Comments on: False statements

By: resident

resident — Sun, 15 Jul 2012 18:03:35 +0000

Wait to you see: Contracting locally, in and of itself, is not bad. Matter of fact, why is bringing in someone from So Cal good? If both bids and competence are competitive, why NOT go local?

By: Wait to you see who the contractor is

Wait to you see who the contractor is — Sun, 15 Jul 2012 04:50:42 +0000

This will all become very clear why this push has occured once we see who the contractor is. Want to bet it’s someone local as opposed to a Southern California crew that has done tons of these?

Good ole boys take care of each other…

Now why would that happen AGAIN??

By: Bill Capraun, retired GDPUD

Bill Capraun, retired GDPUD — Sat, 07 Jul 2012 14:05:48 +0000

Dink and David, You need to see the emails and phone calls between Norm, Bonnie N, and Hank to know who really goes behind who’s back. If you attend a board meeting it is as thought the meeting votes are predetermined and have already been discussed prior to the meeting. This has been a thought for years with this board. The meeting just seems to be a formality.

By: Dink Lane

Dink Lane — Fri, 06 Jul 2012 20:41:22 +0000

David: Kathy was ATTACKED by Norm, Ray and Bonnie N. (other Board members) for “Going behind their backs” and “Secret requests” when she did a FOIA request asking California’s Public Health Department ….. This deception with GDPUD’s GM bothers everyone EXCEPT the Reporter Dawn, and the Mt. Democrat Editor & Publisher…

By: Why isn't Hank behind bars?

Why isn't Hank behind bars? — Fri, 06 Jul 2012 13:58:53 +0000

Bill, thanks for the additional information. There seems to be a pattern at GDPUD, suggestive of complicity. Seems like more than one person culpable since White keeps on keeping on. And so they go after Kathy Otermat instead? They REALLY don’t want their cover blown.

By: Bill Capraun, retired GDPUD

Bill Capraun, retired GDPUD — Fri, 06 Jul 2012 13:49:35 +0000

Mr. White did the same with Greenwood Lake Water Treatment Plant. The state suggested GDPUD cut back on the plans, but GDPUD did not want to and then GDPUD told the state that the public did not want to pay for the cost of the plant. After GDPUD had already passed a rate increase for financing the new plant. GDPUD told the public that the State had changed the requirements causing the increase expense. So,GDPUD told the state one thing, the public another and still passed a rate increase for a new plant that never was constructed costing the tax payers 1.1 million dollars that GDPUD wrote off as a loss. Mr. White still received a good evaluation with job performance.

By: Penny B.

Penny B. — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 18:39:45 +0000

Dale Miller’s information looks pretty compelling. For some strange reason GDPUD ratepayers could have faced a once-off $450,000 bill. INSTEAD, all things being equal (which of course they never are) Mr. White has decided to saddle them with $375,000 PLUS INTEREST for each of the next 40 years. What a deal!

By: David Ostenberg

David Ostenberg — Tue, 19 Jun 2012 17:44:23 +0000

I happened to read this letter and wanted to offer my 2 cents. In my position I deal with state agencies on a daily basis. One thing I can say about the state is that they document everything and I’ve never seen one piece of correspondence with less than 6 other cc’s to other managers and other departments. If the state denied a request there’s NO WAY there would not be documentation to back this up. Dale – I would highly suggest that you send the same California Public Records Act Request to Carl Lischeske at California Department of Public Health, if you have not already done so. THAT my friend would be the smoking gun to confirm your GM lied to the public and the board. Since this is in regard to a very expensive long-term financial commitment, I would say the board would have grounds for firing the GM and I”m sure the public who he lied to would support this decision. Keep up the good work to both you and Ms. Otermat in this unfortunate continuing saga.

By: citizen

citizen — Mon, 18 Jun 2012 23:17:22 +0000

By now it’s becoming fairly obvious why the intense hostility toward Kathy Otermat. One honest person DOES make a difference, not a difference celebrated by those on the take. But less clear is why GDPUD favored the very expensive $15M option (plus interest). Cui bono?