There is no need to re-interview the candidates for legal counsel. That part was not done illegally. This is a ploy to get out of redoing the meeting that decided the outcome. Would you come back and interview again for a job that you knew was awarded to someone else but they were re-doing it because of a technicality? Of course not! And the board knows that. They have set this up so that if the original applicants choose to not participate in this orchestrated event then they can just go with their one true love, Sandra Mack. What needs to be redone is the actual discussion meeting and the vote, with input and questions from the public.
How about contacting all of the finalists and letting them know that the board is reconsidering their decision and would like to know if they are still interested?
Herein lies one of the reasons that BCWA is so afraid of the PUC. The PUC scrutinizes every penny and every decision when deliberating on approving a rate increase. Yes, maybe it would cost $100,000 for a rate increase... but it would be worth every penny to have someone on the ratepayers side checking all the facts and figures. Do you think the PUC would think highly of a NEW union contract guaranteeing no layoffs when the plan is to close the plant? I doubt it!
Please explain the inappropriate content below.
