Open Meeting Law wasn’t broken
In response to UICN suing the county, I would like to point out that the Open Meeting Law was not violated since people come and go during meetings, which cannot be controlled; nor does the vast public need to be present to validate the OML.
In this case, although a lot of citizens left the meeting, the meeting had not been adjourned so it was still in progress and some of the public was still there to witness it.
In addition, the call for clarification by the DA did not change the prior to recess vote; it reinforced the fact that the BoCC was against the RIBs.
One could argue that the RPC had no business issuing the CUP since the BoCC didn’t send the issue to them for further study. UICN ignored the requests of the Water District Governing Board and bypassed it by going directly to the RPC.
The RPC in all honesty should have declined to hear the issue. Instead it indulged UICN, which has created this mess. The RPC’s action should be null and void.
UICN needs to accept the fact that the people of Pahrump do not want RIBs in their town because they are dangerous to the groundwater, “substantial evidence” by the numerous research papers has already proven it.
Furthermore, since Flint, Michigan has pointed out how irresponsible and incompetent the EPA and other governmental agencies are, UICN’s claim of “safety by bureaucracy” is worthless.
The people and their elected representatives, the BoCC, have spoken. This lawsuit holds no merit and ought to be dismissed.