3 ms·
After reading the article I come to the conclusion that this was never really about water. There wasn't even a water shortage, only a technical issue that would
by louwrentius 1y ago
After reading the article I come to the conclusion that this was never really about water. There wasn't even a water shortage, only a technical issue that would be resolved.
This was about some people on the waterboard not being able to manage angry - semi-aggressive- people properly.
And now those people can irrigate their lawns while others can't even drink, wash or cook.
- lokar 1y agoI agree, none of this was really necessary. The board/city was broadly within their rights not to sell (and down the road, as water supplies become more strained they may in fact not have extra water to sell). But the board handled the situation very poorly. The job of being on a board like this is often to sit patiently while people complain and perhaps yell. Try to keep things calm and moving along, let everyone make their statement. They should have just accepted the feedback and then scheduled discussion on various options for some future meeting, with a final vote even further out.