Board weighs disputed will‑serve letter for APN 023131014; legal counsel says transfer appears performed, public disputes record

The board reviewed the status of a two‑decade‑old water commitment for APN 023131014 after staff said the remaining administrative step was issuing an intent‑to‑serve letter. The parcel is the subject of an agreement from 2005 that transferred a residential EDU to the lot and required related actions, some of which are challenging to document due to recordkeeping changes over time.

General Manager Melhaney summarized the transaction and told the board staff had located multiple pieces of the historical record but could not find every file. "We went through hard files and what we could find is what we could find," Melhaney said.

General Counsel Tim Carmemell told the board the agreement appears to have been performed except for the final issuance of an intent‑to‑serve letter. "Based on what we know, the agreement's been fully performed except this last step issuing the intent to serve letter," Carmemell said, adding that the buyer has paid monthly meter fees for 21 years and relied on the agreement in purchasing the lot. He warned that refusing the letter could expose the district to significant litigation that the district could likely lose given the equities and reliance invested by the parcel owner.

Public commenters and local advocates pressed staff for more documentary evidence. Christina Galloway said the staff report did not accurately reflect the board’s prior action and argued Title 8 and meeting minutes show board review and conditions that staff must honor. "You don't have evidence that these EDUs were actually transferred," she said, urging staff to correct the record before relying on the transfer to issue service.

Board members asked staff to post Director Thomas' and public comments and to provide a fuller administrative record for public review. Counsel confirmed that, under the district's transparency rule (Resolution 35‑2021), the will‑serve item appears on the agenda for review and discussion; if the board chooses not to issue the letter, it could face legal exposure.

No final administrative action was taken; the item was discussed and will remain on the agenda for additional review and documentation.