Podiatrist in Fallbrook, CA

Dave Baxter and Hayden Hamilton

As you have probably heard, our two water agencies – the Fallbrook Public Utility District and the Rainbow Municipal Water District – are seeking to switch water suppliers in the wake of price increases from the San Diego County Water Authority that have averaged 8% per year over the past decade. Not surprisingly, this effort is opposed by the Water Authority.

As your local water representatives, we are charged with providing you – the people of Fallbrook, Bonsall, and Rainbow – a reliable supply of water at the lowest cost possible, whether you’re a residential, business or agricultural customer. We are accountable to you and only you.

The SDCWA, on the other hand, provides water to, and thus answers to, 24 member agencies throughout the county. The Water Authority’s top priority is not Fallbrook and Rainbow ratepayers – it’s the Water Authority and its members.

Unfortunately, the Water Authority’s lawyers and lobbyists have been working hard to prevent us from leaving and buying our water from the Eastern Municipal Water District. By switching to Eastern, our customers would save approximately $7.6 million a year on water costs, according to an independent analysis.

Why doesn’t the Water Authority want us to leave? It’s simple: they want your money. They want your money so they can continue funding projects that largely benefit customers down south.

Unfortunately, ever since we announced our plans to change water suppliers, the Water Authority has been throwing up roadblocks at every turn and making false and misleading statements.

Among other things, the Water Authority contends that our two water districts’ customers have racked up obligations of $1.2 billion that should be paid to the Authority before we can leave, $1.2 billion! This so-called “exit fee” would equate to about $45,000 for each and every Fallbrook and Rainbow ratepayer. Not only is such a fee preposterous, imposing it on us would violate California law. The law is clear as to what our on-going obligations would be to leave, but the Water Authority is seeking to punish us for finding a better deal for our customers.

In addition, the Water Authority continues to make unfounded claims. Despite a San Diego newspaper’s report that suggests otherwise, the Water Authority contends that its water would eventually become less expensive than water provided by the Metropolitan Water District, which supplies the Eastern Municipal Water District. This, however, is not accurate. The Water Authority conjured up its rate comparison by factoring in additional cost impacts for Metropolitan, but conveniently forgot to apply these same impacts to its own rate projections.

When it comes to forecasting the future, the Water Authority doesn’t exactly have a strong track record. They failed miserably to predict the amount of water our region would need in future years and, as a result, financed billions of dollars for projects meant to increase the local water supply. However, our regional demand for water has actually plummeted over the years because San Diego County residents have answered the call to conserve.

Whether we can switch suppliers will be up to an organization known as the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission, which is governed by local appointed and elected officials. If LAFCO approves our applications, then Fallbrook and Rainbow voters would have the final say in an election held in each of the two districts’ service areas.

Our proposal has received the support of the Fallbrook and Rainbow community planning groups and the Fallbrook Chamber of Commerce, who voted overwhelmingly to endorse the move after carefully considering the facts.

Facts are important and you can continue to count on our two water districts to provide you with nothing but the facts. And you can be sure that, as your locally-elected water representatives, we are looking out for you and your interests as we engage in this “David vs. Goliath” effort.

The bottom line is escalating water rates in San Diego County, which today are among the highest in America, have taken a huge toll on the people of Bonsall, Fallbrook and Rainbow, as well as our local economy. We firmly believe that switching water suppliers will bring much needed relief to you, our ratepayers, while ensuring a safe, reliable supply of water for many years to come.

If you’d like to learn more about our effort, please join us at a town hall meeting on Monday, May 2 at 6 p.m. at the offices of the Fallbrook Public Utility District, 900 East Mission Road. Supervisor Jim Desmond, who also serves as chairman of LAFCO, will attend to hear directly from the community.

We hope to see you there.

Dave Baxter is president of the Fallbrook Public Utility District Board of Directors.

Hayden Hamilton is president of the Rainbow Municipal Water District.

FPUD reports that switching water suppliers would save Fallbrook and Rainbow customers $7.6M a year

Julie Reeder

Publisher

Local residents spoke out at a packed standing room only town hall meeting last week about a proposal by the Fallbrook Public Utility District and Rainbow Municipal Water District to switch water suppliers, a change that they are reportng would save ratepayers millions of dollars.

Following years of escalating water costs from the San Diego County Water Authority, averaging 8% per year, FPUD and Rainbow are seeking to change water suppliers – through a process known as detachment – from the Water Authority. They would form a new attachment to the Eastern Municipal Water District.

According to an independent analysis, FPUD and Rainbow ratepayers would save a combined $7.6 million a year by switching to Eastern.

The town hall, held May 2 at the Fallbrook Public Utility District offices, included opening remarks by County Supervisor Jim Desmond, FPUD Board President Dave Baxter, and Rainbow Board President Hayden Hamilton, as well as a presentation by FPUD General Manager Jack Bebee and Rainbow General

Manager Tom Kennedy.

Keene Simonds, the executive officer of the San Diego Local Agency Formation Commission, and Adam Wilson, a consultant to LAFCO, were invited to brief

attendees about the LAFCO review and approval process.

"We're very grateful to everyone, especially Supervisor Desmond and Mr. Simonds, for coming out and taking part in this town hall," said Bebee. "This is a very important issue for the people of Fallbrook and Rainbow and we want to make sure that everyone has all the facts and are able to ask their questions and express their opinions."

"The rising cost of water is impacting all of us here in Rainbow and Fallbrook, especially our agricultural community, which is the backbone of our economy," said Kennedy. Our goal here is simple – save our customers money while continuing to deliver a reliable supply of water."

The meeting was attended by nearly 150 local residents. Attendees spoke out on issues that ranged from the time it is taking LAFCO to decide the matter to the suggestion by the Water Authority that FPUD and Rainbow should pay a hefty exit fee.

Among the public speakers was Eileen Delaney, chair of the Fallbrook Community Planning Group, who expressed the group's strong support for the switch as well as its opposition to the districts paying any exit fee. The planning group joins the Rainbow Community Planning Group and the Fallbrook Chamber of Commerce in supporting the switch to Eastern.

Supervisor Desmond, who also serves as chair of LAFCO, told attendees that he can't take a position at this time because doing so would preclude him from voting on the issue. After addressing the audience at the start of the meeting, Desmond stayed and listened to all the public speakers and remained afterwards to meet with attendees one-on-one.

The town hall also included a discussion of a report conducted for LAFCO by Dr. Michael Hanemann, who reviewed three key areas: water reliability, financial impacts to the involved parties, and a potential exit fee.

Regarding water reliability, Wilson said: "Dr. Hanemann concluded that both Eastern and the County Water Authority are both reliable wholesale water suppliers."

On the financial impacts, Hanemann's report concluded that Fallbrook and Rainbow ratepayers would save approximately $7.6 million a year by purchasing their water from Eastern instead of the Water Authority.

Simonds explained that Hanemann also concluded that Fallbrook and Rainbow should pay an exit fee to the Water Authority of at least $13 million a year, but only for a defined period of time.

However, both Fallbrook and Rainbow dispute Hanemann's suggested exit fee.

FPUD and Rainbow leaders agree that some level of compensation should be provided through ongoing property tax payments as described in the act that created the Water Authority, but that the proposed exit fee does not comply with the law. They have asked LAFCO and their attorneys to thoroughly review

the matter.

In addition, it was reported that local ratepayers have paid millions of dollars to the California Water Authority for future projects that have not been started.

LAFCO, which is governed by local appointed and elected officials and is responsible for overseeing the establishment, expansion and boundary changes of cities and special districts, is expected to decide later this year if the districts can change suppliers. If approved, Fallbrook and Rainbow voters would have the

final say in an election held in each of the two districts' service areas.

The escalating cost of water in San Diego County has been a hot topic in recent years. A study conducted last year by statista.com concluded that San Diego's water rates are among the highest in the nation. Further, a 2017 report by the American Water Works Association found that San Diego area households pay more than twice the national average for water.

According to the Authority's recently adopted Long-Range Financing Plan, water costs could jump another 50% over the next five years.

Knowing the election is days away, turmoil has grown in my spirit over candidates misrepresenting their positions to voters. Regardless of what position you support, transparent truth is vital in making decisions, which ultimately affect the community we have chosen to call home. Years ago I learned, getting upset, frustrated and disappointed over a result where I didn’t try to support factual truths was a disservice.

For those who know me, then you know how much Steph and I respect genuine transparency in our lives and those we do life with. Hence it became important to share facts about those who make up the Fallbrook First campaign team. Please note – my comments are from a personal perspective having nothing to do with any organization I represent or Board positions I am currently elected to serve.

Know who you are voting for…very important. With a little research, you will quickly learn some facts and can be better prepared to cast your vote for the group who best represents your core values. As Jackie Heyneman mentioned in her letter last week, there was a shift with the newly elected 2020 members. One such member and current endorser of the Fallbrook First team stepped down from their administrative duties moments before being relieved of them by the Board.

Factual truths supported in minutes and for those attending meetings in person and via Zoom reveal poor information access for Board Members, a gross misrepresentation of the Fallbrook Planning Group on social media along with routinely missed deadlines articulated by existing Planning Group by-laws. Once the individual’s administrative role was replaced, the Planning Group immediately realigned, eliminating the distracting noise and divisive confusion.

Know who you are voting for… another incumbent member of the Planning Group running with the Fallbrook First team has been in gross violation of County rules regarding Ethics Training, Policy I-1, Brown Act Trainings and Form 700 for four years. These are annual requirements specific to all who hold elected office. When asked during a public meeting, the member quickly denied the claim. The issue was later resolved as it was brought to light publicly yet the member maintained the filings had been completed and the County was to blame. This same member made false legal accusations against another member regarding Brown Act violations which was later found to be unsupported.

Know who you are voting for… at least three candidates of the Fallbrook First team support leniency regarding cannabis grows and dispensaries in Fallbrook. Progress is their platform. One incumbent cited their desire to open the first legal dispensary in town and that they should be conveniently located in the village zone.

Know who you are voting for… is it really necessary for any candidate to bully residents and neighbors on various social media forums with vulgar language and demeaning insults?

Know who you are voting for…campaign sign placement requires a paid county permit or private property permission. The County permit stickers are affixed to the signs. Public record – only one of the six candidates running with Fallbrook First filed a sign permit. The other five did not. All members of the Fallbrook 7 filed and obtained their permits. Facts via public county records. Know these are the very folks you would depend upon reviewing, approving and making recommendations in your permitting process for business signage, development, design review and land use.

The Planning Group is non-partisan. Partisanship has not been an issue until 2020. Politics and political stepping-stones are not in the purview or interest of the Fallbrook Community Planning Group. The Fallbrook First team offers candidate statements committing to put Fallbrook First. Unless I have missed something, this is what the Fallbrook Community Planning Group has been doing for decades. They have established years of working relationships with residents, business owners, County Staff and elected officials.

I do not appreciate the Fallbrook First team telling community members that they will change the way the Planning Group represents them. The County has strict policies on how Planning Groups are to function. The Planning Group members today and of the past have been properly representing Fallbrook within the boundaries of County policy – as an advisory group. This election rhetoric is a conscious overstating of commitments unattainable by any Planning Group member.

Fallbrook First states the Planning Group is not transparent and not inclusive. Until 2020 this was also not an issue. The Fallbrook Planning Group by-laws exceed County requirements for public engagement and from my perspective are strictly adhered to. Fallbrook First appears to create a problem to solve when no problem actually exists.

The Fallbrook 7’s philosophy is simple: Keeping it friendly, Keeping it focused and Keeping it Fallbrook.

The candidates of The Fallbrook 7 have our endorsement. These individuals collectively offer decades of planning and land use experience along with established understanding of zoning and strong family values.

The Fallbrook 7 are endorsed by over 50 County and community leaders and volunteers. By comparison the Fallbrook First team are endorsed by six people at the time of this letter submittal – noting three of the six endorsements are from existing Planning Group Members endorsing themselves! The other three are existing Planning Group Members elected in 2020.

The Fallbrook 7 team: Jeniene Domercq, Eileen Delaney, Steve Brown, JJ Neese, Kari Hoyer, Keely Hansen and Debbie Williams.

Know who you are voting for…

Dave Baxter

Five local K-12 superintendents pocketed more than $400,000 each in pay and benefits in 2021, according to the most recent school district pay data published by government accountability website Transparent California.

The same three people were the highest-paid superintendents in San Diego County in both 2020 and 2021: County Superintendent Paul Gothold, Cajon Valley Union’s David Miyashiro and Fallbrook Union Elementary’s Candace Singh.

County Superintendent Gothold, who was paid $471,235 including benefits, leads the San Diego County Office of Education. The county office oversees and provides support and services to the county’s 42 school districts and more than 130 charter schools; it also operates school programs that serve about 1,000 students in special populations on any given day, including homeless and juvenile court students. Gothold has served in the position since 2017.

Miyashiro, who totaled $470,889 in pay and benefits, has for 10 years led Cajon Valley, an East County district with about 14,800 students that recently became embroiled in a debate over a perceived conflict of interest regarding one of its former board members.

Singh, who saw $447,963 in pay and benefits in 2021, retired from the district last fall after serving in the position for 12 years. Fallbrook Elementary is one of the county’s smaller districts, serving about 4,900 students.

Feb. 13, 2022

San Diego Unified’s Lamont Jackson — who leads the state’s second-largest school district with about 95,000 students — was paid a total of $325,223 in 2021, when he served most of the year as interim superintendent for the outgoing Cindy Marten.

Superintendent pay often includes more than just salary. Superintendents can cash out unused vacation or sick days and receive overtime pay, stipends, monthly car and phone allowances and more.

Benefits consist of more than just health insurance, often also including life insurance and retirement contributions.

The average California K-12 superintendent made $297,815 in pay and benefits in 2021, according to an analysis by Transparent California. That’s more than Gov. Gavin Newsom collected in pay and benefits in 2021, which totaled $261,921.

The state’s highest-paid superintendent was James Hammond of Ontario-Montclair School District in San Bernardino County. He collected $743,596 in pay and benefits, partly thanks to generous vacation and sick time payout policies and other benefits.

Get our essential investigative journalism

Sign up for the weekly Watchdog newsletter for investigations, data journalism and more.

You may occasionally receive promotional content from the San Diego Union-Tribune.

There’s nothing wrong with superintendents making more than the governor, said Todd Maddison, research director for Transparent California — as long as they can show that they deserve it.

But that’s the problem, Maddison said. Superintendent pay raises are usually not tied to improvements in performance on state measures like the state school dashboard, a district’s enrollment size, or other concrete factors.

“There’s no connection between increasing the pay of the superintendent and actually providing a better education,” Maddison said.

Instead, superintendents are often given raises based on how satisfied the board is with them, or to match those that were bargained with unions representing other employees.

“I would love to see a superintendent pay scheme that had a large bonus based on actual improvement,” Maddison said. “Without more money tied to improvement, you’re not going to get improvement with more money.”

Some superintendents have received significant pay raises since that 2021 data was collected.

After taking over as San Diego Unified superintendent on an interim basis in 2021, Jackson officially became superintendent last year. In the new role, he was paid a $375,000 annual salary, not including benefits or other pay.

In mid-November, the Cajon Valley school board approved a 7 percent cost-of-living salary increase for Miyashiro, on par with raises given to union-represented employees. His salary is now $381,236 a year.

Miyashiro’s leadership has recently come under criticism after he suggested hiring as a consultant a school board member who had just been voted out of office. When the contract for her company came up for a vote, Miyashiro did not disclose that the firm belonged to her.

Education

Feb. 12, 2023

In response to questions this week about his pay, Miyashiro cited his creation of the district’s World of Work program, which exposes students to potential careers early on based on their personality, strengths and skills. He touted recognition the district has drawn from education leaders, think tanks and national media.

Cajon Valley Board President Jim Miller said he has never seen Miyashiro turn down a meeting with a parent and that he returns emails, texts and calls at all hours of the day and during his time off. He credited Miyashiro with reopening the district’s schools far earlier than most districts during the pandemic and for already having laptops deployed to students before COVID-19.

“You can almost reverse the question when addressing other districts and their superintendents by asking why do any of those that remained closed and (hoarding) their COVID relief funds still have jobs or hold their trustee positions?” Miller wrote in an email.

Officials with the San Diego County Office of Education and Fallbrook Elementary did not immediately respond to questions for this story. Singh, who left Fallbrook last fall, also did not respond.

Singh has previously said that her pay is commensurate with her years in the position, experience and skills and that the district has benefited from the stability she has brought.

See how much your local superintendent made here:

SAN DIEGO – A sluggish first half doomed the Imperial High School girls basketball team as the second-seeded Tigers fell, 58-43, to top-seeded Mater Dei Catholic of Chula Vista in the CIF San Diego Section Division I championship game at St. Augustine High School here on Friday, February 24.

Trailing 7-5 in the opening quarter, the Tigers (26-5 overall) gave up nine straight points and found themselves down 16-5 with 2:20 left in the first period, after the Crusaders’ Kaylee Muckerman hit three consecutive three-pointers.

“They (Crusaders) beat us to everything and we were just slow to open the game,” said Rich Ponchione, Imperial’s longtime head coach. “We had the right game plan but I think the girls were too amped up and just couldn’t calm down early in the game.”

Mater Dei closed out the first quarter up 18-9, then opened the second quarter on a 10-3 run to build a 28-12 lead with 2:25 left in the first half. The Crusaders took a 34-18 lead into the halftime locker room.

“We didn’t have very good communication early in the game,” said 18-year-old Amy Riley, the Tigers’ senior center. “(The Crusaders) are a really good team and they had great shooters but we didn’t get out and contest those early shots like we should have.”

Imperial, the undefeated (8-0) Imperial Valley League champions, mounted a brief rally early in the third quarter, opening the second half on a 9-4 run to cut the lead to 38-27 with 5:13 left in the quarter. The Crusaders responded and bumped the lead back to 15 at 43-28 over the next two minutes.

“They spread the floor well and moved the ball better than teams we normally play, and obviously they were big and long and athletic,” said 17-year-old senior Sierra Morris, who led the Tigers with 18 points and 11 rebounds. “We hurt ourselves with a lack of communication on the defensive end tonight.”

Riley finished with 10 points for Imperial, while senior Xiomara Cardona had seven points and sophomore Nayeli Cardona chipped in with six points.

The Tigers found themselves in the same predicament last season, losing in the CIF SDS Division II championship game to Fallbrook, then going on to win the CIF Southern California Regional title before losing in the CIF-State Division IV championship game in Sacramento.

“This is going to be tough to get over. Us seniors really wanted that CIF banner,” Morris said. “This one is going to sting for a while, but come Monday we will get back into it at practice and focus on the bigger picture and try to make another run to state.”

The top four teams from CIF SDS Division I automatically qualify for the Southern California Regional playoffs, so Imperial will find out on Sunday what division it will compete in and what seed and opponent the Tigers will get when the regionals open on Tuesday, February 28.

“I think it’s going to be tough because we won’t be back in Division IV, we’ll probably be in Division III,” Ponchione said. “But prior to tonight we’d been playing at a really high level, and if we can get back to that level, hopefully we can make some things happen again like last year,” the coach said.