H&Nís editors, once again, draw factual conclusions favoring one local constituency and ideology over another, effectively violating professional journalist ethical standards.
KIDís 2/29/16 Meeting Minutes do not state I was hired solely to assist the district in negotiating a contract to repair the deteriorating C Canal flume; rather they state I was retained ďto oversee the Flume contracts and give [the district] some specialized guidance.Ē
KID Board members Cacka & Carleton, who have since feigned ignorance, were familiar with my federal law and policy work when I was hired. Indeed, they had been forewarned by Reclamation contractor/ Klamath Basin Agreement moderator, Ed Sheets, about my opposition to the Montana CSKT Water Compact the implementation of which he also moderates.
My engagement agreement, posted on H&Nís website, clearly defines my primary task as preventing that contract and the basin agreements from compromising district patronsí land and water interests and identifies my Montana work.
H&Nís editors unfairly support Cackaís and Carletonís claims, made in ethics and bar complaints, that they had been deceived about the purpose of my hire.
They cleverly try to absolve these directors of their state law obligation to scrutinize my contract.
H&Nís editors conveniently overlook the fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and obedience such directors owe to district patrons and the Board.
These duties required them to carefully examine my contract, especially in the absence of a KID manager.
These duties also prohibited Cacka & Carleton from repeatedly disrupting district business, having my board-confidential unredacted engagement agreement faxed to Malin Potato Cooperative, and publicly disclosing its privileged contents through H&N.
Why hasnít H&N reported this, or Cheyne-Knoll-Smithsí lack of knowledge regarding Attorney William Ganongís authorized tasks, considering his 30-year failure to provide the district with an engagement agreement?