “just right or wrong” is based on that person’s education, experience and expectations of what constitutes good behavior.

Rarely are things simply black or white, but rather, multitudes of grey.

Lack of hate doesn’t’ equate to respect or trust when credible evidence exists that motives, words or actions are disingenuous.

The question becomes: Are you happy with the direction this CSD is headed with respect to expanding service rather than focusing on existing customers and their water needs now and for the future?

And just like in County, State and National political maters (where we traditionally feel helpless and too weak to make a difference), the only recourse, your only chance of influencing that which you may believe is wrong and unfair, is your vote.

Interestingly the only time you get to vote is when that which you believe needs changing NEEDS MORE OF YOUR MONEY TO CONTINUE EXACTLY THAT WHICH YOU BELIEVE TO BE WRONG!

How peculiar.  A political machine tells you one thing, but does another. The machine continues to grow ignoring its own rules while claiming the activity it is good for everyone.  It spends millions of dollars, continues to spend, and intends to spend a great deal more under the guise of protecting ALL when in actuality is creating a special benefit for third party interests.  The real crazy part is the majority of innocent taxpayers are expected to continue paying the mounting costs – even for outside professional assistance in achieving that goal.

Think of this.   The very emergency (drought) that created this machine and the situation to redirect money to change our water plant operation will also be used to elicit even more money under threat of dire consequences if another Proposition 218 is not approved.

The warning will go something like:

IF CUSTOMERS do not vote and approve this Prop 218 for water rate increases you will run out of water, maybe die, and the property you leave your heirs will be worth nothing without the water only we can supply.

Bullshit!

It’s our water and water license 11395 clearly says so.

You have, and intend to continue, providing water to those not entitled while expecting us (entitled water users) to pay for and suffer the consequences of your plan.

VISION 2020 a MYOPIC PURSUIT OF A WATER EMPIRE?

MYOPIC: Defective vision of distant objects, and in this case, how changing this surface water treatment plant is going to threaten sustainability of water for those who have, do, and will continue to pay for what they are legally entitled already under the water license.  If this is truly a great idea for everyone there is no reason why those paying the bills should not decide the issue in a fair vote – and that means absentee availability payers as well.

CANCELLED WIDGET AGAIN

This is similar to my cancelled widget – I want to believe it is a good plan but because of the way this GM was hired with the Board’s assistance, who is obviously concealing information from the public (MID POU report in agenda packet  – among other things) I find it extremely difficult to trust his motives and long game plan.

Thus far, barring any earth-shattering information which indicates this truly is a great plan for entitled users who pay the bills, I think I’ll pass on this  GM/BOARD CREATED WIDGET.

DOES GOVERNMENT SUPPORT THIS TRANSFORMATION?

I would imagine the County and State might appreciate the fact more citizens could be served by an existing state approved and regulated water treatment plant so long as someone else pays for the expansion.  Guess who that is?

The modification of License 11395 restrictions has been requested and denied many times.  Has something changed here?  Is there some kind of “wink and nod” going on with regulating government entities?  Have some “you do this, and we’ll do that” handshake agreements already been made under the table?

Is this why things appear so wrong, because there’s a secret deal that the GM and Board cannot divulge to the public yet?

Oh really?  Is this an example of the transparency of public government referred to in the Brown Act and subsequent court rulings?   I think not.

SELL EVERY DROP!  WHO CARES?

One director I served with on the board said more than once he would sell every drop of water we had to whoever wanted it – he didn’t care because it would be revenue for the district.  This was an absolutely unbelievable and short-sighted statement which obviously failed to grasp the concept of protecting a resource for future use by those entitled to this “NEW CALIFORNIA LIQUID GOLD”.

(Do not forget our surface water treatment plant pumps some of the purest California Liquid Gold in the State!

Yes, the prolonged drought and legally required environmental releases for wildlife caused the Lake to drop to minimum “dead pool” and was of concern to everyone – animal lovers, varied agricultural industries, hydroelectric energy producers, and of course, those of us who reside up here and require water to survive.

Here’s an interesting distinction between those entitled to Merced River water (Lake McClure) under License 11395 and those who are not –  choice.

THOSE ENTITLED TO LAKE WATER UNDER LICENSE HAVE NO CHOICE

The majority of owners in the subdivision have no choice as to where they receive their water – we must be customers of the district as we are prohibited from drilling private ground wells on our properties.  We MUST financially support this district because there is no alternative.  You cannot demand to have the water cut off to your house because the respective county health department officials would likely condemn your home as uninhabitable without a verified, dependable, and safe water supply.  [Little things like adequate sewage disposal and protecting public health/life.]

SEWAGE SIDE NOTE:  There is another “large muddy boot ready to drop” on our LDPCSD in the form of the sewer plant on Ranchito Drive near the golf course.  Even when thousands of dollars were discovered owed to the District in the past, one still sitting director wanted to “negotiate” the cost down.  WHAT?  We were almost bankrupt yet some advocated not pursuing the matter at all – to be “nice”.

Can you imagine the added expense for maintenance, repair, replacement, trained personnel, administration, etc. with picking up that white elephant whose construction was a direct response to the uncontrolled development that required more sewage treatment? Heck, those properties that receive the benefit of that sewage treatment system cannot financially meet the costs of keeping it running – not enough paying residents.  That should have been the “speculators problem” but naturally it will likely fall on everyone else.

Of course the County wants to “dump” it on the CSD.  A CSD that quite obviously already has significant difficulties of its own.  How many water agencies in the State of California had their administrative office burned to the ground?  And don’t forget, the second fire in the plant was not inexpensive either.  We have some true “radicals” in this area and they are dangerous when they don’t get their way.

POOR LDPOA SUBDIVISION

The subdivision never developed as intended and much of that had to do with the abysmal failure of enforce existing regulations.  Go figure, huh?  Look at what recently happened when a land development corporation was given free rein in this area.  How many are happy with how that turned out?  That corporation even had an employee sitting on the water board directly influencing how day-to-day operations were carried out usually to the benefit of his primary allegiance employer – which of course was not the LDPCSD.  (Follow the money)  If you didn’t support their plan you were accused of being “anti-development”, “mean spirited”, “selfish”, ……golf hater!  lol

THOSE NOT ENTITLED WATER OUTSIDE SUBDIVISION HAVE A CHOICE

Yes, you can drill your own private ground water well.  There is nothing preventing those who need water from drilling their own ground wells.

Yes it is expensive but there are also varied technologies and ways to proceed which might reduce costs depending on your water demand.

Yes in this fractured rock geology ground wells can be unpredictable and risky – but so can lake water with sustained drought as we all know now.

Yes, in some locations the water is not fit for consumption and contains undesirable elements which may or may not be safely removed.  Caveat emptor (Let the buyer beware)

Yes, there is another option if you want to live in this beautiful foothill area, purchase some LDPOA property where you are guaranteed water service by the district. (Some did this many years ago then illegally ran extensive piping to the other property outside the subdivision thus creating another outside MID POU service which we still must serve.)

Oh, you don’t want to pay yearly property assessments and have another layer of local government (Association) with their often frustrating rules and regulations enforced by local residents telling you how to live and develop your own property?

I think I understand, you don’t want the subdivision and it’s rules – just our water.

AVAILABLE HIGH QUALITY WATER, IN MY OPINION, IS THE BIGGEST ATTRACTION AND SELLING POINT FOR SUBDIVISION PROPERTY.  OUR COMMUNITY’S FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH AND SAFETY IS NOT ONLY DEPENDENT UPON THIS WATER, BUT WE ARE SPECIFICALLY ENTITLED TO IT UNDER THE WATER LICENSE – WHY GIVE IT AWAY AND JEOPARDIZE OUR FUTURE FOR OTHERS JUST LOOKING FOR THE CHEAPEST WAY TO DEVELOP AND INCREASE THE VALUE OF THEIR OUTSIDE MID POU PROPERTIES?

Sharing is a great concept but survival should be paramount.

STABILIZE, SECURE and GUARANTEE EXISTING CUSTOMERS FIRST

Why not stabilize, guarantee and PROTECT water availability to those who already have a legal right to that water – both existing and availability customers?  You know, those who are paying the bills now are the ones deserving of this district’s efforts and attention not “outsiders” who merely want to usurp our greatest natural resource (and biggest selling point for LDPOA land) for their own purposes of development and/or profit.  How many will simply have a new water connection hooked up then sell at an exponentially increased price?

What is so darn difficult to understand here?  This is not a matter of being “selfish and not sharing with others”, but rather, an issue of survival predicated on common sense and good judgment by those trusted to represent LDPCSD customers.

 

DROUGHT HAS BEEN A BLESSING IN DISGUISE

We now know what can happen.  We are learning to save and conserve and discriminate as to what landscaping should survive and what needs to be let go.  We don’t view water with the same “there’s plenty of it” attitude.  We appreciate this necessary resource even more.

Some folks have repeatedly advocated expanding services outside MID POU because we traditionally only use a fraction of our total allotment under the license.  (Approximately 1/5^th but I have read other fractional representations as well.  Obviously it is a moving target and gets into consumption & maintenance values versus unaccounted for water loss).

SIDE NOTE:  Speaking of water loss.   Has the district ever taken corrective action regarding a known discrepancy in water accounting that evidently occurs on a sitting director’s property?  Which happens to have a previously undocumented water line running through his pasture? Near where a stock watering pond suddenly developed in August of 1998?  Check out Google Earth, it’s all there.  First a little puddle which slowly, year after year, develops into a large pond.

THE “WATER SHARING ARGUMENT” GOES LIKE THIS

P1:  “We only use a fraction of what we’re allotted and can therefore spare some and give it to others outside the subdivision”. (says the real estate cheerleader)

P2:  “If we have so much water then why are we rationing under penalty of financial fine while watching years of hard work in landscaping suffer and/or perish?”   (says the customer with dying landscape)

P1: “That’s because of the drought and environmental releases for wildlife, you see the lake was dry and the water wasn’t there,….ahhh, well,…., ahh, sharing is good….ahummm, …..you don’t share ……you are a selfish rotten, anti-development, … no good person”.  (as real estate cheerleader realizes the mistake and backs away screaming insults)

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN WE HAVE A BINGO AT  TABLE  THREE!

Don’t you see they are apples and oranges?  The maximum amount that could be pumped is a set number and immaterial as to the fluctuating number of consumers and amount that can actually be pumped due to physical existence.  You can only pump what is there.

[This is why I have always advocated the McClure Point Deep Water Project was, and is, the logical direction to proceed – closer to the dam means deeper water.  This drought has facilitated the best time to access the area for construction of intakes and initial piping to above maximum lake level.

Ahhhh, there’s that problem for the people outside the legal use area…..the McClure Point Deep Water Project DOESN’T HELP THEM.  IT ONLY ENSURES THAT THOSE ENTITLED TO MERCED RIVER WATER RECEIVE IT WHEN LAKE IS LOW.]

Did our GM/Board refuse the logical answer to this and other droughts because it did not help those “outside the legal use area” which they seem intent on serving?  Isn’t that a betrayal to existing customers?

Please explain how expanding water service with ground wells to areas outside the Water License benefits the entitled Merced River water users in the subdivision who may once again have no, or little, water to pump from the lake?

SELECTIVITY OR DISCRIMINATION?

If ground water is used to expand service outside the legal use area, what will be the criteria for property inclusion into this new District service area?

How many new outside MID POU connections are anticipate?

How far will this new service district serve water?

In addition to single family residences, will multi-family structures be approved?

Perhaps temporary housing like motels, hotels, condos, etc. might be approved?

What about the many prior proposed subdivisions that requested and were denied water by the District years ago?  Will they have “first come – first served” options?  (If so we are already into HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF NEW CONNECTIONS.)

What about brand new subdivision projects – maybe with decorative man-made lakes and ponds as previously proposed?

See any more expansive golf courses, cattle ranches or other agricultural endeavors in the District’s future?

How about businesses, maybe an industrial or manufacturing corporation or two?

Can you envision a large vehicle & equipment washing service?

Is saying “Yes” to one project, and “No” to another, simply service discrimination?

If inappropriate selectivity does take place could the district be held liable for resulting damages due to construction/development delay or refusal?

Maybe that proposed water slide from Coulterville to Waterford (The world famous “Coulterford Slide Development”, or CSD as it is sometimes referred) will have a chance now?  That will be one cool ride!  ………………….

[yes, some of the above is sarcasm-meant to be lol]

ALREADY HAVE SOME HIGH DEMAND OUTSIDE MID POU ACCOUNTS

Elementary School

Fire Department

Cattle Ranching (and other agricultural endeavors)

Sewer Plant (That’s another “BOOT that will eventually drop on our CSD” since the County wants out.  Some deal made already?)

Miscellaneous businesses

Trailer park

Single and Multi family residences

If these new ground wells are used exclusively by the existing customers (including those currently outside the MID POU listed above), fine, no harm, no foul.  Whether this drought continues or another one in the future is equally as disastrous, at least the existing customers would have these new wells (as promised) for backup.

Isn’t responsibly taking care of what you already possess more important than taking on more water consuming entities?

Just think if those directors in the past who wanted expansion with the many proposed subdivisions were successful?  What would we be looking at now during this drought?  Only makes matters worse for everyone.

VISION 2020 DIRECTOR CAUTION

Speaking of directors, check out the GM’s VISION 2020 admonition to them on page 77 of the December 11, 2015 packet.  (a portion quoted below)

As stated in prior meeting, this is YOUR strategic plan, so you must

Feel very comfortable with approving this document, as it will drive many future actions and decisions. Please make sure that you have a full understanding of the goals, objectives and actions of this plan. The purpose of the discussion today is to make sure the full Board

is in support of the plan, and that it reflects your vision of where you want to see the District in 2020. At this meeting, the Board can make any changes, modifications, additions, clarifications and deletions it sees fit. The Board should be commended for undertaking the effort to prepare this first ever strategic plan. The results of the plan will drive daily work, budgets, benchmarks/expectations and actions for many years to come. Congratulations!”

YOUR STRATEGIC PLAN

YOU MUST FEEL comfortable with approving

WILL DRIVE FUTURE actions

MAKE SURE YOU HAVE FULL UNDERSTANDING

MAKE SURE FULL BOARD IS IN SUPPORT

REFLECTS YOUR VISION

WHERE YOU WANT to see District

Whoa there cowboy……

Talk about preemptively assigning future DIRECTOR RESPONSIBILITY for what is undoubtedly going to happen when greed, circumvention of rules and special deals are made with complete disregard for the existing District customers, both water consuming and availability.

 

WHO’S STRAGETIC PLAN IS THIS AGAIN?

This GM pushed for expanded water service outside the permitted use area twenty years ago during his first term of employment with the district.  The very day he resigned he encouraged the board to expand district boundaries even further.  There’s nothing really new or exciting about his dream of building a Water Empire on the financial backs of the 99% of entitled water users.

ANY DIRECTOR WHO SUPPORTS THIS PLAN TO RADICALLY CHANGE THE FUNCTION AND OPERATION OF OUR SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT SHOULD REALIZE THEY ARE THE ONES WHO TOOK A SOLEMN OATH OF OFFICE, NOT THE GENERAL MANAGER.

Also not taking that Oath are the GMs employees at Kampa Community Solutions, employees with other businesses, companies, corporations, and the other vocal cheerleaders advocating this major re-direction of our surface water treatment plant.  Heck, many have made, are making, and will continue to make very good money regardless of what happens to the rest of us in the future.

Directors in a Public Service agency, however, do take that Oath of Office and therefore do have legal duties and obligations to the District and therefore, its customers.    It would be quite unfortunate if any one, or all of them (as suggested in the admonition), mistakenly believed they were doing something beneficial only to later discover they had “been had” and gambled and lost both their personal and public service reputation.  It’s happened many times before, and it will most assuredly happen again.  Stop, take a deep breath and think about what you are doing.

GAMBLING WITH ANOTHER’s MONEY IS EASY

Only district customers will be injured, with the possible exception of a director or two if a subsequent investigation evidenced a serious breach of duty and/or a wrongful intentional act subject to criminal and/or civil action.   (I see there is still a pending civil suit by two former CSD employees that started many years ago and personally understand the stress, frustration and pain experienced for years are hardships that will not be erased or undone no matter how the case is finally resolved.)

ARE THERE CLUES TO SOMETHING MUCH WORSE?

Who is to say some of the same techniques used by a sitting director and only applicant for the GM position (who was subsequently appointed on the spot) are not currently being used to reconfigure our nonprofit CSD into a CASH COW FOR OTHER OUTSIDE WATER INTERESTS?

Seriously, bare with me here for a bit.

The past behavior is pretty clear – since Director information (marked confidential) was clearly provided to this Director’s longtime friend (friend was also the president of his own for-profit water management company) PRIOR to public announcement of the open GM position.

This created and guaranteed a closed recruitment process for a public agency’s general manager position because without public announcement of the open position there could not possibly be other applicants.

This “insider information” also provided adequate time for the applicant to prepare a detailed contract for exclusive board consideration and approval at the next District Board of Directors Meeting.

Four of five LDPOA Directors (including the one who had furnished the confidential information of the GM position opening – conflict of interest here?) approved the contract and appointed the applicant as new IGM at that very meeting.  This was done without any rudimentary investigation or verification as to the applicant’s employment background much less his past employment with the very CSD that just hired him!

Had the District performed a basic investigation it would have been advised of any prior employee performance difficulties and the fact the applicant had a history of advocating District expansion beyond the legal limits of Water License 11395.

Did the other three directors also already know these facts when they appointed him? Because they knew he would assist them in expanding district service outside legal limits as they desired?

It should be noted AGAIN that the sitting director who furnished the confidential information to our GM has been one of the largest consumers of water outside the MID POU for over twenty years.  Hey, being a cattle rancher takes lots of water.

There is documented information indicating this director also (with intent) wrongfully appropriated another party’s meter.  This information wasn’t even discovered until nine years after it had been appropriated when the rightful owner’s account was re-credited with the “liberated” meter.  Somehow this director maintained use of a water meter despite specifically being denied one in the past.  This director possesses 2 of the 36 outside MID POU meters and has continually used chlorinated water for cattle ranching that was unequivocally intended for domestic residential use.

We read and hear about “insider trading” and how corrupt the financial system can be due to the staggering amounts of money people make through “just passing along a little confidential information”.  Can you imagine how much it would be worth to some property owners, land developers, investors, contractors and other real estate related fields if they obtained confidential information as to when and where water would be available?  What about those seeking special consideration of their particular property and/or project through “under the table” incentives-aka bribes?

Don’t believe this is possible?  What about incorrect LDPCSD information being furnished to other government agencies? (that it could serve river water outside POU)  Consider the past unreported burglaries of LDPCSD records requested by the Grand Jury that were never located;  water connections/meters obtained using adjacent property Assessor Parcel Numbers to confuse and conceal actual entitlement; director resignation following Superior Court plea for false information to a peace officer during a Grand Jury investigation; fabrication of records by a former office employee, complete destruction of our administration office by arson, and confidential LDPCSD information provided to a GM applicant by a sitting OMIDPOU Director?  And now that selected GM intends to dramatically change our water treatment and distribution operation with the blessings of YOUR ELECTED/APPOINTED  BOARD OF DIRECTORS!

“Golly gosh!  Bribery and payola sound relatively mild compared to what has already happened”.

Wake up and smell the chlorine.  Realize this blog’s motto:

ANYTHING VALUABLE REQUIRES PROTECTION, is absolutely correct.

There is a current plan to hijack our “California Liquid Gold” and we, the entitled users, are expected to pay for the heist!

 

My best to you and yours, Lew

 

PS after thoughts:

Can you imagine what sort of information/evidence will eventually turn up in the next ten years regarding this reconfiguration of our surface water treatment plant into a “cash cow” for those not entitled to water under License 11395?

Should these new grounds wells be designated “exclusive use” for third parties outside legal service area under L11395?

Think about this; if drought drains the lake to where pumping to the plant is impossible, those on ground well water substitution will have water and those in the subdivision won’t. Does that make sense to you?

Well, as you may have seen in the previous post photograph the weed eater is down for a bit due to a cracked fuel primmer bulb. (I believe there is a way around this but don’t recall right now.)  So where were we??

INCORRECT INFORMATION TO STATE?

“Currently, LDPCSD does not have an alternate source of water.”

The above sentence was contained in the California Environmental Protection Agency State Water Resources Control Board Division of Water Rights Order approving Temporary Urgency (in stream flow and the LDPCSD pumping below Minimum Pool requirements) and is obviously incorrect.

The Order was included in the December 11, 2014 Board Packet on Page 51.  The ORDER is 11 pages long and on page 7 (under 6.1 Urgency of the Proposed Changes continued from page 6) the statement is made in the second sentence, second paragraph.

WHY INCORRECT?

Because the District has been using an alternate source of water (the Ranchito Drive ground well) to serve outside MID POU [Merced Irrigation District Place of Use] properties for over 20 years.

MID, CSD and others knew, did the SWRCB?

SPLITTING HAIRS?

Perhaps, but still surprising because precise language is usually extremely important when it comes to the law and ORDERS by State Regulating Departments and Agencies demanding parties to do one thing or another.

I read that paragraph several times thinking I missed a qualifying word to make that patently incorrect statement factual.  You know, something like the LDPCSD does not have: “an adequate alternate source”, OR, “a sufficient alternate source”, OR, “a satisfactory alternate source”, etc.  Nope, read it correctly.

KNEW RANCHITO WELL HAD BEEN INCLUDED

When still on the Board in late 2014 I recall specifically addressing this issue and arguing that the Ranchito Drive well issue should be mentioned in Resolution 2014-2, which it was, and can be found on Page 28 of the December 11, 2014 packet also.

SIDE NOTE: Have any of you noticed that the District often refers to those 36 properties as:  “a small number of service connections”, “approximately 36 properties”, etc. ?

Why such an ambiguous description?

Surely the district knows exactly how many properties it has allowed to violate the water license restrictions in the past.

Has the number of properties increased since that routine monthly outside MID POU report was discontinued from the meeting packet?

Heck, that report was required by, and submitted to MID to demonstrate compliance with restrictions.

Does the LDPCSD still even report this outside use to the Merced Irrigation District as previously required?

Was the SWRCB aware of this special circumstance of the LDPCSD?

Were the grantors of emergency funds for the ground wells?

Exhibit C, Resolution 2015-15, Stage III on page 39, included the qualifying word “adequate” again, affirming that an alternate water supply did exist.

WHY ONLY ONE WELL TO BEGIN WITH?

The LDPCSD Ranchito Drive well was specifically developed to serve those receiving water OUTSIDE the legal Place of Use under water license 11395.  It was the immediate alternate source remedy to keep the District out of “hot water” for wrongfully diverting Merced River water outside the legal use areas and violating License restrictions.

Actually MID, as the license holder, would have been the party to receive substantial daily fines for permitting violations to continue.

In fact, MID required the outside MID POU monthly report to protect itself from liability or SWRCB enforcement because of the LDPCSD’s reckless history of not following regulations.

SIDE NOTE:  When on the board I was shocked to discover even our CSD attorney had been deliberately “left out of the loop” concerning some past very pertinent outside MID POU information.

SURFACE WATER TREATMENT PLANT

Our plant pumps from Lake McClure which is fed by the Merced River (incidentally, some of the purest quality water in the State!) but if a requesting property was outside the permitted Place of Use, [and previous boards did their job] the answer HAD TO BE NO,  sorry.  Merced River water could not be diverted for their use.

Ground well water, however, is not Merced River water and our treatment plant simply pumped it from the Ranchito Drive well, mixed it with our Merced River water from Lake McClure, treated, stored and ultimately delivered it to those properties outside the MID POU.

FOOT IN  THE DOOR

Naturally, seeing this, other outside properties also demanded water service…..”The District did it for my neighbor…why not me?”  And thus began decades of turmoil and accusations of “selective enforcement” and “injustice” to those refused service.

A SPECIAL BENEFIT PAID FOR BY ALL ENTITLED USERS

This was a special benefit to Outside MID POU properties and a great inconvenience to the District in respect to maintenance, accounting, and treatment and circumvented the process of how our surface water treatment plant was designed and intended to function.    (Pump from lake, treat, store, and deliver to entitled properties.)

Q: When did this become an issue?

A: Twenty years ago when MID ran afoul of the SWRCB for incorrect environmental releases of water for wildlife.

THAT MISTAKE RESULTED IN AUDIT AND LDPCSD RESTRICTIONS

South Shore, I believe, is the only legitimate annexation to our district that that was approved by LAFCo, MID, and the State Water Resources Control Board.  772af of water set aside for this proposed development.  That was a water diversion for 2,010 acres but the 20+ year old proposed subdivision and golf course never developed.  However, it was during the South Shore annexation process where documents presented to the SWRCB by MID evidenced a mistake in the calculation of a non-related Environmental Water Release program by MID which resulted in an enforcement process with that water audit.  Things were different after that.

ILLEGAL  CONNECTIONS MUST BE ADDRESSED

Outside MID Place of Use properties became a hot topic for enforcement and a nightmare for both the district and water thirsty property owners not entitled to lake water like the subdivision was.  Multiple CSD boards have addressed and attempted to change or modify this water restriction with negative results.

The only way to continue providing water to those not specifically entitled to Merced River water was to use an “alternate source of water” which meant drilling a ground well along side Ranchito Drive.  That ground well “patched” existing violations of the water license.

 

EMERGENCY BACKUP NECESSITY

OR

JUST SERVICE EXPANSION PREPARATION?

So here’s the problem:  customers were told these wells were being constructed with grant funds (certainly won’t cover all costs) to ensure water service to the existing customers during this drought emergency, yet again the board appears ready to abolish Resolution  2013-4 which prohibits further expansion of Outside MID POU properties.

WHY DO I BELIEVE THE TRUE REASON WAS EXPANSION?

Check out the Minutes regarding BOD President Danny Johnson during the December 11, 2014 meeting:

President Johnson gave a verbal report. He thanked the public for taking the LDPCSD customer survey. The survey allowed customers that cannot attend our meeting to give their input. He commented that he felt one of the best things the board did was to drill the wells. From his perspective it was a good financial move in comparison to trucking water in for the community. He also wanted to commend staff and management for positioning this District to have the infrastructure in place to keep the community water running. He also thought the board should revisit the outside place of use restrictions resolution

“He also thought the board should revisit the outside place of use restrictions resolutions”

ARE YOU KIDDING ME?  AGAIN?

Even with the new ground wells, during peak demand times we are still short of water according to our engineers yet President Johnson wants to revisit the restriction?  Why?

To expand service to other outside MID POU properties as you have advocated in the past? Come on Danny, seriously, who are you really representing here?  Are there still third party construction projects that desperately need our water to start development?

Why revisit this issue now?

Same issue.  Same drought.  And the money?

What has changed since June when the vote was 2-2?

TWO IMPORTANT VARIABLES

1)   Newly developed ground wells represent another “alternate source”, and

2)   New Directors on the board willing to “go with the flow”

If this expansion and reconfiguration of CSD operations is good for existing customers, why weren’t these plans included in the recent survey?

BY the way, how many responded?  How many were mailed?  The promised “review of the survey results” was a bit sketchy.   The survey could have simply asked customers:

Are you in favor of  expanding service to properties outside the limits of our water license with ground water production recently developed?

LDPOA SUBDIVISION RESIDENTS

Many people purchased property in the Lake Don Pedro Owners Association (LDPOA) not because it was a CID (Community Interest Development), or was governed by a POA (Property Owners Association) with differing CCRs regulating how property is to be developed, but rather because there was available WATER, electricity and maintained roads.  (Unfortunately, some areas of the subdivision in Tuolumne evidently have problems with roads.)

What about over half the subdivision absentee owners who pay availability fees?

Didn’t these DIRECTORS’ OATH OF OFFICE include these legitimate future users of District water?

Haven’t they been paying for that future water use benefit?

Why not protect the water service to existing customers, both consumers and availability properties?

Why furnish water to proposed  projects which we will then have to serve during the next drought or other water related emergency?

SORRY.  WATER WILL BE SHUT OFF

You can’t start providing water to someone then later say OOPS – SORRY, HAVE TO CUT IT OFF.  (Actually some of the past service connection contracts outside the POU specifically stated if the owner did not subsequently annex their property to the District the water service would be discontinued.  It was a condition of service.  But the water was not shut off.  Some property owners discovered they could not legally annex, so no water was delivered.  Others did annex but the district was still prevented from serving water under the License and water agreement.)

Mariposa LAFCo advised they were initially never told about the License restrictions by District representatives seeking annexations, however, the county eventually found out and began putting a disclaimer in their mid-1980s annexation paperwork that the county could not be held liable if an annexed property did not receive water from the District.

What a frigg’n mess huh?

WHAT IS THE LDPOA’s POSITION ON THIS?

From what I read the Owner’s Association may not even continue it’s monthly meetings any longer due to lack of business.  They are apparently flush with cash according to their financials.   Here is a serious situation concerning the subdivisions future water service –  why not help those owners who already pay good money for protection?

Since the LDPOA membership compromises the far majority of LDPCSD customers (3,128 last I saw versus the 36 outside MID POU customers) what is the Association’s position on this extension of water service to outside POU properties with our new and extremely expensive ground wells?

Will the Association step-up to help protect these innocent property owners from potentially losing their water service in the future?

Will the Association work with multiple property owners and assist them in joining properties together with only one assessment to help reduce future potential subdivision connections?

LDPCSD District engineers do not believe the new wells will even meet our peak demand times for existing customers so why even consider adding further service to properties outside the legal service area?

BETTER PROTECT YOURSELF – NO ONE ELSE WILL

You know, if the Resolution restriction preventing further service to outside MID POU properties is abolished and this District does indeed begin Empire Building with ground well water, subdivision owners might need need to protect themselves.

Absentee owners who pay availability fees to this Community Services District (and property assessments to the LDPOA), should organize and legally protect the interests for which they are paying.

 

INFORMATION OVERLOAD

Massive amounts of material, yet little time to digest and respond.  Even as a former director we often received the packet on a Friday before the Monday meeting.  This did not provide much time to read and study all the material and prepare meaningful questions for clarification much less adequately prepare for a board vote.  (Cannot contact office for additional information on a weekend.)

I was astounded by how some directors obviously, and routinely, did not read the entire packet which was clearly evidenced by their questions and ridiculous comments on the particular subject.  If directors are unprepared – how is a customer going to understand the issues?

ADMIT TO BEING SUSPICIOUS FROM THE START

Absolutely.  When a sitting director, who happens to be THE ICON for outside MID POU water use (cattle ranching for over 20 years using chlorinated water clearly intended for domestic residential consumption) surreptitiously contacts a friend in the water industry and advises him our GM position will open (prior to that explicitly confidential information being made public) – and that individual subsequently shows up at the next Board meeting with a management contract ready for approval – and the board fails to adequately consider the entire situation and on the spot selects him as the new IGM[1] – (who had a prior employment record at our CSD in the 1990s that clearly encouraged expansion outside license limits),  yes, I am suspicious.

 

CAN YOU FEEL YOUR FEET GETTING WARMER?

Decades of turmoil over non-permitted water use, most notably, real estate and land development interests.

This is really a simple equation.  Drought prone dry foothill property + water = $$$$.

Can you imagine the sums of money to be made by unscrupulous people if inside information that a particular project or area absent utilities will soon receive water?

CONNECT THE DOTS & FOLLOW THE MONEY

Someone burns down our nonprofit Administration Office (attempt to destroy regulatory history?)

A for-profit management company (Kampa Community Solutions) is ultimately hired under emergency drought conditions to keep the water flowing for existing customers.

This for-profit company president (our GM) immediately begins a process to secure an alternate source of water (ground wells) ostensibly for existing customers water sustainability, yet in actuality, to continue his plan to expand district service beyond License 11395 under which our CSD operates.

Sorry, but all I see is conspiracy and sophisticated camouflage concealing the hot plate CSD customers will be dancing on for perpetuity.

 

My best to you and yours, Lew

 

There is so much more – but it is another beautiful foothill day and the fast growing weeds are calling!

 

 

 

POST TITLE THE “RECALL STIMULUS” FOR THE DUCK DANCE STORY?

Yes, that and a number of other issues spurred that horrible recollection of “one thing appearing as something else” however, I believe the following to be rather serious:

Incorrect information about our Lake Don Pedro Community Services District operations has apparently been provided and documented with the State of California Environmental Protection Agency and State Water Resources Control Board, and very likely, many other State, Federal and corporate water related entities.

INTENTIONAL MISDIRECTION OR SIMPLE MISTAKE?

I’m sorry but I do not believe for a nanosecond this was a mistake, and fear it was an intentional act by multiple parties in “threading some type of legal needle” through the maze of government requirements and obstacles in obtaining emergency grant funding and relief from established regulations.

Funding which is being used to offset the tremendous costs proposed in REDIRECTING the approved design, intent, and operation of our surface water treatment plant WITHOUT A VOTE of the over 3,125 existing customers who have financially supported this nonprofit Community Services District for decades.

SPECIFICITY OF LAW

Legal language is required to be precise and not willy-nilly APPROXIMATION as to what is actually being conveyed or what IS intended.  Blatantly incorrect information being cited in official State agency documents is outrageous and has a ripple effect with inter agency document reproduction.

NOTE: Lake Don Pedro Community Services District has it’s own history with fabricated records and many still wonder if the UNRESOLVED ARSON OF OUR ADMINISTRATION OFFICE was merely a “radical record destruction” policy of those INTERESTS displeased with District regulations and historical records of water use.

ONCE PROCESSED – FALSE INFORMATION ESSENTIALLY BECOMES FACT

Unfortunately, once INCORRECT INFORMATION is recorded in formal legal government documents it often appears to stay there uncorrected for many years, if not perpetuity.  (Example: Water License 11395 mentions a 55 acre golf course, yet I believe the former Lake Don Pedro Golf Club was more like 155 acres. – Perhaps there is some type of addendum or clarification note in the official file?

Still, without those subsequent corrections anyone reading the original water license would think it a very small golf course.   So once again, although incorrect, this “55 acre golf course” language remains and has been passed along through many other departments and agencies as evidence for one thing or another.  Very similar to the misinformation recorded with the State regarding the pond from where water was diverted to that golf course.  Many examples of false information that is treated as well known fact.)

MUCH WORK TO DO

It’s a cool and beautiful Foothill Friday up here in these rolling green Oak and rock studded hills.  Numerous shimmering pools of water glisten in the morning sunshine as testimony to the recent precipitation.   Primarily blue sky with scattered wisps of larger cloud fragments.

LISTEN CAREFULLY!   CAN YOU HEAR THAT?

Well maybe not hear, but hillside weeds are growing exponentially.

One of my planned chores today (and I really dislike this one) is to work on some small two cycle internal combustion engine equipment, specifically the weed eater.  If that goes well, two chainsaws should also be started. My shoulder aches with anticipation.  “Pull start” engines are often difficult to start.  Unfortunately, much like a slot machine in a casino, sometimes many attempts pay off!  LOL

For those of you familiar with this process:  YES INDEED!  I drained the fuel last year, or maybe it was the year before?  YES!  Fuel stabilizer had been added to the fuel mix and run through engine before storage.   We shall see……

Maybe some weed spraying?

I am still shaking off typical 1-2 day soreness associated with other routine yard work such as raking, shoveling, picking up stuff blown around by recent storm winds, and of course, moving rocks from point A to point B.

GRAVITY AND EROSION

Landscaping on a hillside is also challenging.  Rain runoff and wind blow material around and gravity summons it downhill for reorganization where Mother Nature dictates, unless disturbed by something else. That’s where I make a grand entrance.

“Why not rake, sort, load, and haul the sand and soil back uphill for fill around necessary low spots and start the process again – ready for the next rain?”     LOL

CRAP!  Got to get out of here — Already past noon!!!!!!!

 

My best to you and yours, Lew

 

 

PS:  Until later, think about this….

If proposed changes in the DISTRICT’S VISION 2020 STRATEGIC PLAN are legal and “above-board” (so to speak – lol/ wait till you read the GM admonishment to directors before public presentation) why is clearly false information about our District being provided/repeated to State regulators- you know, the folks you would LEAST LIKELY WANT TO PISS OFF?

 

NEXT BATTER UP?

 

GOSH, NOW IT’S PAST 1300HRS!

Lately I have tried to understand some things that broadly fall under the category:  “NOT AS THEY APPEAR”.   I believe we have all experienced those circumstances when for one reason or another we believe, or were told, one thing – only to later discover our analysis was incorrect or we were deliberately misled.

Many years ago I read about an incident involving a business advertisement where dancing ducklings were displayed in a front display case window to catch the attention of passing pedestrian traffic.  [I believe it was a legal case but don’t recall if it was Tort based (a civil wrong for monetary damages) or, a criminal matter (animal abuse, code violation enforcement, etc.]

Apparently it was quite an attraction and gained the attention of many people especially after it was discovered the poor creatures were comically jumping around not because of music, but rather, the fact their dance floor was a disguised working hot plate!  Needless to say the public outcry was tremendous.

Torturing young animals in an attempt to increase business sales?  What sort of mind conjures up such a despicable plan?  What lengths will some people go in the attempt to achieve personal and/or business goals?

 

My best to you and yours, Lew

Cloud formations and rain slowly pass through the Central Valley at dusk on Sunday.

 

My best to you and yours, Lew

The Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines widget as “an unnamed article considered for purposes of hypothetical example”.

You may have seen the term used in legal discussions where the item of discussion is less important than the governing principles relating to that, and similar items.    I am using the term in this post to describe an actual product I was going to purchase online yet, due to what I felt were unfair selling techniques, cancelled the purchase.   Since I really do not know about the quality of the item I do not want to dissuade or negatively influence other potential purchasers with my comments about this item.   So widget will have to do.  You know, I still wonder if I may have passed on a good product but refuse to reward what I believe to be an unfair purchasing process.

[Gee, wouldn’t it be great if, as taxpayers, we did not have to financially support activities which intentionally circumvent and/or violate existing law and approved procedures?]

ALREADY OWNED A FEW BUT….

Actually I already owned a few of these widgets and although they all worked to one degree or another, they were manufactured by different companies and varied greatly as to quality, dependability and cost so I was already “passively looking” for one that possessed all the desirable qualities of a good, dependable “widget” at a reasonable price.

ADVERTISEMENT WAS IMPRESSIVE

Like any good ad, after reading the manufacturer’s claims I wanted to purchase one and started the online purchasing process.  The slightly different approach should have alerted me that something wasn’t right, but after all, to acquire such a great widget certain allowances might be made for the typical exaggerated claims of new technology, limited time offer, and discounts for multiple purchases – right?

The first page of the order process contained an initial confirmation that a customer wanted to purchase a widget at a greatly reduced price.  Essentially, “want to save N% on the purchase of this great item?”   The second page contained the more traditional questions in an order process:

1)      Select the number of widgets to purchase (another sliding scale discount increased with volume of widgets to be ordered)

2)      Contact information,  name, telephone number

3)      Shipping address, and of course,

4)      Credit card information.

PRETTY STANDARD HUH?

BUT THEN, after all the above information had been submitted, another page offered other desirable options for the widget(s) each with their additional costs.  Please realize these options were only made known AFTER credit card information had been entered and there was no opportunity to page back, modify, question, or even cancel the order and the seller already had all necessary information to complete a transaction.  [Except for one aspect which is crucial to an above-board legitimate sales process:  the purchaser’s clear understanding as to what was offered, purchased, and for what price.]

Suddenly, a customer is stuck in an order trap with nowhere to go but forward with each additional step (if accepted) increasing the purchase price.  No back button.  No second chance to confirm order.  No escape.

PERFORMED AS INTENDED?

You know, suddenly changing your mind about some aspect of an intended purchase is another BIG CLUE that should prompt more careful scrutiny as to what you’re doing.  When initially offered multiple widgets for a discounted price (selection must be made before continuing the process and learning more) I chose to get two instead of one.  But again, as mentioned above, AFTER SUBMITTING PAYMENT INFORMATION I was advised of other desirable options that, had I been aware of in the first place, would have resulted in the purchase of only one widget with all available options.  Ahhhh, too late!  There was no opportunity to return to the number of widgets selection so if these new and desirable options were to be added to the sale a customer would have to incur additional costs on every widget purchased at discount.  Not a fair or reasonable process at all.

MORE TRADITIONAL BAIT

Compare this with all the ads we see and hear on television for miscellaneous items – “BUT WAIT!  IF YOU ORDER RIGHT NOW WE WILL INCLUDE  …..  blah, blah, blah — for only blah blah blah! …. That’s a blah blah blah SAVINGS FOR YOU IF YOU ORDER NOW!”

But there’s the rub – the phrase “BUT WAIT” is followed by clearly disclosing what the additional options are PRIOR TO OBTAINING PAYMENT INFORMATION with a built-in guarantee of concluding a transaction up to that point regardless of option choice.

The only thing missing from this deal, which is very important in my mind, is the purchaser’s clear understanding as to what they were purchasing and for how much.  There was no “meeting of the minds” if you will.

WHAT NOW?

After searching for an escape route and finding none I abruptly left the site and immediately contacted my credit card company because I was concerned about the seller already possessing my credit card information.   Yup, you guessed it, even though I bailed on the rest of the process the charge had already been made for the purchase of two widgets up to that point.  I was pissed  and explained to the credit card representative exactly how the process worked and why I believed it was unethical.  The representative agreed with my position but since the transaction had already been received and processed if the seller would not voluntarily removed the charge I would have to dispute the transaction later – after payment.  Obviously the next step was to contact the seller through the listed telephone number on the website.

RING…..RING…..RING…..RING…..RING…..

I called the telephone number and waited for a human being to answer while repeatedly being offered the opportunity to just leave a message.  Are you kidding me?  If I don’t trust your sales techniques why would I believe you would actually call me back to hear a complaint?  Yes indeed, I wanted to speak with a living breathing representative of that company – besides I already had a very good idea as to why this company was currently experiencing a higher call volume.  Over forty minutes I waited during which time I “prepared my case” as to why the order should be cancelled.

ASTONISHED DISBELIEF

The representative started with disbelief as to my dissatisfaction with the ordering process since all components of a “good sale” were present.  I explained the problem was not WHAT information had been exchanged, but rather, it was the chronological order of the steps in the process that were unethical and essentially a purchase trap.  Eventually the representative agreed to cancel the order but not until making one last pitch for an even larger discount on the two widgets.  I must give them credit for tenacity but my distrust was solidified and I insisted on the cancellation.  I called my credit card company and confirmed the cancellation had been processed.

Here’s the final paragraph of a letter I subsequently wrote to the company.

“I was disappointed that a conscious effort to purchase “MADE IN USA” was over-shadowed with a feeling of being “had” with piecemeal information.  If this process was a result of a simple design or programming error on the website, it should be corrected ASAP.   If it was by design, shame, shame, shame.”

 

JUST HUMAN NATURE

Do you know what one of the major trademarks is of a good con job?  [Con refers to confidence which is required for the “Mark” or victim to take the bait.]   Answer:  The EMBARRASSMENT of admitting they fell for it in the first place!  That is precisely why so many such scams go unreported, and thus continue to exist.

“THERE’S A SUCKER BORN EVERY MINUTE”

[VICTIM: “Hey!  I paid $100 for this Rolex but it isn’t really gold and it stopped working completely!  I’ve been swindled!”   Law Enforcement Officer taking the report:  “Where did you buy this watch?”   VICTIM:  “From a guy in the alley behind the casino who desperately needed money for bus fare out of town because his wife and kids were …. “ ]

Ever hear the expressions:  “Larceny of the heart”, “You can’t cheat an honest person”, or “if it seems too good to be true it probably is”?  All revolve around the concept of a fair deal being understood on both sides of the equation, seller as well as the buyer.   If a buyer believes (or is encouraged to believe) they are getting away with something sneaky or ostensibly beneficial only to them, they also are not being honest and their own pursuit of greed actually facilitates their being cheated.  They had larceny of the heart.

THIS WAS A DIFFERENT FLAVOR

The widgets were not inexpensive (and may indeed be good products) but not disclosing available options PRIOR to selecting the number of items to purchase AND submitting payment information (with no modification or escape opportunity) were literally deal breakers for me.

SO WHAT’S THE POINT?

So what is the point of belaboring this insignificant cancelled purchase of a couple of widgets?

A few points actually.

I haven’t posted anything in a while and I thought the story made a good Caveat Emptor (let the buyer beware) reminder.  Heck, it might even help someone else avoid an unwanted purchase by recognizing a similar “purchase trap”.

The payment cancellation was a minor victory over one of the many things in life most would consider unfair, deceptive, or outright dishonest.  Unfortunately, many folks (for one reason or another) do not challenge such business tactics.  Maybe some feel the further frustration in such a challenge isn’t worth the trouble?  You know, “suck it up” as a lesson learned and be more careful next time.  I seriously considered that alternative but the question was:  Would simply letting the purchase go through, (less than $100), be easier than the exasperation experienced with multiple telephone calls, wait times, and speaking with a company sales representative trained to make objecting callers feel unreasonable?  For me the answer was no because I am pretty sure every time I would use one of those widgets (if they worked as advertised) I would chastise myself for not objecting right off instead of purchasing something I really did not want.

A good deal will sell itself just as unethical activity will breed customer distrust.

 

 

My best to you and yours, Lew

 

PS: This widget business also reminds me of the LAKE DON PEDRO COMMUNITY SERVICES’ DISTRICT (LDPCSD) aka [“the water company”] and how customers are apparently anticipated to just “suck it up” once again when it comes to a significant rate increase to fund the consequences of some questionable decisions.   Sounds like a subject requiring some illumination huh?

 

I observed my first “Hillary for ” sign displayed in a central valley farmyard in late November of 2015.

Passing the sign in my truck I wasn’t sure at first what I had seen in the blur of red, white and blue or what it had actually advocated.  I did wonder however, who would publicly advertise their support for such a person to be president of the United States considering the ever increasing evidence that she does not tell the truth and likely jeopardized our country’s security with her intentional mishandling of secret information through her non-government private computer server.   (Recent national news reports now indicate Hillary’s server also included information with the designation SAP – Special Access Program – touted as the highest form of government top secret information.)

Continuing down the rural county road something bothered me about the sign – the word following “Hillary for” didn’t appear to be long enough for the traditional, and expected,  word “president” – but what the heck was it?

A U-turn, short back-track, and second look revealed the message.  I laughed, took a photograph, and returned home to look up the website.  Ultimately I ordered a few items (in addition to the yard sign) for my collection of humorous political advertisements.  Naturally, like with anything else in public demand, there was a bit of a wait in receiving the merchandise, but worth the time.

Hummm….  TIME.   Something Hillary probably should do.

My best to you and yours, Lew

MERCED RIVER ONLY ON NEW MAP (NOTE HORSESHOE BEND)

 

Although the old map (top) is a different type and scale I’m sure you still got the point – McClure is not illustrated or even noted on the new 2014 map.  Seems a bit harsh.  Surely it would not have distracted from the new map’s accuracy to simply note the lake’s prior existence parenthetically –   (former Lake McClure).

Oh well, maybe next year.  Or the year after that.  Or the following…..maybe…..

 

My best to you and yours, Lew