Error
  • JUser: :_load: Unable to load user with ID: 67
Monday, 13 October 2008 04:42

Berry Vs. AWA Lawsuit Remains Unsettled

Written by 
Rate this item
(0 votes)

slide1.pngBy Jim Reece -

Amador Water Agency Board Member Terence Moore ripped into Ken Berry and Bill Condrashoff Thursday on the lawsuit Berry filed to stop the Amador Pipeline. Moore said Condrashoff was practicing engineering without a license, providing a conclusion Berry used as the basis for his lawsuit. Moore said the AWA settlement agreement with Protect Historic Amador Waterways included the stipulation that no member of PHAW would sue to stop the pipeline project, including the small diameter pipe that would supply water to customers on the canal. Moore said that as an engineer of 40 years, he knew licensing made an engineer and that practicing engineering without a license was a misdemeanor, which could be charged if someone filed a complaint. Moore said the early cost estimate of the Amador Pipeline was $13 Million, then the PHAW suit delayed the pipeline, with its final cost being $22 Million, so the PHAW suit cost the AWA $9 Million. Berry said the suit was based on rain gauge readings and Condrashoff signed an affidavit that he was not a party in the suit. Berry said the suit was not about getting water into Jackson Creek, but rather the issue of whether the board even considered that Jackson Creek would dry up as a result of the canal dewatering. Berry offered to settle the suit in the open meeting if the “water agency agrees in principal to do the appropriate environmental studies” of the creek. Condrashoff said, “Terry (Moore), you tried to take me down there.” Moore answered, “I certainly did.” Condrashoff said he has a chemical engineering degree but not a license and that the past board did not listen to PHAW and fought the lawsuit. Condrashoff said he merely compiled some charts and data and made an engineering decision, but Moore said the conclusion – that the creek dries up with the canal’s drying up – was practicing engineering. Berry said Condrashoff’s analysis of the charts showed that the flow in the creek matched the flow in the canal, asking, “is it against the law to use common sense?” He said “If I have wasted staff’s time on bad data, then I’m perfectly willing to talk to the board.” The board then went into closed session and discussed the suit with Berry, but no settlement was reached.

Read 705 times Last modified on Friday, 14 August 2009 04:52