It may seem tiresome, but we need to once again ask the question: What is SDRMA doing by affiliating itself with RD 348? Talk about guilt by association! This whole enterprise gives govenment a bad name and angers the public. We need to take action before this issue becomes even more outrageous.
Recent Posts
RD 348: Just Another Name for Outrage
When will citizens stop the egregious behavior of RD 348? This blog has received numerous queries about RD 348 as a symbol of scandal and overall incompetence. We now believe that too many conflicts of interest - and too many examples of arrogant behavior - have forever destroyed RD 348's ability to be a trustworthy organization. This group needs to acknowledge its actions and apologize. Now.
SDRMA Needs to Abandon RD 348
Good govenment is not simply another slogan, or at least it shouldn't be. If SDRMA realy cares about openness and political transparency, then it will abandon its support for RD 348. Based on many, many complaints and various lawsuits, we implore SDRMA not to taint itself by even associating with an organization like RD 348. Whether you call it corruption or incompetence (or both), RD 348 seems like an example of all the pettiness and just plain awfulness that makes California look like a joke to the rest of the country. The news stories about RD 348 are several -- and SDRMA needs to hold this group's feet to the fire. Why were meetings, public disclosures and certain actions far afield of what others expect of a public agency? Where's the outrage? Unless we act now, and unless SDRMA musters the strength to walk away from this mess, we will continue to suffer.
The Final Word
As frequently reported by the Stockton Record, RD 348 is essentially a political fiefdom, a form of monpolized power that operates under the radar of most citizens and watchdog groups. Comprised of individuals who meet virtually in secret, and typically facing little or no opposition to their secretive agenda, RD 348 is the very opposite of the sort of governance Californians need and demand. In fact, a San Joaquin County judge expressed astonishment at one reclamation district's lax rules. Again, the Stockton Record was brave (and correct) to point out how some very vigilant people and organization took it upon themselves to initiate reform of this broken system. As we move on to other issues, let us never forget that accountability is essential, that no one is above the law. We will always raise awareness about these matters and their impact on this state. Period.
The Consequences of RD 348
More folks are finally starting to understand the consequences of allowing RD 348 to continue to operate in the shadows. The article is good. Click on the audio file to listen to an interview with Mary Grundman. http://centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=3444
Exposing Their Right To Know
Download Background.pdf 
The footsteps must be getting louder. Today, the Stockton Record editorial page agreed with Thornton residents (see below). And Judge McNatt held an ex parte hearing where RD 348 was given more time -- through November 4, 2006 -- to produce all of the documents. The judge has allowed them to have another 20 days to appeal if they want, but the documents still have to be produced within the 1st 20 day period. In addition, the judge ordered the District to provide to the public, electronic evidence that is resident on RD 348 computers and in other electronic media storage devices owned or controlled by the District.
http://recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061024/OPED01/610240307
Exercising their right to know
Residents in one of San Joaquin County's tiniest communities used the
California Public Records Act to force officials of their local reclamation
district to make its procedures and records public.
It's a perfectly correct use of the power that's available to every state
resident.
Superior Court Judge Bob McNatt gave officials of Reclamation District 348
just 20 days to release their records to a group of Thornton residents. The
district is responsible for levee repair and maintenance in the Thornton
area.
"If an agency can't even supply for inspection a copy of its own internal
policies for such things as how meetings are to be held, something appears
wrong with the way records are kept," McNatt wrote in his Oct. 3 ruling.
It doesn't matter who's asking or for what purpose. Such documents should be
available to the public. Members of public agencies, even small reclamation
districts should conduct their business in the open.
Thornton residents win records request
A group of Thornton residents won a legal victory in its effort to examine records kept by a reclamation district that protects their community from floodwaters. San Joaquin County Superior Court Judge Bob McNatt ruled most of the objections by Reclamation District 348 to the requests were invalid under the California Public Records Act. The district objected to turning over records to "malcontents," according to the ruling, and refused the records requests because they were vague and burdensome. McNatt, however, ruled the district's arguments were weak. "Government agencies have a responsibility to maintain their records in such a manner as to facilitate locating records requested under the CPRA," McNatt wrote in his Oct. 3 ruling. "If an agency can't even supply for inspection a copy of its own internal policies for such things as how meetings are to be held, something appears wrong with the way in which records are kept." McNatt gave Reclamation District 348, which repairs and maintains levees around Thornton, 20 days to produce and make available all its records since 1990, with a few exceptions outlined by public records laws.
