Gibson Asks Parks Dept. to Withdraw Funding Request for Tri-W Park, a "Result" of the "Failure" of the Coastal Commission to Approve Sewer

I know, I'm such a dork, but I have a new favorite CD: The recording of the January 28, 2010 meeting of the SLO County Parks Commission.

It's rockin'! So revealing.

I acquired it through an official public records request that I did recently with county officials, because I suspected the recording would contain spectacular evidence to support my Brown Act violation case against the SLO County Parks Commission, that I recently filed with the District Attorney's office.

You can read all about that case at this link:

http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2010/02/sewerwatch-asks-da-to-investigate.html

And, although the CD does contain the spectacular evidence that I suspected it would (beyond my wildest expectations), there's also other GREAT stuff on that CD, that I wasn't so much expecting, and what that great stuff shows is that, apparently, the honeymoon's over. There appears to be a great deal of friction between 2nd District Supervisor, Bruce Gibson, 2nd District Parks Commissioner, Pandora Nash-Karner, and, recently hired SLO County Parks Director, Curtis Black.

Trouuuuublllllle in par-a-dise!

What the recording reveals, is that shortly after last month's Coastal Commission hearing, where the Commission "failed" (staff's word) to issue a permit for the county's proposed sewer system for Los Osos, Gibson contacted the Parks Department and asked them to "withdraw" their application for funding for a proposed Tri-W park project.

"The failure for the sewer project to get through the Coastal Commission, resulted in (Supervisor Gibson's) request to withdraw (an application for Prop 84 funding for the Tri-W park project)," Black said at the meeting.

Gets better.

Nash-Karner, Gibson's own appointment to the Parks Commission, was completely unaware that he had made that request.

"I had no idea," she said, and then seemed devastated upon hearing the news, and launched into a desperate rant about the project, and how it could be funded, before finally saying, "I'll talk to Bruce Gibson about this (Prop. 84 funding for the Tri-W park project) issue."

At one point, Black actually calls Nash-Karner, "very unfair... truly unfair," for her "disappointment" with Parks staff... simply because they followed Gibson's request to withdraw the funding application.

SewerWatch has sent the following e-mail to Supervisor Gibson:

- - -

DATE: 2/27/10

Dear Supervisor Gibson,

On the recording of the January 28, 2010 meeting of the SLO County Parks Commission, a Parks Dept. staff member (it sounds like, Curtis Black, Deputy Director of SLO County Parks) said that you recently asked him to "withdraw" the Parks Department's request for Proposition 84 funding for a park project the department is proposing at the Tri-W site in Los Osos.

He said that, prior to your "request," that project had received staff recommendation to proceed.

He also said that you asked him to "withdraw the request" for the Prop. 84 funding as a "result" of the recent Coastal Commission meeting, where the Commission "failed" (staff's word) to issue a permit for the county's proposed sewer system for Los Osos.

Here are my questions:

-- Why did you ask the Parks Dept. to withdraw their Prop 84 funding request for the Tri-W park project, after the Coastal Commission "failed" to issue a permit for the county's sewer project for Los Osos?

What were your reasons for doing that?

Also, on that same recording, your appointment to the Parks Commission, Pandora Nash-Karner, was surprised to hear that news. She said that she, "didn't realize that (Supervisor Gibson) had sent this (notice to withdraw the funding request)." And, "I had no idea," she said.

Here's my question on that:

Why didn't you notify your own Parks Commissioner about your request to withdraw the Prop. 84 funding proposal prior to the Parks Commission's January 28 meeting, especially considering that the Tri-W park project is located in Los Osos, her district, and hometown?

Finally, Ms. Nash-Karner also said at that meeting, "I'll talk to Bruce Gibson about this (Prop. 84 funding for the Tri-W park project) issue."

That was on 1/28/10.

Did she ever talk to you about that?

If so, what did she say? What was the nature of that conversation?

As always, much thanks for your time,
Ron

- - -

IF he replies (and almost certainly, he won't... because he never does... even for EXCELLENT questions like that), I'll post it.

On 2/23/10, SewerWatch also sent Curtis Black these questions:

- - -
Are you aware of Pandora Nash-Karner's involvement with the development of the Tri-W sewer project?

How she was the vice-president of the LOCSD in 2000, and a quote from the 2000 EIR for the Tri-W project report, that I first exposed in one of my New Times cover stories, reads:

"The size and location of the other sites did not provide an opportunity to create a community amenity. The sites on the outskirts of town could not deliver a community use area that was readily accessible to the majority of residents in the manner that (the Tri-W site) could."

Before this e-mail, were you aware of that?
- - -

He replied, "No, I wasn't aware of her concerns or actions regarding the sewer project."

###

SLO County Parks Department Uses Commissioner Nash-Karner's Home for "Retreat," and Conducts Public Business

TO: Curtis Black, Deputy Director, SLO County Parks Department
DATE: 2/26/10

Dear Mr. Black,

On the "Previous Parks Commission Meeting Minutes" page at this link:

http://www.slocountyparks.com/information/pcommprevmeetmins.htm

... it reads (for the 1/28/10 meeting):

"Commissioner Hilton thanked Commissioner Nash-Karner for the use of her home for the Park Commission retreat."

and;

"12. Update on Needs Assessment and Approval of a Commissioner(s) to Participate on the Needs Assessment Team. Dileo said she provided an update at Park Commission retreat but asked at that time for a committee be created to assist with review. Commissioners Gonzales and Nash-Karner volunteered and both were appointed to the needs assessment committee. Dorothy Jennings commented on needs assessment development model."

and;

"Curtis Black said staff has withdrawn their recommendation to pursue the tri-W project."

Please consider this e-mail a public records request for ALL documents associated with the above mentioned "retreat" -- including how it was arranged, and what was discussed at it -- and for ALL documents associated with the SLO County Parks Dept.'s "recommendation to pursue the tri-W project."

Thank you in advance for your prompt attention to this matter,
Ron

###

SewerWatch Asks DA to Investigate Possible Brown Act Violations by SLO County Parks Commission

"The people do not yield their sovereignty to the bodies that serve them. The people insist on remaining informed to retain control over the legislative bodies they have created."
-- The Ralph M. Brown Act

[Updated 2/24/10, see below]

- - -
To: SLO County Supervisor, Bruce Gibson, 2nd District
Date: 2/22/10

Dear Supervisor Gibson,

I'm attempting to send the following e-mail to SLO County District Attorney, Gerald Shea, however, I noticed that the DA's office does not include a contact e-mail address on their web site. So, considering the subject matter of my e-mail involves the 2nd District of San Luis Obispo County, I was hoping that you could forward the following e-mail to Mr. Shea.

Thank you,
Ron
- - -
- - -

Dear Mr. Shea,

I'm writing you today, because my research shows that in other municipalities, the method used to report a possible violation of the Brown Act is to write a letter to the local District Attorney's office requesting an investigation. That's what this letter is, because I believe I'm the victim of an egregious violation of the Brown Act, that occurred recently in SLO County.

Here are the details:

On, 1/20/10, I published a piece on my blog, SewerWatch [sewerwatch.blogspot.com], that shows that Supervisor Bruce Gibson's appointment to the SLO County Parks Commission, Pandora Nash-Karner, also sits on the Board of Directors for the San Luis Obispo Botanical Garden -- a facility that leases County-owned land, is discussed at Parks Commission meetings, and is also planning a "$20 million" expansion, and, according to their executive director, the one proposal they've received to design the project is from the SWA Group, where Nash-Karner's husband, Gary Karner, is a "Managing Principal and Senior Project Manager for 27 years and is currently retained by SWA," according to his bio.

What my piece also shows, is that I've filed a complaint with the California Fair Political Practices Commission requesting they investigate possible conflict of interest violations (found in the Political Reform Act) with that arrangement.

Shortly after I exposed that apparent conflict of interest, I noticed on the January 28, 2010 Parks Commission meeting agenda, this item:

"(Item) 8: Proposal from San Luis Obispo Botanical Gardens – Dave Porter (7:00)"

As I'm sure you know, according to the Brown Act, agenda items, and their staff reports, must be made available to the public "at least 72 hours before a regular meeting."

Here's the specific language:

- - -
54954.2. (a) At least 72 hours before a regular meeting, the legislative body of the local agency, or its designee, shall post an agenda containing a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting, including items to be discussed in closed session.

54954.1. Any person may request that a copy of the agenda, or a copy of all the documents constituting the agenda packet [bolding mine], of any meeting of a legislative body be mailed to that person.
- - -

I deliberately waited until within that 72 hour time frame before I contacted SLO County Parks Commission staff requesting a copy of the staff report for Item 8 -- required by the Brown Act to be included in that meeting's "agenda packet," at the time of my request.

On the morning of 1/26/10, well within the "72 hour" Brown Act requirement, I sent SLO County Parks Planner, Jan Di Leo this e-mail:

- - -
On the agenda for this Thursday's Parks Commission meeting, it reads:

"Proposal from San Luis Obispo Botanical Gardens – Dave Porter (7:00)"

Please e-mail me the staff report for that item, and the proposal.

Thanks again,
Ron
- - -

After not receiving a reply for 24 hours, I sent Ms. Di Leo another e-mail on the morning of 1/27/10:

- - -
Hello Jan,

Yesterday morning I sent you an e-mail requesting the staff report for the following item on this Thursday's Parks Commission meeting agenda:

"Proposal from San Luis Obispo Botanical Gardens – Dave Porter (7:00)"

That was 24 hours ago, and I've yet to receive a response, although you were kind enough to promptly respond to my other e-mails... and thank you for that.

That meeting is tomorrow, so PLEASE, is there any way I can get that report today? (And, frankly, I'm a little disappointed that the report isn't linked on the Parks Commission web site, like they are with other SLO County government agencies, like the Planning Commission, and the Supes.)

So, again, please e-mail me the staff report for that item, and the proposal (if available) as soon as possible. And, please don't force me to do a public records request to get that staff report, as those take up to 10 days to fulfill, and the meeting is tomorrow.

Thanks again,
Ron
- - -

The next morning, on 1/28/10, Ms. Di Leo finally replied:

- - -
Ron,
That item was continued until February 25, 2010. At this point there is no report. I believe Dave Porter was simply coming to give a report. Our web site has the Parks Commission agenda and staff reports. So, prior to the February meeting (around Feb. 19th) you should be able to down load [sic] the agenda and the report (if there is one).

Jan Di Leo
Parks Planner
SLO County Parks
- - -

Please note, Ms. Di Leo writes, "I believe Dave Porter was simply coming to give a report," when the Item 8 clearly says, "proposal." Then, Ms. Di Leo writes, "Our web site has the Parks Commission... staff reports," when it clearly does not.

[ Here's the link: http://www.slocountyparks.com/information/parkscommission.htm ]

To emphasize the egregious nature of this apparent Brown Act violation, I want to summarize the above mentioned sequence of events:

I recently exposed an apparent conflict of interest involving 2nd District Parks Commissioner, Pandora Nash-Karner, her husband's landscaping firm, the SWA Group, and her position on the Board of Directors for the San Luis Obispo Botanical Garden.

Then I noticed that a representative from the San Luis Obispo Botanical Garden was agendized to give a "proposal" to the SLO County Parks Commission, on January 28.

Then, I deliberately -- repeat, deliberately -- waited until inside the Brown Act's "72 hours" before requesting a copy of the staff report for that "proposal."

On the same day of the meeting -- two days after my initial request, and with Item 8 STILL listed on the Parks Commission agenda, a member of SLO County Parks staff wrote to me, "That item was continued until February 25, 2010. At this point there is no report."

Due to this seemingly egregious violation of the Brown Act, I (and the public) will never know the contents of that January, 28, 2010, "proposal."

I'm requesting that the SLO County District Attorney's office please investigate this very serious matter.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Finally, I'd like to end with this quote:

"Unconstitutional practices [often] get their first footing in their mildest and least repulsive form."
-- United States Supreme Court, 1886

Thank you for your time,
Ron

###

[UPDATE: 2/24/10 -- The minutes from the January 28, 2010, SLO County Parks Commission meeting were just published on their web site:

http://www.slocountyparks.com/information/pcommprevmeetmins.htm

It reads:

"8. Proposal from San Luis Obispo Botanical Gardens – Dave Porter.  Deferred."

... and the agenda for tomorrow night's meeting was also just published, and this:

"Proposal from San Luis Obispo Botanical Gardens – Dave Porter (7:00)"

... is nowhere to be found, of course.]

[Eight weeks down... 44 to go.]

Yin/Yang-in' It!

Of all the journalism devices I employ, one of my favorites is my own invention: The "Yin/Yang It!"

It tells such a great story, in about as tight (and funny) a fashion as you can imagine.

Yin:

"Just look at the SEVEN (7) FPPC complaints filed by (Taxpayers Watch) that were ALL accepted and being investigated by the (Fair Political Practices Commission). You can trust the FPPC to 'do what is right', and fine and prosecute those being investigated..."
-- Recalled LOCSD Director, "Richard LeGros," posted on SewerWatch, 2/9/10

Yang:

"The Commission has completed a review of the forgoing allegations, and closed this case without finding a violation."
-- California Fair Political Practices Commission, from a letter dated, 2/8/10, to former LOCSD Director, Lisa Schicker, regarding a complaint filed by Taxpayers Watch, a "group" consisting of at least one recalled LOCSD Director

###

[Seven weeks down... 45 to go.]

The Great "New Los Osorleans/Nash-Edwards-Karner/Montgomery, Watson, Harza/Third Shiloh Missionary Baptist Church/Save the Dream/MCCI/SWA Group" Case

TO: Jim Letten, U.S. Attorney, Eastern District of Louisiana
DATE: 2/11/10

Dear Mr. Letten,

I think you are going to find this extremely interesting.

I'm a former newspaper editor, and now independent reporter, and the reason I'm writing you, is because I just finished reading (with great interest) the story titled, "Benjamin Edwards pleads guilty in Sewerage & Water Board kickback scheme," at this link:

http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2010/02/former_new_orleans_sewerage_wa.html

... a case that, according to the article, you are the prosecuting attorney.

I recognize that story.

I've been reporting on a near-exact version of that story, in Los Osos, California, for the past 10 years.

In fact, I recently posted a blog entry that's almost perfectly interchangeable with the Benjamin Edwards story.

That story is at this link:

http://sewerwatch.blogspot.com/2009/07/exclusive-sewerwatch-investigation-how.html

My story involves Montgomery, Watson, Harza, and their subcontractors, and government officials using public funds to pay to MWH, which, in turn, apparently hired at least one of those officials' spouses' businesses as a sub-contractor.

The similarities between your case, and my story are too numerous to list here.

However, at the link above, I provide links to primary documents that show MWH doing some awfully fishy things, like donating $10,000 to a political committee that was formed to defeat a recall election -- a successful recall election, that terminated a sewer project that MWH was contracted to build -- and MWH's donation came in one day AFTER the recall election, and then MORE fishy things happened with that money, as you'll see if you read my piece.

The similarities between your case, and my story just go on and on. You'll recognize them, immediately, like I did. (It's basically the exact same story.)

If it's not too much trouble, I'm hoping that you could forward this e-mail to the proper authorities in California, along with, perhaps, some of the information from your case.

Like I said above, I think they (and you) will find this very, very interesting.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Thank you for your time,
Ron

P.S. BIG congrats to the Saints!

###

"Better for you than donuts"Food Journalist, Michael Pollan, Discusses Recent Cal Poly Incident on Democracy Now!

In case you missed it yesterday on Amy Goodman's amazing show, Democracy Now!, Michael Pollan, the author of The Omnivore’s Dilemma and In Defense of Food, discussed (among many other great things ["Veggie libel laws?" Who knew?]) his recent encounter with Cal Poly.

Here's an excerpt:

- - -
MICHAEL POLLAN: At Cal Poly, California Polytechnic Institute, State University in San Luis Obispo. One of their big donors, Harris Ranch, protested that I was going to be speaking and threatened to withdraw $500,000 in funding they had given the university, if my speech wasn’t countered by a debate and that the industry be allowed to speak. Now, the industry gets plenty of opportunities to speak at this university. I mean, it’s basically an agribusiness vocational school. And so, they insisted that what had been a speech be turned into a debate, which I participated in. And, you know, it was fine, but the students wanted to hear a speech. And, you know, so I didn’t get the full meal.
- - -

Excellent interview. Highly recommended. The guy's hilarious.

Here's the link to the full interview (read or listen):

http://www.democracynow.org/2010/2/8/michael_pollan_on_food_rules_an

###

[Six weeks down... 46 to go.]

Quota Made

TO: SLO County Supervisor, Bruce Gibson, 2nd District
DATE: 2/2/10

Dear Supervisor Gibson,

Are the Parks Commission meetings recorded?

Thank you,
Ron

###

[Five weeks down... 47 to go.]