Last year, the Modesto Irrigation District (MID) hired 4Creeks Engineering to conduct an investigation into Director Larry’s Byrd’s irrigation practices on the AB La Grange Ranch in southeastern Stanislaus County. December 16, the MID Board of Directors reviewed the investigation, and then voted against continuing. The decisive vote was by Byrd himself, in a clear conflict of interest. Directors Robert Frobose and Chris Ott voted for further investigation.

Byrd’s vote is being investigated by the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC). The Stanislaus County District Attorney is investigating Byrd’s alleged misappropriation of MID surface water.

Newcomers to the Byrd investigation may need to know that Larry Byrd’s irrigation practices became a matter of public interest when a former ranch resident alleged Byrd irrigated out-of-district last July 8. That claim was subsequently supported by two former employees, one of whom, Todd Sill, came forward publicly.

Like many top ranch managers, Todd Sill keeps journals. He kept meticulous records while working for Larry Byrd on the AB La Grange Ranch, where he had worked for almost two decades prior to working for Byrd.

When summarizing the methodology for the investigation, 4Creeks produced the following:

“….extensive investigative efforts were undertaken to obtain firsthand operational knowledge and validate assumptions regarding the study unit. Multiple interviews were conducted with key personnel possessing direct insight into the farming and water-management activities, including former and current employees of the farming operation, former and current MID staff, and the property owners. The information provided from individual interviews collectively offered critical context on historical and current operational practices.”

No transcripts or summaries of interviews were provided in the 4Creeks’ published report. In addition to Sill’s and his coworker’s testimony, knowledgeable observers would have expected reports from the ditchtenders who monitored surface water usage on Byrd’s properties. Those interviews might have explained why there were discrepancies between the ditchtenders’ reports and power usage records for the same water years and irrigation events as reported by 4Creeks.

Moreover, 4Creeks’ investigation showed that, in 2022, when the MID allotment was 30 inches, Byrd pumped 40.37 inches. During last year’s December 16 MID Board meeting, Larry Byrd said that his “Master Water Plan” (or Account) would explain the apparent excess use.

However, after MID produced the Master Account records for 2022, the reports showed that Byrd had been billed for two acre-feet of MID surface water on eight different accounts that irrigated pasture and/or almonds.

Any successful farmer knows neither almonds nor pasture will produce on two acre-feet of water over a year’s time. In fact, the 4Creeks’ investigation verified, with granular specificity, that, in years of normal rainfall, almond orchards in the exact location of the AB La Grange Ranch require three-and-a-half acre-feet of water. 4Creeks also determined Byrd could not have used groundwater for the out-of-district almond trees on the AB La Grange Ranch, as he had previously claimed.

Transcripts of interviews from the 4Creeks’ investigation are clearly of interest and value to MID ratepayers and farmers, many of whom remain frustrated that Larry Byrd was able to end the investigation by voting in his own interest. In fact, according to FPPC guidelines, Byrd should not even have been present while the vote was discussed by other Boardmembers.

One of MID General Counsel Frank Splendorio’s areas of expertise is conflicts of interest. Why didn’t Splendorio point out Byrd’s clear conflict of interest last December 16?

When I requested transcripts of the 4Creeks’ interviews, I received equivocal responses from Splendorio. When I asked to know who signed off on Byrd’s Master Water Account, I received more equivocal responses. Thus far, MID has not produced the interviews nor any record of who approved of Byrd’s irrigation reports.

Four Creeks determined that Byrd pumped almost three-and-a-half acre-feet onto the AB La Grange Ranch in 2022. According to MID’s own records, he was billed for two acre-feet. The discrepancy amounts to a loss of revenue and a cost that is ultimately borne by MID ratepayers and farmers in a clear abuse of the public trust. Seven other properties were also underbilled.

MID management has been aware of allegations concerning Larry Byrd’s misappropriation of MID surface water for well over a year. MID is a public utility. MID management and Counsel work for MID ratepayers and farmers.

MID General Manager Jimi Netniss and Counsel Frank Splendorio both have a fiduciary duty to conserve and utilize MID resources fairly and efficiently for the benefit of MID ratepayers and farmers. Netniss, who worked in finance prior to becoming General Manager, supposedly has extensive experience with rates and budgets. Why would he not have discovered discrepancies between Byrd’s reported usage and billing months ago? Did he even look?

Despite conclusive evidence that Byrd could not have irrigated his out-of-district trees with groundwater, 4Creeks reported the investigation was “inconclusive.”

The report did not note that Byrd went over his allotment in 2022, and did not report discrepancies between ditchtenders’ reports and power records. However, Management and Counsel should have noted those items immediately upon reading the report. To date, MID has refused to explain why Larry Byrd was billed for far less water than he used in 2022 and, most likely, in many other years.

Thus far, after over a year, MID Management and Counsel continue to fail to produce records and testimony that could clarify the record regarding Director Larry Byrd’s alleged (mis)use of MID surface water on the AB La Grange Ranch, including egregious underbilling, prohibited use of MID surface water outside of MID boundaries, and wide discrepancies between ditchtender reports and power records. They have failed to provide the interviews 4Creeks said provided “firsthand operational knowledge” and “critical context on historical and current operational practices.”

Absent counter-evidence, MID ratepayers and farmers have the right to know how much income the district has lost due to incompetent management and accounting. They also have a right to just compensation for their losses.