February 22, 2006
Archives
BORever Mob Threaten Retaliation Against CWP Whistleblower & State Senate Candidate Oscar Braun
From: Oscar Braun [mailto:oscar@oscarknows.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 9:51 PM
To: 'Frank Iwama'
Cc: Pedro "Pete" Lucero (plucero@mp.usbr.gov); Michael R. Finnegan (MFinnegan@mp.usbr.gov); Congressman Mike Thompson (Brad.Onorato@mail.house.gov); rpombo@mail.house.gov; gchilds@waterboards.ca.gov; Sheriff Gary Simpson (GSimpson@co.napa.ca.us); Supervisor Diane Dillon (ddillon@co.napa.ca.us)
Subject: RE: Braun v. Norton Status
Importance: High
Frank,
Thank you forwarding Charles O’Conner's (USACAN) recommendations. Please inform Mr. O’Conner that I, in turn, will share his acerbic communiqués directly with the California State Attorney General Office regarding the BORever Mob official position regarding compliance with NEPA and all local, state and federal applicable laws and whistleblower retaliation threats against the Brauns. The AG can save the taxpayers some of their hard earned money by prosecuting ALL polluting violators of the Clean Water Act at
Regards, Oscar
From: Frank Iwama [mailto:frankiwama@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 9:24 PM
To: O'Connor, Charles (USACAN)
Cc: Oscar Braun
Subject: Re: Braun v. Norton Status
Mr. O'Connor:
Frankly speaking, I am intrigued by your acerbic wit or attempt at dry humor (e.g. "or for whatever mysterious reason he's (Mr. Smith) become unreachable"). Please feel free to contact Mr. Smith at any time by calling or leaving a message at his Vallejo business office to ascertain his whereabouts. (Telephone: 707/553-7376).
Primarily because of past unpleasant experiences with BOR and Forever Resorts, the Brauns made a decision to hire outside personnel (Mr. Smith's company) rather than personally being involved in the removal of private belongs from their Pleasure Cove permittee sites. This is particularly so in light of information disseminated by BOR and Forever Resorts staff that the Brauns are unwelcome and will be prohibited from entering on to the federal lands at Pleasure Cove. As you will recall, I mentioned this development during one of our recent telephone conversations. You mentioned that you would be looking into this matter but I never heard anything from you. (For your information, the Brauns had previously removed two boats and other personal items from Pleasure Cove.).
I will forward your recommendation to the Brauns. Thank you.
Frank A. Iwama
___________________________________________________________
From: Frank Iwama [mailto:frankiwama@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 8:38 PM
To: Oscar Braun
Subject: Fwd: Braun v. Norton Status
FYI.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: O'Connor, Charles (USACAN) <Charles.O'Connor@usdoj.gov>
Date: Feb 22, 2006 6:23 PM
Subject: RE: Braun v. Norton Status
To: Frank Iwama <frankiwama@gmail.com>
Okay, Mr. Iwama, I'll forward this to the Bureau, just as I've forwarded all your other complaints and pleas for help on behalf of your clients, from the Bureau. Of course, your 'actions' in now "formally" requesting things from the Bureau would be more convincing if your relocation expert was actually doing something toward the same. Also, I think you and the Brauns would be well-served by focusing on taking actions to do everything you can to actually move things from the land ASAP. For example, I understand there are items of personal property on the lots, other than the trailers. I recommend that you advise your client to not procrastinate regarding taking the necessary steps for the removal of such things while your expert is out of town (or for whatever mysterious reason he's become unreachable) and taking no direct steps to work with the Bureau's personnel to move the trailers. I don't know of any technicalities that would prevent movement of those other items of personal property. You have mentioned nothing, and I know of no impediments to movement of those things. Please understand, the Brauns will not be allowed unlimited time to remove whatever they may want, and it may come to an end sooner rather than later, so it seems best for all that they get busy now about doing what the order requires. ________________________________________
From: Frank Iwama [mailto:frankiwama@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 5:53 PM
To: O'Connor, Charles (USACAN)
Cc: Oscar Braun
Subject: Re: Braun v. Norton Status
Mr. O'Connor:
Your last e-mail, particularly your use of capital and bold letters, is noted. As confirmed last week, the Brauns have retained the services of Vic Smith and his Vallejo company to relocate and remove their mobilehomes and personal property from their permittee sites at Pleasure Cove.
In case my e-mails regarding the requests to BOR and/or the concessionaire for assistance and cooperation in issuing permits or exemptions were considered as posturing, please consider this as the Brauns formal request and application to BOR for the following permits or exemptions to facilitate the relocation and removal of their mobilehomes and personal property from Pleasure Cove:
• Permits and permission to trim and cut overgrown trees and debris from Lake Berryessa federal lands to provide clearance space to allow the movement and transportation of the mobilehomes on Pleasure Cove roadways from the Braun's permittee sites to the nearest public roadway;
• Permits or an exemption to disconnect sewer, water and utility connections required to relocate and remove the mobilehomes from the Braun's permittee sites.
In addition to the request for permits or exemptions, please consider this as the Brauns formal request and application to BOR and/or the concessionaire for the following required work and repairs on Pleasure Cove roadways to permit the relocation and removal of their mobilehomes:
• The repair of deteriorated unpaved roadway to widen and buildup surfaces, including water runoff damaged areas, to comply with minimum Napa County code requirements. [The present unpaved roadway is very narrow (less than 11 feet wide) and its deteriorated conditions presents safety hazards in the relocation and removal of the Braun's mobilehomes.];
• The removal or reduction of numerous illegal speed bumps that presents safety hazards and inhibits the movement of the Braun's mobilehomes because of axle clearance problems. (It is recommended that BOR consult with Napa County and State Fire and emergency officials for compliance with minimum county and state code requirements.).
If BOR wants the Brauns to comply with the court order forthwith without compliance and adherence with county and state laws and codes requiring applicable permits, please provide BOR's written exemptions and indemnifications to proceed as instructed. Thank you for the action plan.
Frank A. Iwama
Tel: (650) 591-6200
E-mail: frankiwama@gmail.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2/22/06, O'Connor, Charles (USACAN) <Charles.O' Connor@usdoj.gov> wrote:
Thank you.
As I tried to make clear in my last phone call to you, the Bureau and I are interested in A-C-T-I-O-N, not in any more reasons why nothing has happened or more excuses why something can't be done. As far as we can tell, no concrete steps or efforts have been made toward accomplishing the movement of the trailers, or anything else on the property. For example, you refer repeatedly to permits, etc., that are needed to move the trailers, but as far as we can tell, neither you nor your client have even made application for any such permits, and two weeks have elapsed since the Court's order. This pace and lack of action is unacceptable. Please convey our interest in immediate action to your clients and anyone else on their behalf who's involved in the obligation to satisfy the court's order on partial summary judgment. We expect to see and will be looking for immediate concrete action taken toward removal of everything the Brauns' lots, large or small. ________________________________________
From: Frank Iwama [mailto:frankiwama@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 4:30 PM
To: O'Connor, Charles (USACAN)
Subject: Re: Braun v. Norton Status
Mr. O'Connor:
I received confirmation that Mr. Smith's office contacted Mr. Lucero this afternoon and provided him with a status report.
Perhaps we have a communication problem. What I meant by good faith was in reference to the Brauns taking action to expedite the relocation and removal of their mobilehomes and personal property from Pleasure Cove. I then merely asked for your and BOR's cooperation and assistance in the permitting process required for the Braun project. It seems that you question Mr. Smith's qualifications by refering to him as the "relocation expert." If BOR has any doubts about Mr. Smith's credentials, please have Mr. Lucero recommend the name and contact information for the experts described as your February 15th e-mail ("...routinely handled by experienced relocation firms and such things should not significantly slow progress on the move."). If Mr. Smith's schedule and detailed procedures do not satisfy BOR, then please ask BOR to recommend the name(s) of experienced relocation firms. Thank you.
Frank A. Iwama
Tel: (650) 591-6200
E-mail: frankiwama@gmail.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 2/22/06, O'Connor, Charles (USACAN) <Charles.O' Connor@usdoj.gov> wrote:
Mr. Iwama -
Inasmuch as the Bureau personnel, including Mr. Lucero, have been standing for over one week, in eager anticipation of assisting the Brauns' "relocation expert," I don't think there's any need for anyone on our side to "show good faith" by now alerting Bureau personnel, once again, that the relocation expert "might" soon be contacting the Bureau for assistance. However, a little good faith and timely follow-through by the relocation expert in contacting the Bureau personnel who are standing-by, would be appropriate, to say nothing of showing some courtesy.
Even though it is redundant, I'll be sure to send them a copy of your message to the Bureau so that they can once again anticipate hearing from the relocation expert at any time.
Could you please confirm for me when the relocation expert eventually contacts the Bureau?
Thank you.
- Chuck O'Connor
________________________________________
From: Frank Iwama [mailto:frankiwama@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 3:20 PM
To: O'Connor, Charles (USACAN)
Cc: "mailto:PLUCERO"@ mp.usbr.gov; Oscar Braun
Subject: Re: Braun v. Norton Status
Mr. O'Connor:
Thank you for acknowledging receipt of my last e-mail. I immediately called Mr. Smith's office after transmitting my e-mail to you to provide instructions to have him contact Mr. Lucero as you requested. I was informed that Mr. Smith was out of the office but that an effort was being made to contact him to give him my urgent message. I emphasized the importance of my message and I was assured that either Mr. Smith or someone from his office will be contacting Mr. Lucero today.
In order to show good faith and expedite the relocation and removal of the Brauns mobilehomes and personal property from their Pleasure Cove permittee sites, I request that you direct or request the cooperation of appropriate BOR and/or concessioniare officials to begin the required permitting process as outlined in my previous e-mail. As I informed you, Napa County officials are extremely concerned about permitting and environmental requirements because of the recent lawsuit filed by the State of California against Napa County relating to water pollution and health safety concerns at Lake Berryessa.
http://www.timesheraldonline.com/todaysnews/ci_3535293
Thank you. Best regards.
Frank A. Iwama
Tel: (650) 591-6200
E-mail: frankiwama@gmail.com
----------------------------------------------------------------
On 2/22/06, O'Connor, Charles (USACAN) <Charles.O' Connor@usdoj.gov> wrote:
Mr. Iwama -
Thanks for your email and the long-awaited information.
You were non-committal as to when Mr. Smith would contact Mr. Lucero, but I trust that he will do so today, so that he can begin to get all his problems and difficulties resolved. That would certainly go a long way toward demonstrating good faith on the part of the Brauns to remove their trailers and goods, as ordered by the Court, albeit late.
- Chuck O'Connor
________________________________________
From: Frank Iwama [mailto:frankiwama@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 22, 2006 12:53 PM
To: O'Connor, Charles (USACAN)
Cc: Oscar Braun
Subject: Re: Braun v. Norton Status
Mr. O'Connor:
This is in response to your most recent e-mail in our continuing communications regarding the status of the Braun's removal of mobilehomes and personal property from their Pleasure Cove permittee sites.
First, contrary to BOR's characterization that the relocation of the Braun's mobilehomes and personal property should be "routinely handled by experienced relocation firms" and the cited 'problems' and 'difficulties' "should not significantly slow process on the move," Mr. Smith, the relocation expert retained by the Brauns, re-confirmed that the relocation project presents numerous problems and difficulties, including compliance with local, state and BOR permitting requirements. In addition, Mr. Smith further confirmed that the difficult physical conditions at Pleasure Cove and the uphill location of the Braun's mobilehomes requires careful planning and execution because of potential work safety hazards for his employees and environmental damage to the federal lands.
After making a physical on site survey and assessment of the Braun project at Pleasure Cove, Mr. Smith informed me that the project presents complex relocation and permitting issues, currently under expedited review and investigation, before he can issue a written report. As an experienced professional with many years of expertise in the mobilehomes relocation business, Mr. Smith pointed out that problems and difficulties relating to the Braun's relocation project must be carefully reviewed. Mr. Braun, as a certified environmental watershed consultant, wants to fully comply with all applicable laws, and does not want to knowingly violate any local, state and federal laws relating to environmental permit requirements.
• The Braun's mobilehomes are located at the far end of Pleasure Cove on uphill locations, and off a narrow unpaved roadway (less than 11 feet wide with deteriorating and sloping road surface). One mobilehome is located uphill adjacent to a sharp u-turn curve off the narrow unpaved roadway with limited movement space near a hillside;
• One mobilehome is 14 feet wide and over ten years old. Besides the difficulty in maneuvering the mobilehome on the narrow unpaved Pleasure Cove roadway, there are issues in obtaining required permits for movement and transportation on public roadways and highways;
• BOR and/or the concessionaire will be requested to repair the deteriorated Pleasure Cove roadway to widen and buildup areas, including water runoff damage areas, where the current conditions present a safety hazard because of non-compliance with minimum Napa County code requirements;
• BOR and the concessionaire will be requested to issue permits and permission to trim and cut overgrown trees and debris to provide clearance space to permit the movement of the mobilehomes from the Braun's permittee sites at Pleasure Cove. This tree trimming and cutting and debris removal may require permits from Napa County unless BOR provides an exemption for non-compliance with Napa County code requirements;
• BOR and/or the concessionaire will be requested to remove or reduce numerous illegal speed bumps on the Pleasure Cove roadways which inhibits the movement of the mobilehomes because of axle clearance problems. Napa County fire and law enforcement officials have confirmed that Pleasure Cove roadway speed bumps do not comply with state and county codes and prevents required ingress and egress access for fire and safety emergency vehicles;
• BOR will be requested to issue permits or an exemption to disconnect sewer, water and utility connections required to move the mobilehomes from the Braun's Pleasue Cove permittee sites. Since the recent filing of a lawsuit by the State Attorney General against Napa County for water pollution and public health problems at Lake Berryessa, the County is understandably very concerned about compliance with required state and county laws and codes;
• The relocation company will apply for permits required from city, county and state agencies for the movement and transportation of mobilehomes on public roadways and highways, including compliance with restrictions on movement limitations to certain days and times of the week.
It appears that you and BOR officials think that the movement and relocation of the Braun's mobilehomes and personal property from Pleasure Cove is a rather simple, uncomplicated, routine task. I will have Mr. Smith contact Pete Lucero to discuss the Brauns project. (Pete Lucero's telephone: 707/966-2111 x106).
Frank A. Iwama
Tel: (650) 591-6200
E-mail: frankiwama@gmail.com
On 2/21/06, O'Connor, Charles (USACAN) <Charles.O' Connor@usdoj.gov> wrote:
Mr. Iwama -
Thanks for your reply, but it comes very late. See my earlier message, today.
Please give Mr. Smith's firm the following contact information: Pete Lucero, ph. (707) 966-2111 x106. Please ask Mr. Smith to phone Mr. Lucero not later than close of business, today.
Also, please provide me with a copy of Mr. Smith's report, as soon as possible.
- Chuck O'Connor
cc: Jim Turner (via facsimile)
________________________________________
From: Frank Iwama [mailto:frankiwama@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, February 17, 2006 8:20 PM
To: O'Connor, Charles (USACAN)
Subject: Re: Braun v. Norton Status
Mr. O'Connor:
As I informed you in my e-mail to you this evening, I have been attending out-of-town meetings the last few days and this is the first opportunity I have had to review your recent e-mail messages.
Oscar Braun retained the services of Vic Smith and his family-owned Vallejo firm, a mobile home business for two generations with relocation and hauling experience and expertise. Mr. Smith will require the cooperation and assistance of BOR officials and staff in the relocation of the Braun's mobile homes for the reasons cited in my previous e-mail status report to you. Please let me know the name of the BOR contact. I will have Mr. Smith coordinate the Braun's relocation project with the appropriate BOR contact person.
I expected to receive a survey and analysis report for the Braun relocation project yesterday as I had previously informed you. Due to scheduling and inclement weather problems, the survey and analysis was not completed as expected. The urgency of the Brauns project has been communicated to Mr. Smith and local and state government agencies involved in the permitting process for transportation on public roadways and highways. (For your information, I am reviewing state regulations and exemptions for the movement of mobile homes over ten years old on public roadways and highways. I am also checking local Napa County permit requirements.).
Please understand that the Brauns have not been to Pleasure Cove since the court order and are as anxious as BOR to bring closure to the litigation.
Frank A. Iwama
Tel: (650) 591-6200
E-mail: frankiwama@gmail.com
On 2/17/06, O'Connor, Charles (USACAN) <Charles.O' Connor@usdoj.gov> wrote:
Mr. Iwama -
Please provide me with a copy of the promised relocation company report, which was due yesterday.
Thank you.
- Chuck O'Connor
________________________________________
From: Frank Iwama [mailto:frankiwama@gmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2006 5:47 PM
To: O'Connor, Charles (USACAN)
Cc: Oscar Braun
Subject: Braun v. Norton Status
Mr. O'Connor:
This will confirm our telephone discussion this afternoon wherein I summarized the Braun's good-faith efforts to comply with the court order granting partial summary judgment. Since our telephone conversations last week, the Brauns have engaged the services of a professional relocation company to physically remove their mobilehomes and personal property from the Pleasure Cove permittee sites.
According to your understanding of BOR regulations, the mobilehomes at Lake Berryessa were required to be "travel trailers" and thus should not present undue relocation problems. I informed you that based on my personal observations at Pleasure Cove the movement and relocation of mobilehomes, particularly the Brauns units, does present difficult problems and that the units cannot be moved by merely hitching them to a truck and transported on public roadways and highways. You may want to review the difficulty of the task at hand with the BOR experts.
As I mentioned to you, the relocation of the mobilehomes involves a complex procedure requiring compliance with applicable local and state laws, including permits and applications for transportation on public roadways and highways. I was informed today by local and state officials that the issuance of the required permits will take several days (estimated minimum of 7 to 10 days) because of the need to coordinate the safe transportation and movement of the mobilehomes with city, county and state transportation agencies. Unless BOR is willing to take the responsibility of granting permits or permission for the Brauns to disconnect utilities, including water and sewer connections, this issue may require notice and approval from the County of Napa and the State of California (if it affects regional water quality issues).
In addition, the Brauns were informed that the Pleasure Cove sites present difficulties relating to access, space considerations to permit ingress and egress from uphill sites, internal resort road conditions, including removal of illegal speed bumps and the need to buildup deteriorated roadways, and the removal or trimming of overgrown trees and debris to permit clearance required for movement. The relocation company is presently preparing a survey and analysis of the relocation issues at Pleasure Cove. I expect to receive more details about Pleasure Cove issues from the relocation company this Thursday, February 16th.
I will immediately provide with you with a detailed report as soon as the survey and analysis of relocation issues is received from the professional relocation company retained by the Brauns. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions. Thank you. Best regards.
Frank A. Iwama
Tel: (650) 591-6200
E-mail: frankiwama@gmail.com
BOR FOREVER VIOLATING NEPA & 1992 RAMP
Suit challenges management plan for water in state
By Matt Weiser -- Bee Staff Writer
Last Updated 8:04 am PDT Friday, August 12, 2005
A coalition of environmental and fishing groups alleged Tuesday that the federal government chose "political science" over pure science in approving a plan to alter water management in California.
The groups, led by the Sierra Club's nonprofit Earthjustice, filed suit in federal court in Oakland on Tuesday against the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (BOR).
They claim the Bureau of Reclamation violated the National Environmental Policy Act in approving the water management plan without first conducting an environmental impact study.
They also claim that NOAA's fisheries branch violated the Endangered Species Act in approving a biological opinion that said salmon and steelhead would not be harmed by the bureau's water plan.
The suit is a response to the Bureau of Reclamation's controversial Operations Criteria and Plan, or OCAP, which aims to coordinate state and federal procedures to make more water available from California reservoirs. Critics say the plan will harm fish in the Delta by changing flow conditions and exporting more water to Southern California.
Based on its decision, the Bureau of Reclamation has already renewed scores of contracts to major water users around the state.
"It's important to emphasize the whole Bay-Delta ecosystem is in collapse right now," said Mike Sherwood, lead attorney for Earthjustice, noting continuing declines in striped bass and Delta smelt populations.
"So it seems to be more important than ever to be making decisions about how to manage the state's water based on science, and not for political reasons. That's what this lawsuit is trying to do."
The Bureau of Reclamation's water plan moved forward only after NOAA fisheries officials ruled that the proposed operational changes would not jeopardize survival of salmon and steelhead. That finding, called a biological opinion, came in October 2004.
But an earlier draft of the opinion, leaked to the press, concluded that fish will, in fact, be put in danger by the plan.
Insiders at the time told The Bee that an assistant regional administrator at NOAA, James Lecky, intervened in the drafting of the opinion and changed it to reach a favorable conclusion.
A subsequent investigation by the Commerce Department's inspector general found that Lecky violated agency procedures by intervening, though he was not named in the investigation.
Sherwood said this intervention was not only "arbitrary and capricious," it also violated the Endangered Species Act. The plaintiffs want the court to set aside the final biological opinion and start the process over.
"This was a clear effort to thwart the process as explicitly set forth under the law," said Bill Jennings of the Stockton-based DeltaKeeper group.
NOAA fisheries officials said it is their policy not to comment on pending litigation. Bureau of Reclamation officials could not be reached for comment Tuesday.
The plaintiffs also want the Bureau of Reclamation to be ordered to prepare an environmental impact study on the new water management plan.
Other plaintiffs are the Natural Resources Defense Council, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, Friends of the River, The Bay Institute, Northern California Federation of Fly Fishers, Sacramento River Preservation Trust and the Winnemem Wintu Tribe.
Since the favorable biological opinion was issued in October, the Bureau of Reclamation has begun renewing long-term water contracts with 240 water users around the state. These include big urban water users such as the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, and farm users like Westlands Water District, both of which benefit from Delta water exports. About 200 of these contracts have already been renewed.
"At some point, we might get into asking that those be set aside," said Sherwood. "Logically, that would seem to follow if we prevail on the claim that the biological opinion was arbitrary and capricious."
About the writer:
The Bee's Matt Weiser can be reached at (916) 321-1264 or mweiser@sacbee.com.
PCM STATUS REPORT FROM FRANK IWAMA ESQ.
Hello PCM Permittees,
It has been over two weeks since we sent Forever Resorts a draft Permittee Agreement and we have not yet heard back from Forever Resorts Chief Administrative Officer Terry Sides regarding the draft concessionaire/permittee agreements we have exchanged.
My understanding is that Mr. Side has been on vacation in Wyoming with his family. I have left several messages for Terry Sparkman at his Pleasure Cove Marina office but have yet to receive a curteous call back from Mr. Sparkman either.
This coming week I will again be contacting Mr. Sides with the CWP's renewed offer to work with Forever Resorts on a mutually acceptable PCM Permittee agreement. Also, Oscar Braun, Chief Hank Howard and I will offer to support and assist Pleasure Cove Marina's Mr. Sparkman obtain all the lawfully reguired applicable by Napa County Environmental Management & Health Services, state and federal permits and licenses necessary to conduct a public recreational facility on a federal estate in California.
That's all to report for now. Please look for my weekly PCM updates in the Pebble. Hope to see you at the lake this Labor Day holiday.
Regards, Frank