Apparently, Los Osos CSD has ended its GM management relationship with Peter Kampa and his KAMPA COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS llc, stating his primary purpose had been completed despite an October 6th, 2016 Los Osos CSD meeting PUBLIC COMMENT challenging that gracious farewell press statement.

Rather than my attempting to explain the departure, here are two Los Osos articles for you to check out:

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

LEW HERE AGAIN……gosh, I sure wish our Board would wake up and smell the chlorine as to the monumental waste of money and effort Kampa & Kompany orchestrated here at the Lake Don Pedro CSD for his special interest land development purposes.  (Also, please do not forget how Kampa and his company actually achieved that GM appointment through a board developed “closed recruitment process” guaranteeing Kampa could, and would, be the only applicant and ultimate appointee to the position.  In other words, Kampa has performed exactly as those sitting directors had intended – to develop an alternate source of water to further expand outside PLACE OF USE water service in circumvention of  water license restrictions for MERCED RIVER WATER.)

Perhaps KAMPA’s management activities in Lake Don Pedro are also approaching a “parting of the ways” as well?  Personally, I would much prefer an honest board doing their ethical best (even with “honest mistakes”) over that of a “for profit professional part time remote GM” that ignores established regulations, policies, opinions of customers, and intentionally increasing District Liabilities while pursuing his goal of creating a “water empire in the same drought prone foothills” where he began his infamous water career 20 years ago.   The fact that KAMPA was already aware of  the MERCED RIVER WATER restrictions in L11395 back then makes his recent activities even more reprehensible and outrageous.  Sure cannot say he didn’t know!

Guess it’s true….. perpetrators always return to the scene of the crime.  

{not so lol for customers trying to survive in a State recognized disadvantaged community.}

I cannot help but wonder what impact, if any, KAMPA’s GROUND WATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM (specifically designed to circumvent the restrictions in water license 11395 regarding MERCED RIVER WATER USE to continue service expansion for land developers outside the legal PLACE OF USE) might have had on the State’s recent  proposal to increase environmental releases from Lake McClure which could very well lead to serious future ramifications regarding our water availability here in Lake Don Pedro.

Think about that.  Kampa aggressively pushed for the new groundwater substitution wells to circumvent those license restrictions just to provide water service beyond the legal Place of Use which was established decades ago, yet for the program to work even more Merced River water must be used.  [Diluting the degree of arsenic contamination from groundwater for safe consumption.]  Could the STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD have interpreted KAMPA’s  special interest activities as an indication that the LDPCSD already had MORE THAN ENOUGH AVAILABLE SURFACE WATER and could therefore AFFORD TO LOSE some of it for increased environmental releases?   (I clearly recall warnings by our legal counsel when I was on the Board of Directors that pursuing further water  service connections outside the PLACE OF USE under L11395 could conceivably jeopardize the water service for  EVERYONE.)

Maybe the SWRCB realized STATE AND FEDERAL GRANT MONEY was obtained through MISREPRESENTATION OF FACT and then those funds were MISAPPROPRIATED TO CONSTRUCT AND DEVELOP KAMPA’s GROUNDWATER SUBSTITUTION PROGRAM WITH AN “ALTERNATE SOURCE”  RATHER THAN repairing and replacing our failing primary infrastructure which is obviously based on the treatment of surface water from Lake McClure which might also have suggested the LDPCSD did not need as much surface water from the lake to meet our water demand?   So maybe the State figured “why not put that water to better use in maintaining the survival of other species that DO REQUIRE THAT WATER”?   (I mean, it’s not like  Salmon and other water dependent creatures could obtain public funds through misrepresentation and then construct their own groundwater supply to insure survival.)

Heck, KAMPA & KOMPANY even created and furnished our water consuming community with a “foreseeable negative consequence” to boot!  Due to the insistence on developing new ground wells our community must now contend with the expensive proposition of arsenic removal which I  would imagine also entails additional monitoring and reporting to State Health Department officials to insure customers are not adversely affected health wise.  Please realize there was no arsenic problem with the surface water from the lake prior to KAMPA’s groundwater substitution program.

You know, I am truly sick of this KAMPA KRAPA and am not sure if I care to waste any more time attending LDPCSD meetings or reporting on what other Kampa activities are in store for us.   Seriously, what is the point?   They (Kampa & Kompany) will only continue to do as they please.   Who is going to stop them?  {RECALL Kampa & Kompany is merely a shorthand description for those who support service expansion beyond permitted areas in the water license while forcing all to pay for that special benefit.}

Take PUBLIC COMMENT for instance.   The District repeatedly violated its own policy regarding how PUBLIC COMMENT was to be reported in the Minutes so customers (or other interested parties) could understand topic discussions, complaints, and/or suggestions.  So, what was the response?  Did KAMPA & KOMPANY apologize for the obvious censorship and propose to correct those violations by finally abiding by their own existing policy to provide the public with a fair and reasonable comment period that is documented in our records?  Nope.  They simply propose changing the policy to fit the goal of suppressing contrary opinions being documented in the record.  This only results in more Kampa sanitized records.

The POST MEDICAL RETIREMENT BENEFIT issue?  Where is the neutral third party analysis of the facts?  Never happened.  An attorney works for the client, and what the client wants, the attorney assists in delivering.  How is that impartial?   Also please do not forget when KAMPA made an issue of these benefits several other retired employees voiced an interest in also receiving those previously discontinued benefits -this has the potential of creating yet another extremely costly gigantic “Kan of Kampa Worms”!    (Please do not misunderstand, I wish nothing but the best for our employees, but this issue was just another example of how KAMPA has done everything in his power to increase District expenses which will undoubtedly be used as evidence in justification for greatly increased water rates/fees for everyone else.)

What about 40 years of water service WITHOUT AN OFFICIAL SERVICE BOUNDARY MAP?  PURE BULLSHIT!  There has always been an official map but those wanting water outside the legal PLACE OF USE were obstructed from receiving MERCED RIVER WATER so it just conveniently disappeared (like many inconvenient “official records”).    Golly gee, no map, no violation.  Problem solved.   Sure haven’t seen the promised RE-CONSTRUCTED OFFICIAL LAKE DON PEDRO WATER SERVICE BOUNDARY MAP yet either…..just the same antiquated “proposed map” KAMPA and his OUTSIDE PLACE OF USE land developer buddies have attempted to pass-off as a legitimate document for decades.   Heck that piece of crap is still on public display on the LDPCSD website as well as the boardroom wall.

Yes indeed folks, it is extremely difficult and quite frustrating to challenge those who make, and plan to make, substantial amounts of money by doing AND SUPPORTING THINGS the “KAMPA WAY” — all at the “legitimate customer’s expense” – financially, and now, possibly even health wise too.  (Do you think for a nano-second KAMPA & KOMPANY would admit to providing water with an arsenic amount over the State Maximum Contaminant Level?)

Will this corrupt mess ultimately be exposed as the INSTITUTIONALIZED FRAUD it has appeared to be for decades?   Yes, I think it will – and just like the results in this last presidential election – the public and the “POWERS THAT BE” will eventually recognize the corruption and unethical activities for what they are and respond appropriately.   We’ll just have to wait for reconciliation while continuing to pay for such deceit as long as PETE KAMPA, KAMPA COMMUNITY SOLUTIONS, llc, and his special interest land development associates are at the helm of our sinking LDPCSD ship.

 

Humm, a ground well inspired farewell?

 

My best to you and yours, Lew

 

PS:   Below are two of Mr. Wes Barton’s monthly emails to those interested in this continuing LDPCSD saga:

I am formally asking this Board to reject subject motion “….resolution clarifying medical benefits ……  .

Resolution has 9 (1-9)paragraphs beginning with “whereas”, 1 (10)paragraph beginning with “now therefore”

1 (11) paragraph beginning with “wherefore”.  I’ll reference paragraphs 1-11 for my comments.

Begin paragraph 5 thru 7.  Yes there is an April listing of history found but listing was never approved.

Failed April 2016, vote 2-2-1.  Recorded in minutes May 2016.          Second, Barton prepared a letter to the

Board and GM on July 9, 2016, addressing CPA reports’ probable errors regarding not only the cencus but

Also the life of this benefit.  Barton showed that Staff (Syndie) listing (report) had missed certain info that

Was material (CPA auditor notes, community member u-tube tape, concerns over hire dates with handbook

Preparation and no clarification of missing “grandfathered documents” noted in handbook).  Point of these

Missed items is  not to question Staff listing of what was found but only that not all was found and reported.

From a control point, without control of all documents, cannot assume you have a material listing.    Last

Presentation to the Board and GM of Barton’s letter was Sept 18, 2016.      On Sept 19, GM asked board

For permission to use CSD Attorney as reviewer not as an independent 3^rd party.  Board didn’t approve but

Didn’t reject (no action taken).  At issue with Sept 19, agenda item also is that it discussed the purpose of

Review is CSD records whereas it had been agreed in public meeting the purpose was to evaluate the

“Words only” of the handbook.  Apparently, GM asked for a legal review and counseling not evaluate the

Words only.  Several meetings this clarification had been made (especially since no way of determining if

All documentation history was possible).

Paragraph 8, is opinion.  Was never questioned could the policy be more clear.  Was never questioned

Would written policy be better than verbal.  Was never questioned that the revised policy in July was

Responsible.   In short, might be good opinion, just wrong purpose and subject.

Paragraph 9, is a second attempt to get the Board to approve the list discussed above  paragraph 5-7.

(This may be a very annoying habit of GM.)

Paragraph 10 and 11, should fail.

Why am I concerned about this, besides general honesty.  The Board in 2008-9, goal was honorable;

I estimate ½ million cost for the last 2 only not considering ongoing employees’ cost for ever.  This is

Not an expense that a small CSD can afford.  I also have questions as to why this came-up again?

I wonder if this was as honorable as the 2008-9 Board was.  I sincerely doubt that the two employees

Were promised this bene until recently.

If the Board is sincerely, ethically, morally hurt, then all they have to do is add the two with a waiver

Beginning today.  This would allow the adjustment for past considerations, reducing some cost while

Honoring the past intended actions.

PLEASE READ IN MEETING OR ALLOW TO BE READ, REVIEWED REGARDLESS OF COMMUNITY LIMITATIONS

POLICY.

Wes Barton

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

First, Lord, I really have been trying not to “bad-mouth” my brothers but sometimes it is the “person” not the process.

Second, since most of you have shown little interest in the CSD and do not plan to attend the meeting I’ll try my best

To be brief but outline what is happening as listed in this agenda (need to click “attached” to understand detail):

3)a,b,c present only (no action expected):  Obviously since no one furnished any commentary.  But, Bd President asks

    Public to contact GM (not Board members) in advance of meetings.  BD/GM apparently believe they are not subject

    To public though CA Code explicitly says otherwise.

4)a,b approve prior financial (treasurer’s) info and minutes:  financials are still erroneous after being highlighted

    Previously.  Still incomplete as defined as “basic” financials.                          October minutes are missing.  Specially

    Onerous since it included a closed meeting “report out”.  (Only chance I’m aware of for “secret meeting” concerning

    ½ million dollar employee benefit, GM potential legal/insurance issues, GM loss of another CSD “job”)

    It is also interesting that GM wants to decrease transparency of reporting minutes from meetings.  Ref 5) e.

5)a,b,c relatively self explanatory so I will address “the rest of the story” behind budget changes:  1^st GM has been on

    Board for over 2 years; this defines full responsibility–not “staff’s fault”.     GM has discovered major items not budgeted

    (major risk of major shut down).  Could be $300000.  Health Department involved concerning water quality.  (Won’t

    Discuss the barge[s] and previous GM; another story)   $300000 is being taken from “intake pipe” budget.  Last year

    Or so 4 major leaks, 65-70% water loss each time;          “priorities, priorities who knows the priorities”?

    Note: this reminds me of the story behind the story.  Multi-hundreds of thousands of dollars per well that can’t operate

    Without “surface” (lake) water.  Did we dig the wells because no lake water?

5)d going on since 2010 !  Inventory of correspondence was not approved !  Barton later showed examples where other 3^rd

    Party persons input was missing.  GM couldn’t find a commercial “arbiter” to settle the WORDING ONLY of the employee

    Handbook.  Thus GM hired the CSD’S lawyer to consult on all issues of the law.  After all the discussions, Board President

    Must condemn this action of GM.  If President wants to give this benefit to two employees (my estimate $500000), he

    Needs to ask the board to approve, now.

5)f, g relatively self explanatory.    MID, CSD and you and I are in a major fight for our home and access to water.

EDITORIAL:  GM when hired stated that CSD wasn’t his type of client; too small.  HE HAS PROVED IT !  WE’VE PAID FOR IT!

QUESTION  IS : how much more do we pay?  He has proved it at McCloud, CA, Sonora, CA and recently Los Osos.  (others ?)

Note: last 30-60 days, Los Osos CSD didn’t renew Kampa LLC contract but hired another “contract firm”.  Reading a local

Los Osos “rag/web” this week, writer referred to “bureaucratic leach” in describing the departure of Kampa LLC and the

Hiring of the new contractor.  I’m not going to go that far but this non-licensed, part time, non-residential, non-hands-on,  Outside

GM Isn’t working.  As the GM is comfortable blaming a near, non-existent staff, our board apparently thinks they

Have limited responsibility if they have piles of paper (over and over again) and a “GM” .  As the folks stated in the Newsweek

Bloomberg magazine discussing Kampa/Nestle leaving McCloud, CA, we are still suffering thru the “legacy cost”.    Kampa

Will be gone, he always does go.       We are already over our heads trying to act like we are a “Hetch-Hetchy” water system.

We’re not !          Our last Financial Mgr had the guts to show a five year forecast.  CSD’s GM just piles more and more paper in

Front of the Board; they just move it on.  Apparently scared to ask, when is enough ?  [Sounds like the two trillion dollar debt

We gave our kids, huh?)                        Whatever you do don’t come to the meeting, very limited seating; they count on it!

 

 

 

Frank Sinatra considered Kate Smith the best singer of her time, and he said that when he and a million other guys first heard her sing “God Bless America” on the radio, they all pretended to have dust in their eyes as they wiped away a tear or two.

Here are the facts… The link at the bottom will take you to a video showing the very first public singing of “GOD BLESS AMERICA”.  But before you watch it, you should also know the story behind the first public showing of the song.

The time was 1940. America was still in a terrible economic depression. Hitler was taking over Europe and Americans were afraid we’d have to go to war. It was a time of hardship and worry for most Americans.

This was the era just before TV, when radio shows were HUGE, and American families sat around their radios in the evenings, listening to their favorite entertainers, and no entertainer of that era was bigger than Kate Smith.

Kate was also large; plus size, as we now say, and the popular phrase still used today is in deference to her, “It ain’t over till the fat lady sings”. Kate Smith might not have made it big in the age of TV, but with her voice coming over the radio, she was the biggest star of her time.

Kate was also patriotic. It hurt her to see Americans so depressed and afraid of what the next day would bring . She had hope for America, and faith in her fellow Americans. She wanted to do something to cheer them up, so she went to the famous American song-writer, Irving Berlin (who also wrote “White Christmas”) and asked him to write a song that would make Americans feel good again about their country.  When she described what she was looking for, he said he had just the song for her.

He went to his files and found a song that he had written, but never published, 22 years before – way back in 1917. He gave it to her and she worked on it with her studio orchestra.  She and Irving Berlin were not sure how the song would be received by the public, but both agreed they would not take any profits from God Bless America. Any profits would go to the Boy Scouts of America. Over the years, the Boy Scouts have received millions of dollars in royalties from this song.

This video starts out with Kate Smith coming into the radio studio with the orchestra and an audience. She introduces the new songfor the very first time, and starts singing. After the first couple verses, with her voice in the background still singing, scenes are shown from the 1940 movie, “You’re In The Army Now.”  At the 4:20 mark of the video you see a young actor in the movie, sitting in an office, reading a paper; it’s Ronald Reagan.

To this day, God Bless America stirs our patriotic feelings and pride in our country.  Back in 1940, when Kate Smith went looking for a song to raise the spirits of her fellow Americans, I doubt whether she realized just how successful the results would be for her fellow Americans during those years of hardship and worry….. and for many generations of Americans to follow.

Now that you know the story of the song, I hope you’ll enjoy it and treasure it even more.

Many people don’t know there’s a lead in to the song since it usually starts with “God Bless America…..” So here’s the entire song as originally sung…..ENJOY!

Let us pray God still does Bless America, and it’s not too late.

Click on:

VIDEO OF KATE SMITH SINGING “GOD BLESS AMERICA”

REMEMBER TO THANK A VET- TODAY AND EVERY DAY!

You know my opinion already so it makes no sense to belabor the issue, right?  I just pray the Good Lord continues to bless this great nation while granting its citizens the resolve to face and adequately address whatever materializes on our horizon due to the results tonight.    Whatever happens, living in the United States of America is one of the greatest blessings each of us shares and OUR FREEDOM should never be taken for granted.

As always,

my best to you and yours, Lew

THE 1965 PROPOSED SITE

for the

SNELLING RESERVOIR

as viewed from

 ALAMO DRIVE in the Lake Don Pedro Subdivision

(The body of water under the arrow is Kelsey Lake, Merced Falls, Merced County, CA.)

 

 

Judging by the 25 years of traveling Merced Falls Road from the Lake Don Pedro subdivision to the city of Merced and experiencing the traffic first hand, I can comfortably state that many of us utilize this “short cut” rather than traveling HWY 132 into La Grange and then HWY 59 south to Snelling on our way to Merced and else where in the valley.  [I often use both routes (Merced Falls and HWY 59 to Snelling) for a bit of variety on routine journeys – one going downhill, the other returning uphill, just to make that literal “round trip” to Merced and back.]

Did you know our familiar winding Merced Falls Road could have been dramatically changed by a MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT water holding proposal documented in Bulletin Number 131, MARIPOSA AREA INVESTIGATION by the Resources Agency Department of Water Resources in November 1965?  Check out the below map found while researching the water issues of this area:

The unincorporated area of MERCED FALLS (middle-left side of map and west of McSwain Reservoir [currently known as Lake McSwain], would have been under the proposed SNELLING RESERVOIR!   Much like the town of Bagby on HWY 49 between Coulterville and Mariposa that was submerged due to construction of the New Exchequer Dam, Merced Falls would have been relegated to similar “underwater status” as water backed up from the (proposed) construction of the Snelling dam.  Notice also the massive holding of water on the Merced River east of Bagby along with the many other water holding/diversion proposals scattered about the area.  Absolutely fascinating with all the engineering and planning involved with such major projects.  This doesn’t have anything to do with current LDPCSD issues but I thought it interesting enough to share.

Now on to burn day preparation!  Rain is on the way!

My best to you and yours, Lew

Here are the lists of Annexation Resolutions, both requests and approvals, from LDPCSD records.

[NOTE: some of the identified “approvals” were never legally approved and are not currently annexed into the district.  Also, all handwritten notes are mine except for page 3 involving the MISSING RESOLUTION 88-4 involving Lake Shore Ranch]

Well this certainly was an interesting, although labor intensive, little experiment.  When I discovered Mariposa County Planning in April of 1985 had originally suggested a “ZERO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE” for the LDPCSD [ie, the District should not expand water service beyond the approved PLACE OF USE UNDER THE WATER LICENSE] I was curious as to how such a lucid and reasonable suggestion for our predicament had been abandoned, so I just kept reading forward in the timeline.

Jotting notes down by hand or typing them into an open word file was cumbersome but I did not want to just summarize in my own words so I decided a “COPY & PASTE” approach might be more convenient and would maintain the authenticity of WHAT REMAINS OF THIS DISTRICT ANNEXATION HISTORY.  Ended up with a 36 page word document full of  annexation “Minute Snippets” from April 1985 to December 1989.  The only problem was when I tried to insert this word document into a blog post my computer refused to cooperate with the format.  Wonderful!  What next?   The good news was the document would at least print – so TO THE INK AND PAPER!!!   After printing I scanned them into the computer to be inserted like any other JPG image.  (Who would have ever thought I would be talking like this?  lol)

You know, it doesn’t matter what the particular issue is or even to what degree innocent taxpayers are victimized,when you start researching how such OUTRAGEOUSLY UNETHICAL ACTIVITY WAS PERMITTED TO CONTINUE, you will discover there were indeed those who recognized it for what it was at the time and spoke up that it was wrong.  Unfortunately, those attempting to “do the right thing” were swimming against a very strong current of greed and focused desire to obtain something that was not theirs.  Honest and sincere efforts to follow the rules were ignored in favor of big money, special interest corruption and continued deliberate violation of established protective regulations….

…regulations specifically designed to prevent the foreseeable harm

this district has suffered for decades.

ANYWAY, that initial proposed ZERO SPHERE OF INFLUENCE was, not surprisingly, met with strong opposition by the numerous property owners and speculative land developers outside the permitted PLACE OF USE who wanted and demanded the subdivision’s water for their varied purposes.

APRIL FOOLS DAY? 

Is every day for subdivision entitled MERCED RIVER WATER customers who continue to pay for this fraud.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Friday, October 28th, 2016

While doing a quick check  for open windows and doors around the house this morning during a heavy down pour of rain just after 10am, I saw some of our “regular neighborhood wildlife” quietly waiting for the opportunity to continue their journey to the natural park down by the creek.   Should be plenty of “action” down there today!  MBTYAY, Lew

 

 

 

Sorry.  Never realized the link to that SWRCB ORDER wasn’t working – likely a result of a late night posting marathon.  lol.

Naturally it turned out to be an 11 page order from the STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD so this morning I had to first print all those pages, scan them into a file, create a blog page, insert the SWRCB pages into that page, and re-post….  oh yeah, and make an excuse for screwing up when they were first presented!  lol

Anyway, the point of posting that specific order was to emphasize the incorrect information contained on page 7 where it states:  “Currently, LDPCSD does not have an alternate source of water.”  BUT OF COURSE WE DID! And it was called the Ranchito Drive remedy well!

PAGE 7 of 11:

True,  it was only one groundwater well that was used to supply “replacement water” for the MERCED RIVER WATER that was wrongfully leaving the permitted service area of the Lake Don Pedro subdivision (according to water license 11395 and the water agreement with the MERCED IRRIGATION DISTRICT who holds that water license), but it was an ALTERNATE SOURCE OF WATER never-the-less.

The statement to the SWRCB should have been qualified with a word like “adequate“, “sufficient“, or even “appropriate” to make the sentence factually  correct, such as:

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

Of course, by using such a qualifier in the request, a resulting reasonable question from the SWRCB might have been something like:

After 36 years of operation,  why was no ADEQUATE ALTERNATE SOURCE OF WATER pursued by the LDPCSD?  

But as we all know now, such a question from the SWRCB would have brought up all the illegal water service connections installed outside the MID POU into the discussion – something MID and the LDPCSD certainly wanted to avoid – because having only one groundwater well was an ADEQUATE ALTERNATE SOURCE OF WATER FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE AS A REMEDY TO PAST VIOLATIONS OF THE WATER LICENSE!

Asking the STATE for a special URGENCY ORDER when not following existing regulations already would not be a good starting point – right?

Anyway, sorry about the inoperable link.

My best to you and yours, Lew

 

“At this time, and in the foreseeable future, LDPCSD’s only public service

is the provision of water to residents of the subdivision.” 

Pete Kampa September 18th, 1996

 

 

Interesting that the above 20 year old statement legally reflects

exactly what the LDPCSD should have been doing back then as well as today. 

Once again Pete KAMPA  conveniently side-stepped (others might say concealed) the fact our LDPCSD had been intentionally serving water outside the permitted PLACE OF USE under water license 11395  (the Lake Don Pedro subdivision) since the District’s formation in 1980.  Not only that, but as evidenced by his prior correspondence to the Counties of Tuolumne and Mariposa he quite clearly documented his intention to continue and greatly expand (9,000+  acres) that SPECIAL BENEFIT WATER SERVICE TO LAND DEVELOPERS outside the permitted service area.

This is not a simple matter of knit-picking over the use of particular worlds in one select piece of correspondence, but rather, is just one more crystal clear example of the MANY MISREPRESENTATIONS this DISTRICT (through it’s various “representatives”) has made through the years to customers, the general public, and even more importantly – the many regulatory agencies and departments throughout this state and federal government. 

The above statement is further evidence of the concerted and routine effort to

MISREPRESENT THE LDPCSD’s FACTUAL HISTORY

versus

ITS LEGALLY APPROVED OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS.

Kampa’s 1996 letter identified (and thus quite unintentionally reaffirmed) the District’s INTENDED and STATE APPROVED OPERATION ……..

“… LDPCSD’s only public service is the provision of water to residents of the subdivision”.

 

Just wanted to correct a failure on my part to make this particular point clear in the prior posting which contained the correspondence.

My best to you and yours, Lew