IID seeks outside help for QSA litigation

4

 

Kevin Kelley

 

EL CENTRO – At the regular meeting of the IID Board of Directors Tuesday, June 11, General Manager Kevin Kelley announced that his office has contracted communications firms to assist in the QSA litigation.

“Since your May 28 meeting, “ said Kelley, “I want to report to the Board and public that my office has engaged the services of two outside communications firms to assist with the QSA litigation and, more specifically, the Salton Sea restoration and mitigation initiative this Board has authorized. Letters of engagement have been signed by me with APCO Worldwide in Sacramento and with the Diversity Consulting Group, which is based in Santa Barbara. Service agreements for both firms, which are not open-ended but are instead being entered into on a six-month project basis, will be presented to your Board as action items when you next meet on June 25.”

“Both firms are experienced in issues advocacy, coalition-building with policymakers and stakeholders, and coordination with legal counsel in sensitive litigation,” continued Kelley. “Their charge will be to develop messaging that aligns with your Board’s strategic direction and to fundamentally alter the status quo at the Salton Sea, something that no court, based on what we have seen to date in a decade of litigation surrounding the QSA coordinated cases, has been willing to do. Working in close coordination with the District’s government affairs representatives, its outside legal counsel, and a working group drawn from Water, Energy, Finance, and Real Estate, this specialized communications function will add a new and much-needed dimension  to the integrated team we have assembled in support of your Board’s policy aims and strategic objectives at the Salton Sea.”

During board member comments, Director James Hanks clarified the ruling last week by the Superior Court Judge Lloyd G. Connelly on the QSA.

Jim Hanks“The tentative ruling that Judge Connelly gave needs to be kept in perspective,” said Hanks. “It was a validation ruling. It was probably the last item that related to environmental impacts. The validation is a ruling that the procedures, or processes, have been followed correctly. It doesn’t mean that the contract is workable as it is written, whether we can perform under the terms of the contract, or necessarily conserve the amount of water under the contract. That’s what the ruling was and it should be kept in the proper prospective.”

 

 

 

 

4 COMMENTS

  1. Ahh a little antique televison trivia. I’m a young, attractive trivia buff wanting to be discovered and trying to get on Jeopardy- what’s your excuse for such detailed antiquated knowledge?

  2. You can teach an old horse new tricks. Kevin Kelley is evolving.

    “Service agreements for both firms, which are not open-ended but are instead being entered into on a six-month project basis, will be presented to your Board as action items when you next meet on June 25.”

    Project/task/scope specific not just the usual undefined open ended service agreement with an inflated amount for an open ended term and scope. There is a ray of hope for productivity and cost effectiveness. Much needed services for the “effectiveness” of the QSA and Salton Sea restoration solutions.

  3. prospective= likely to happen or become

    perspective= the manner in which objects appear

    Dot your i’s and cross your t’s Perry Mason. Old man Hanks babbles on just to hear himself speak. Past time for pasture Jimbo.

Comments are closed.