A regional groundwater dispute that began more than a decade ago is now shaping who can sit on the current San Miguel Community Services District (CSD) board.
In 2013, a group of North County landowners, including former board member Raynette Gregory, filed a “quiet title” lawsuit against several public water agencies, including the San Miguel CSD, Templeton CSD, the city of Paso Robles, Atascadero Mutual Water Company, and San Luis Obispo County. The suit sought to affirm landowners’ inherent rights to groundwater amid concerns over drought and new regulatory restrictions on pumping.
The litigation, which eventually involved more than 600 property owners, went to trial in Santa Clara County and concluded in 2018, according to court records.
A jury ruled in favor of the public agencies, finding that they had established limited prescriptive rights to pump groundwater based on historical use between 1981 and 1990. The ruling allowed the agencies to continue sharing the Paso Robles Groundwater Basin in accordance with historical practice, even during times of drought, but did not extend to ongoing claims by individual plaintiffs.
That lawsuit was part of a broader conflict over groundwater management in North County. Landowners sought to protect their rights to pump water from the Paso Robles basin, while public agencies asserted that historical usage allowed them to continue supplying water to tens of thousands of residents.
The jury ultimately awarded limited prescriptive rights to the agencies for past usage, ensuring that they could pump specific amounts in declared overdraft scenarios, but did not create ongoing claims affecting individual participants like Gregory.
“North County landowners filed a lawsuit against the public water suppliers in 2013 claiming that the landowners’ right to use groundwater is superior or prior to those of the public water suppliers; and, as a result, during times of shortage, the public water suppliers would have to curtail or cease pumping from the basin while the landowners’ right to pump would remain unaffected,” a San Luis Obispo County press release states.
‘These divided boards like this … it’s not healthy for the community; so let’s see if they can come together.’
—John Peschong, 1st District SLO County supervisor
Deliberations found that “the public water suppliers have established a ‘prescriptive right’ such that they can continue to share in the groundwater supply consistent with historical practice, even during times of shortage,” the statement continues.
The lawsuit was costly and tense for the agencies involved. Collectively, the five defendants spent more than $5.7 million on attorney fees, hydrologist reports, and related expenses, with San Miguel CSD accounting for more than $500,000 of that cost, according to data previously requested by New Times.
Former San Miguel CSD General Manager Rob Roberson told New Times in 2018 that those costs affected operations and forced water rate increases for the district’s then 851 customers.
“It comes directly out of our operational expenses and has diminished our reserve funds,” Roberson said in 2018. “This has put us in a situation where we had to raise our rates and put off some of our projects.”
While the litigation is resolved, its legacy persists in current board decisions. Board members Owen Davis and Ashley Sangster have cited Gregory’s participation in that legal action as a potential conflict of interest in filling a now-vacant board seat.
Gregory, who served on the board from July 2019 to November 2024—including terms as president and vice president—was among four candidates interviewed to replace the late John Green, who passed away in December 2025.
During a Feb. 26 CSD meeting, district counsel noted that the board could not consider Gregory’s past role as a plaintiff and the district as a defendant in the appointment process.
Some residents claim that Gregory has faced harassment and sexism during her service, in the months after leaving the board, and throughout the appointment process. Resident Jay Brown cited personal attacks on social media, including a Facebook post by Green shortly before his death, in which he targeted Gregory with inflammatory and sexually explicit comments.
“Say no to sexism, stabilize the CSD. … I support Raynette Gregory for the board,” Brown wrote in a letter backing her candidacy.
During the district’s annual reorganization in December, the board selected its officers for 2026, reelecting Sangster as president and appointing Brendin Beatty as vice president. The board then began accepting letters of interest for Green’s seat, ultimately selecting four candidates for interviews in January.
On Jan. 22, the board interviewed all applicants but failed to reach a consensus. A follow-up meeting on Feb. 26, which included three of the candidates, again failed to result in an appointment.
First District SLO County Supervisor John Peschong told New Times that county intervention isn’t planned, leaving the decision solely to the board.
“There’s plenty of time for them to be able to work together, to come together with somebody that they would like to see,” Peschong said in a previous New Times interview. “I hope that’s the case where they build a coalition of support around somebody, and it’s good for the community. Because these divided boards like this. … It’s not healthy for the community; so let’s see if they can come together.”
Gregory received nine letters of support from residents and one letter of opposition. Davis and Sangster argue that `her involvement in the past lawsuit raises questions, but legal experts note that resolved litigation generally does not preclude service on a public board, particularly when the case involved broad regional issues and hundreds of participants rather than a personal dispute with the district.
The San Miguel CSD decided to leave the seat vacant until the November 2026 general election, which will also include three other board positions. ∆
Reach Staff Writer Chloë Hodge at chodge@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in April 2-9, 2026.