Water Law and General Practice Lawyering in a Small Town

With years of administrative bungling behind us here in Kittitas County, but not resolved, and the general tendency of potential clients, and even one unnamed wannabee legislator, to think a property owner should and can do whatever they want when it comes to water diversion, well drilling and simple adherence to a panopoly of laws involving water use and streambed modification, it is pretty difficult not to be touched by a water problem of one sort or another here where I live and work.  On a sheer gross dollar earned for clients water law cases (including flood damage work) this has been one of the more active areas of law my office has been involved in that I never set out to take on when I first hung out my shingle.  And, unfortunately, these are never easy cases to resolve and they are expensive to bring to settlement and or trial for both parties.  But, if you are looking for local counsel, I am available for consults on water issues as well as my standard liness of business, probate and estate planning law.

Theresa Petrey v. Inflammatory Breast Cancer

Well here it is at last, the blog post where I share a day in the life of a lawyerly lady in a small town attempting to work her way through treatment for a rare and aggressive form of breast cancer.  Early on, I made the decision, mostly by default due to my own experience with the highly effective grapevine news system in this community, not to try to keep the diagnosis quiet.  I did not know what to do, whether I would be able to work, and, if this was indeed  inflammatory breast cancer, whether I should even try to work. 

Interpreting the studies and the statistics remains enigmatic.  What does it really mean when a study places a five year statistical mean for survival at 40%?  Let me tell you, that I REALLY like the study that came up with a five year survival rate of  58%.  The overall five year survival rate for breast cancer is close to 90%.  I was one of those people who had a delay in getting diagnosed and treated, because the Cancer Medical Industrial Complex in Central Washington, was, in my experience, systemically incapable of timely deployment, so I've repeatedly wondered in the end how much that delay changed the numbers for me.

Ultimately, we wound up at Seattle Cancer Care Alliance (SCCA), seeing a team of Doctors for a second opinion.  It took only minutes for us to realize that I should be treated there and that I should have been there six weeks earlier.  My husband calls SCCA the mill, but in a loving way.  I call it the land of the Baldy Chemos.  I was put off by all the hairlessness initially, but have since come to rejoice in being able to go to a place for treatment that my pathetic little baby bird fuzz like hangers on under my wig seem to belong.

I have really resisted engaging in the Cancer Medical Industrial Complex in many ways, preferring to take a pragmatic approach of attempting to keep my practice and life as we know it back here in Ellensburg basically rolling along.  I limited Rotary attendance for the year, passed the Kittitas County Bar Association Treasurer books along to the highly capable Paul Sander, delegated, delegated, delegated to the rest of the Kittitas County Democratic Central Committee Board, decided that most Sundays during Chemo treatments, one hour of church meetings is good, and on some Sundays, just staying home and listening to Christmas music on Pandora was also good enough.

Many potential litigation clients were sent away.  I even fired a couple of clients.  I continue to take new clients who need consults or transactional legal work. The rest are all hanging in with me as I plod through completing my backlog.  One family even calls and emails on a regular basis, telling me that I am a "dear one to them."  That is very moving. 

My colleagues are supportive as well.

I am able to work.  Not as much as before, but I can do several hours a day.  Currently, I've got a great legal assistant, Candee Cox, who helps tremendously.  I've almost got the office situations fully resolved with my relocation.  I feel like I can make it through the next rounds of chemo therapy, even though this second phase of Chemo lives up to the bad reputation the process has, surgery and radiation therapy.

I am planning to win.

Moving Time Again

My new address for meeting clients in Kittitas County will be at 206 West First and the Kittitas Office will close on December 22, 2011.  All other contact information will remain the same.  Please effect all personal service of documents at 312 E. Manitoba Ave., Ellensburg, Washington.  Do not mail documents to either of the above addresses.  For mailing please continue to use the Post Office Box address which is PO Box 1341, Ellensburg, Washington, 98926.

The Long Journey Towards Acceptance of Marriage Equality

Later tonight, I will add my name to a list of members of the Washington State Democratic Party who support granting full marriage rights to persons who choose to marry a partner of the same sex in Washington State. 

This has not been an easy road for me to travel to reach the place where I would be comfortable supporting anything other than the so-called "traditional marriage" of the past century in the United States.  As an LDS (Mormon) person it has been difficult on a number of fronts, but not for reasons that may be readily understood by a casual observer.  As is the case in many families, our family has a number of family members and close friends who are or were sexual minorities of one sort or another and who are in varying degrees of being out or in on the issue of orientations other than pure heterosexuality.  This also formed and shaped my journey towards a change of heart and viewpoints.  Having come of age as an LDS person with the nearly constant villification of the LDS Church's history of polygamy, the fear that same sex marriage could be the gateway to polygamy and demi-marriages was my primary personal reason for not supporting the extension of marriage rights beyond what was sufficient for the last 100 years or so.  Accepting marriage equality has required setting aside that fear and acknowledging that consenting adults are in the best position to make informed decisions as to how and who to love.

My beloved church sought to fight what it apparently perceived as a huge threat to essential doctrines, secular marriages of same sex couples, even though it generally excused itself from becoming involved in politics in the past on other issues. I had a hard time with the timing and the internal conflicts the LDS Church's involvement in Proposition 8 brought forward for me personally.  Eventually, I came to a very profound support of the Church's right and even moral duty to make its strong opinion known on the matter and I accepted their right to speak out.  However, as an attorney, even then, I would articulate my belief that ultimately and constitutionally speaking, same sex marriage would eventually become the law of all our land. 

I support the constitutional first amendment right of my Church and that of others who oppose same sex marriage to continue to do so, to solemnize only opposite sex marriages if they choose to, and, in some cases, to even speak what may be perceived to be hate speak by some.  However, I no longer personally wish to deny the rights of other human beings to enjoy the benefits of and embark on the responsibilities of secular marriage in the United States on the basis of what legally amounts to a ban based on traditions without evidence of sufficient weight and credibility that there is a basis for the government to prohibit secular same sex marriage. With six states now allowing same sex marriage, Washington State having already granted all the rights of married couples to parties in registered domestic partnerships, and my firm belief that when the United States Supreme Court considers the Proposition 8 case it will find that banning same sex marriage via the initiative process is unconstitutional, I believe the time has come to extend full marriage equality in Washington State.

Re: Request for action voiding contract, investigation, civil and or criminal prosecution, and subsequent removal of government officials if violations of RCW 43.88 or other unlawful acts are found to have been committed

Dear Governor Gregoire, Auditor Sonntag and Attorney General McKenna:

I write in my capacity as a very concerned citizen and community stakeholder of Central Washington University and wish to express my concern that at least one prima facie violation of the Washington State Budget and Accounting Act, RCW 43.88, may have occurred in regards to the $500,000 James Gaudino bonus which the Central Washington University Trustees approved on October 7, 2011.  Last Friday, October 21, 2011, President Gaudino acknowledged that there is no plan or known source of the funding for his bonus and that the money could come from a variety of future income sources.  The act of granting Mr. Gaudino this bonus appears to be a direct attempt to do an end run around the painful and exhaustive attempts of the people of the State of Washington through their elected officials to deal with the current budget crisis. 

The Central Washington University Board of Trustees have an ethical duty as stated in their bylaws not to overexpend university funds and the bylaws also advise them that they are subject to the provisions of the Budget And Accounting Act, see CWU 1.5.1 (5) A which reads as follows: 

The Budget and Accounting Act contains severe penalties for the intentional or negligent overexpending or overencumbering of any appropriation made by law, for failing to properly account for any expenditure by fund, program or fiscal period, or for expending funds contrary to the terms, limits, or conditions of any appropriation made by law.

There is a tidal wave of public sentiment building against this bonus and the egregious and flagrant breach of the duty of good faith it represents against various stakeholders in the Central Washington University community, especially in light of the fact that no one knows where these funds will come from or if there will be a source of funds in the future for this contractual liability. 

The fact that the bonus is unfunded (I presume this to be language for taxation purposes) and unsecured, does not mean that this contract, if otherwise valid, would not be enforceable and payable by the University and ultimately the citizens of the State of Washington.  I might add that I am among a growing contingent of community stakeholders who do not see that President Gaudino has actually achieved significant progress in increasing the diversity or numbers of students enrolled on campus (the stated reasons given by the board for the incentive bonus) and believe him to be the beneficiary of both the downturn of the economy and the stellar work performed by the President Emerita, Jerrilyn McIntyre.  Moreover, I believe Mr. Gaudino’s ability to lead the university has been seriously compromised by many other acts as well and that serious consideration should be given as to whether or not it is appropriate for him to remain in that role at all even if no violations of RCW 43.88 are found.

I respectfully request that the James Gaudino Incentive Bonus Contract be found null and void under RCW 43.88.130 prohibiting any agency from incurring liabilities in excess of the amounts appropriated for that purpose.   I also request that the State Auditor, pursuant to the provisions of RCW 43.88.160 (6) (d), take exception to the James Gaudino Incentive Bonus Contract. I also request that the Attorney General investigate whether or not civil and or criminal acts occurred in this matter pursuant to RCW 43.88.300 or RCW 43.88.270, respectively.  Finally, in the event that civil or criminal violations by the Board of Trustees are found to have occurred, I request that the Governor petition for the removal of the Trustees pursuant to RCW 28B.10.500.

Sincerely,

Theresa Petrey

Re: James Gaudino Bonus and general concerns regarding the direction of Central Washington University

Dear Members of the Board:


I write today in my capacity as a very concerned citizen of Kittitas County, a community member who somewhat to her own surprise has grown deeply to care about what happens on the Central Washington University campus during the past few years, and as a lawyer who from time to time assists persons who are within the potential donor pool for charitable bequests to the University. 

Despite carefully evaluating the information available publicly, I find myself increasingly disturbed by what I perceive is a lack of foresight by the board in awarding such a large incentive package to Mr. Gaudino which does not appear to actually be tied to performance benchmarks and reflects what might be described as a thinly veiled opportunism by Mr. Gaudino, who most likely knew his compensation is out of line with his peers in Washington State. Unfortunately for the University, I am not alone in my concerns. 

I have heard other normally circumspect business people in the community make comments which I won’t repeat here indicating that they believe the Board of Trustees has made a serious mistake in this matter and that they do not know what is now “going on” at CWU.  I have heard from university employees that they are afraid to speak out about waste that they see for fear that they will face retribution.  I have read the same.  I have read that there are concerns among student leaders that the Board of Trustees may have diverted funds that are to be used for students, or at minimum diverting funds from students that have always been used for students not just at this university, but at the State’s flagship university, the University of Washington.  There is also a rumor that the faculty is taking a vote of no confidence in President Gaudino.


In short, I wish to emphasize that I believe you have done significant long term damage to Central Washington University’s reputation in your potential donor community and among other stakeholders here locally due to this ill thought out bonus plan.  I would strongly suggest that you seriously consider modifying your contract with Mr. Gaudino and or consider appointing an acting president in his stead, as I suspect his ability to lead in these troubled times will be substantially diminished due to this avoidable controversy despite his considerable public relations skills.   

Sincerely,

Theresa Petrey

Occupy Wall Street and Main Street

A few years ago, I would tell anyone who would listen that I believed that the banking industry bailout and the subprime mortgage meltdown were the biggest wealth transfer of wealth away from the middle class and the poor this country has ever seen.  And, that, when the American people finally realized what had happended, there would be protesting in the streets.  That day has come and I will be doing my best to add my voice to the protest.

Most of my business colleagues, fellow Rotarians, ward and stake friends know by now that I was diagnosed with stage IIIc inflammatory breast cancer over the Summer.  I have done pretty well with not being angry or terribly sad about this situation.  I am keeping my office open, working my cases, taking a few select new cases, and in general moving forward with my life in all aspects.  But I have to tell you, that loosing one's hair through chemo is a truly maddening process.  I feel quite pissed off.

Add to that, the ongoing problems I have had with the relatively new business neighbor in Kittitas, that does very little business and appears to be a lifestyle club for men with little to do durning business hours but play with large trucks.  Last week, I had two business meetings interrupted by engine revving.  You should know that I have been trying for months to work out the noise, fume and parking issues.  Vehicle Repair is not supposed to be taking place there under the 2007 zoning code and the original tenant told me that they were only supposed to do repair work incidental to retail product installations. The old garage was not grandfathered in as far as I know.

I intend to re-occupy my place on Main Street in Kittitas.  We will see how it goes.  I may have to resort to protest signs if my petition for code enforcement doesn't work.  Or go lawyeristic and file a nuisance suit.  Or, maybe, simply move back to Ellensburg.