The call for resignations, with the exception of Bert Bertrando, was made by Roberta Weissglass, a local activist and resident of eastern Goleta Valley. She asked them to resign unless they begin to act as if they comprehended their “fiduciary responsibilities;”
recognize the declaration of a statewide drought; acknowledge that a conflict of interest exists with the district’s legal advisor; and take action to protect the district’s limited water supplies.

Opinions on the necessity of water conservation varied widely, however. Jack Ruskey, a district customer and vociferous critic, contended that based on ordinances in place, the district is under legal obligation to take the actions called for until the drought is declared over.

District counsel Chip Wullbrandt expressed a markedly different opinion, however, stating that Ruskey had misinterpreted district documents and ordinances.

Bertrando said he only approved of pumping ground water now if it is necessary to meet water-quality standards for public health and safety. Ground water is currently being pumped from the aquifer to blend it with water from Cachuma Lake, to keep water quality at a safe level. Unusually high amounts of carcinogens are moving from the watershed into Cachuma following the use of tremendous amounts of chemicals to fight last year’s Zaca Fire.

The Brown Act, the state’s open meeting law, was once again the subject of heated discussion early in the meeting. As the regular meeting opened and Jack Cunningham, president of the board, called for public input, before any comments under that item were heard, Ruskey asked if there were any actions to report from the closed session that preceded the regular meeting.

Action taken in closed session is required, by the Brown Act, to be reported to the public.

Cunningham started to say that yes, the board had authorized General Manager Kevin Walsh to sign a waiver or some kind. Wullbrandt jumped in to clarify Cunningham’s response, saying that only confidential direction was given by the board to counsel and Walsh.

Cunningham at that point also referred to a couple of ad hoc committees created previously by the board — one dealing with LAFCO on boundary overlaps with other agencies, and the other to work with LAFCO on annexation issues. The district requested last year that LAFCO approve annexation of property on the Gaviota Coast into the district.

At issue was why the creation of the two committees had never been reported publicly.

When Ruskey asked Cunningham what he intended to do about the alleged violation of the Brown Act, Cunningham said he guessed he’d “have to suffer with it.”

Tuesday’s closed session had two items on the agenda. One was conference with counsel regarding existing litigation against the district by the Gaviota Coast Conservancy; the other concerned conferencing with him about considering “initiation of litigation on two matters.” No information about litigation being considered, including who the district is considering suing, was made public.

Wullbrandt said later that the board has “not decided at this point to initiate” litigation in this case, and that depending on future circumstances, the board may reconsider it.

Farmers and ranchers in the Goleta Water District should have direct input, for a while at least, into district decisions following the formation Tuesday of an ad hoc committee on agricultural issues. The topic was on the agenda at the request of Susan Petrovich, an attorney representing some of Goleta Valley’s farmers. Petrovich actually requested that the Ag Issues Working Group, consisting of a number of farmers who consulted with the water district in the past, be reactivated. She said she thought the reactivation was essential to improve communication between the district and ag users, and that meetings should begin as soon as possible.

The board was supportive of the proposal — the only question was whether or not the “ag working group” should be reactivated, as Petrovich requested, or an ad hoc committee should be formed instead, as recommended by Wullbrandt. The board approved an ad hoc committee, to include several farmers.