What are you waiting for, governor? The Paso Robles groundwater basin legislation has been sitting on your desk for a week or so, and still no signature.
Proponents of the legislation speculate the governor may be waiting to sign all bills dealing with groundwater at the same time. That’s understandable, but we’re getting anxious. There is still much work to be done — the district must go through the LAFCO process before it’s put to a vote — and meanwhile, the basin continues to degrade.
The governor has until Sept. 30 to sign or veto the legislation; if he takes no action, it becomes law anyway.
We’ll give Gov. Jerry Brown a signing-bonus bouquet if he approves the bill before the Sept. 30 deadline.
Tell someone before discharging
In this climate, the city of Arroyo Grande should have known better than to drain 35,000 gallons from one of its water tanks without a word of warning.
The big, 250,000-gallon tank was drained to prep it for much-needed painting. Most of the water was transferred to the city’s distribution system, but about 35,000 gallons were discharged to the city’s drainage system. City residents were understandably concerned when they saw water running down their streets. And while the discharge didn’t technically require an additional state permit, the Regional Water Quality Control Board would have preferred to have been clued in as well.
The discharged water was laden with sediment and unfit for drinking. It could have been used for irrigation, though transporting the water would have been a challenge.
Dumping the water may have been the only practical solution, but the city should have given citizens — and the water board — a heads-up. The city’s public works director said he’ll set up notification protocols to follow in the future. That’s good, but the city still gets a soggy brickbat for lack of foresight.
No violation means no investigation
We toss the Arroyo Grande City Council a bouquet of common sense for refusing to be bullied into another expensive investigation into the “incident” involving City Manager Steve Adams and Community Development Director Teresa McClish.
For the handful of readers who don’t know what we’re talking about, here’s a brief recap: On the night of July 3, police officers went searching for McClish, who was late returning home. Officers found Adams and McClish in Adams’ office; police described Adams as looking disheveled — his hair was uncombed and his shirt untucked — and said McClish appeared to be holding an article of clothing in front of her, though she was not described as being unclothed. And contrary to some reports, the two were not described as being in “an intimate situation.”
An investigation by the deputy city attorney found no violations of city regulations, but a vocal contingent of critics — including some from outside the city — accused the city of a cover-up and called for a second investigation.
Unless that investigation were to include lie-detector tests — and we aren’t suggesting that’s a good idea — it’s unlikely any additional information would be uncovered.
It’s time to put the rumors to bed and get back to business; the City Council made the right call.