Laserfiche WebLink
I the neighbors and the environment; there is nothing in it for the Defendants because they do not <br /> . 2 intend to sell the property for use as a dairy. <br /> 3 So long as there are no consequences other than occasional notices of violation— and f�r <br /> 4 twenty years there have not been --the Defendants' strategy serves as an excellent model for any <br /> 5 polluter. The law has had no meaning or effect on them for twenty years. A large penalty is <br /> 6 appropriate under the circumstances. Deterrence of others is also necessary,because dairies <br /> 7 compensated based on milk production, not environmental compliance. Absent economic <br /> 8 consequences, others may be tempted to scrimp on aspects of their facilities that yield no <br /> 9 income. <br /> 10 CONCLUSION <br /> 11 <br /> 12 The People request that the court allocate the penalties as set out in the following chart. <br /> 13 Portions of the petialties could be formally imposed but suspended on condition that the other <br /> 14 penalties are paid within 60 days of Notice of Entry of Judgment and all tetras of the injunction <br /> • 15 are complied with. In the event of late payments or upon presentation of evidence that the <br /> 16 injunction has been violated during the next five years, the suspended penalties will be payable <br /> 17 immediately. <br /> 18 <br /> 19 Statutory Basis Payable Suspended <br /> 20 Water Code§13385 $125,000 $225,000 <br /> 21 Health &Saf. §25189.2 $125,000 $275,000 <br /> 22 Bus. &Prof. §17200 $146,100 <br /> 23 Fish &Game §5650.1 $350,000 <br /> 24 <br /> 25 <br /> 26 /1/ <br /> • <br /> 27 /// <br /> 28 <br /> Plaintiff's Post-Trial Brief 18 - <br />