LAKE COUNTY >> District 3 Supervisor Denise Rushing ran on a platform to change Lake County”s conversation in 2006, and after eight years of service to her constituents, her role on the Board of Supervisors (BOS) has spurred headway on a number of projects meant to revitalize both her district and the county as a whole. But as she prepares to step down in January, a handful of those projects with loose ends will be passed into the hands of either John Brosnan or Jim Steele.
Specifically, either candidate will be expected to pick up where Rushing left off on the Middle Creek Restoration Project, the advocacy for lower water rates in Lucerne and continued cleanup of the blight along the north shore. As Rushing”s role on the board has been one of a moderator and proponent of compromise, according to District 1 Supervisor Jim Comstock and District 5 Supervisor Rob Brown, her successor will have to assess the change in balance he brings to the board.
Rushing notes that while she has been able to use her position on the BOS to remove barriers to progress, nothing she has worked on has been done alone. However, among Rushing”s portfolio of projects in Lake County, a number stand out for their impact on both the district and the county. Over the past eight years, Rushing has been involved in the preservation of Mt. Konocti, navigating the economic downturn, increased use of solar energy throughout the county, development of the Konocti Regional Trails Plan, building of the Live Oaks Senior Center, saving the Lucerne Alpine Senior Center from closure, restoration and revamping of Clarks Island, restoration of the Lucerne castle and its lease with Marymount California University and the inclusion of the county in the Lucerne water district”s water rate debate.
One of Rushing”s biggest struggles and most difficult challenges was the water rate situation in Lucerne, she said, and, as the issue is passed down to her successor, the necessary steps to finding a solution are only getting larger.
In her last term, Rushing was instrumental in bringing the county into the conversation with California Water Service Company (Cal Water) when the company proposed a new set of rate hikes in 2012. While Rushing believes the issue must be solved at the state level, she said she was at least able to bring attention to the problems with her position on the BOS.
The county”s role in Cal Water”s General Case Rate (GCR) brought some subsidies for the Lucerne ratepayers. But it”s not enough and the main problem, according to Rushing, is that Cal Water spent nearly twice what it should have to build Lucerne a new water plant, which required three designs.
“It”s a very difficult challenge; we can”t buy the system because what Cal Water would charge us is what they”ve paid,” Rushing said. “The answer might be a partial grant ? and my successor will need to work with the state to get some help for Lucerne in terms of buying out the system.”
Craig Bach, president of Lucerne Friends of Locally Owned Water (FLOW), agrees the solution will require a great deal of long-term work and the process will require help from the county.
“Denise will be sorely missed; we definitely helped her get elected and she”s definitely helped us,” Bach said. “She did as much as was likely possible at the time for our cause. It took a board that was actually willing to listen to us and understand we were getting royally screwed.”
Both Brosnan and Steele attended the last Lucerne FLOW meeting on Aug. 20 but Bach said that while talk can be cheap, the group”s interest lies in who is actually going to be able to help the situation once they”re in office.
While Rushing had only lived in the county for a little more than a year before she was elected to the board, she said her first campaign for election “turned out to be a pretty transformative campaign for Lake County.”
“My work has been centered around community resilience and their local economies, environmental restoration and preservation of our watershed and strengthening communities,” Rushing said. “That was the compass by which I made my decisions as a board member and I put energy into the things I thought would have the most impact while removing barriers that would prevent those visions from coming to life.”
Carol Cole-Lewis of Thrive Lake County, who has worked with Rushing on a handful of projects, said Rushing has done just that as she”s taken complex problems and clarified them so the board could take action.
“She has been a thought leader and put on the agenda the long-term view of the environment and social responsibility,” Cole-Lewis said. “She”s done as much as a human being can be expected to do for the county.”
District 3 resident Mike Dunlap, who served on the Clear Lake Advisory Committee, is not as impressed by Rushing”s work though. While Rushing has publicly advocated for Clear Lake”s protection, Dunlap doesn”t feel that she”s done enough.
“She”ll argue she”s only one voice on a board of five and has to moderate her approach to the other four to get their votes,” Dunlap said. “But on a plane, if you go from being part of the left wing to being part of the right wing, you”ll just end up going around in circles and end up crashing.”
As an example, Dunlap points to the Lake County Watershed Protection District (WPD), which is also governed by the BOS, and what he sees as the reluctance of its board to take meaningful action while failing to put together a governance structure to run it. Specifically, on Oct. 22, 2013, Rushing made the comment at a BOS meeting that the WPD board did not understand the governance of the WPD. However, as the supervisors are paid an extra salary to oversee the WPD, according to Dunlap, the problems with the WPD”s lack of transparency and organization become apparent when one of the board members admits to misunderstanding its structure.
Additionally, Betsy Cawn of the Upper Lake Essential Public Information Center believes there are a number of issues within District 3 that have gone unaddressed and will need either Steele”s or Brosnan”s attention. Cawn sees issues with the district”s lack of local wildfire prevention plans; the antiquated water lines in Lucerne and Clearlake Oaks resulting in loss of treated water; a lack of minimal services for older adults, specifically at the Lucerne Alpine Senior Center, and for minority populations; minimal effort for public education and involvement in the county”s governance processes and uncertain or fragile emergency communication systems, among other things.
While Rushing believes there can never a perfect candidate for the position, she said the voter”s job is to make sure the person they elect is prepared to navigate the challenges that come with the seat on the board.
“The next person will need to set aside their limited agenda and realize that every decision made is for the ultimate benefit of the entire county,” Brown said. “They”ll quickly realize there”s more to being a supervisor than the agendas that seem to propel them into candidacy. If I agree or disagree with somebody, it makes no difference; as long as they think they”re doing what”s best for Lake County, they”re right. I feel Denise has done that because she has a passion for helping Lake County and my hat”s off to her for that.”
“It”s been an honor to serve the people of District 3 and Lake County,” Rushing said. “Everything that”s been accomplished has been a result of people putting their energy together; very little is accomplished by negative energy but most has been accomplished by people who decided to create something new.”
Rushing added that she decided not to run for another term on the BOS because she felt a third term would maker her a career politician, something she had promised her constituents she was not when she first ran for the seat.
“It”s time for some new energy and effort. There are a number of things I started that can be pushed across the finish line with some new energy,” Rushing said.
