There is a pungent odor in Lompoc, and it isn’t from the broccoli fields after they have been mowed and before they are plowed under to enrich the soil.
Several months ago, one of the City Council members was charged with multiple felonies related to his applications for utility rebates. Then the council was informed that there had been other errors in the rebate program.
Following these charges, the Santa Maria Times reports that “the city hired RSG under a contract of up to $38,895” at the City Council’s direction to conduct an impartial review (“Lompoc utility rebate review finds recordkeeping deficiencies, urges tighter oversight,” Oct. 20).
The innocent explanation is that they were exercising their oversight responsibilities and simply wanted to know how many other applications were defective, since an in-house review had already identified about a dozen erroneous submittals.
This is where the odor intensifies surrounding how the council majority appears to be trying to assist the defense of a fellow council member. The report was supposed to be presented to the council on Oct. 20; however, it was deleted from the agenda.
While this report has not been discussed in a public forum, somehow a reporter from the Santa Maria Times acquired a copy.
Just how it was obtained, since it still wasn’t officially delivered to the council yet, is suspect. Several very reliable sources confirmed that council members were emailed a copy of the report prior to Oct. 20 but were told it would not be on Tuesday’s agenda since the city attorney and staff had not finished reviewing its contents.
This is a critical step in the process because the legal staff must first verify the validity of the information and then determine if legal action could be recommended to recover any lost taxpayer funds.
Even though the report wasn’t properly vetted, if correct, there was some troubling information contained in the Santa Maria Times report: “RSG Inc., the hired consulting firm, reported missing information or documents in 107 of 549 applications. The rebates associated with 106 of those applications totaled $67,344.14 in the report appendix while the 107th application has no amount listed.”
That’s almost a 20 percent error rate, which should make taxpayers cringe.
Some might say the report may have been leaked to provide ammunition for the defense of Steve Bridge, the council member charged with all those felonies. I don’t think the issues identified in the report rescue him from prosecution. Simply appropriating and stealing an identity to obtain rebate funds is enough to prosecute him and makes his case unique from all other applications that simply had “missing information or documents.”
But who leaked the report to the press? All someone would have to do is ask, “Who would benefit by an unreleased report becoming public knowledge prior to a public hearing on the matter?”
I can think of a couple of people beginning with those council members who have publicly been strong defenders of Mr. Bridge: They may have their fingerprints on this situation. They stand to lose a lot of credibility if he were convicted of any of the 20 felony charges.
One thing is certain, there is a pungent odor in Lompoc coming from City Hall, and it isn’t from the broccoli fields after they have been mowed and left to rot in the sun.
Ron Fink writes to the Sun from Lompoc. Send a letter for publication to letters@santamariasun.com.
This article appears in November 12 – November 19, 2026.
