Introduction
These excerpts address the following issues in the dispute: the French drain installation, slope maintenance history, and whether engineering oversight was involved. All are taken directly from the official court transcript.
Q = Vasko Alexander, Jill's Attorney
A = Bill Katz, Former Board Member
A = Bill Katz, Former Board Member
Key Testimony
Was any engineer involved in the decision to install a French drain?
No. The recommendation came from an informal GeoTek site visit with no written report. No formal reports were prepared, no second opinions were sought, and no one on the board held an engineering license. The board voted to install the drain on a private slope based entirely on a verbal suggestion.
Who made the recommendation to the board to install a French drain on Slope 139?
The verbal recommendation from the GeoTek people that came over as a courtesy to us, because of our -- they did not charge us or do a report because, in my opinion, the referral came from a very large home builder and they came over as courtesy and gave us their opinion. Nothing was in writing or a report.
Was there at any point an outreach to another geotechnical engineer to get a second opinion with respect to the installation of a French drain at Slope 139?
No.
Was anyone on the board in 2019 a licensed geotechnical engineer or --
No.
How about a civil engineer?
No.
Pages 47-49
Does Katz agree with GeoTek that the drain reintroduced water into the slope?
No. When asked whether the French drain was reintroducing water into the slope, Katz disagreed with the licensed engineer's report. His evidence: he "saw it" work when they poured water into the drain caps. Neither he nor the vendor were licensed engineers, and no formal testing was performed by a qualified professional.
I'm not an expert to even say that. But the water wasn't reintroduced to the slope. It was taken away from the slope.
And how do you know that?
I saw it.
When did you see it?
When the French drain was tested.
How was the French drain tested?
Pouring water into the drain caps.
But neither you or the vendor are licensed geotechnical engineers; correct?
That's correct.
Pages 59-61
Did Katz recognize his own newsletter report on the slopes?
No. When shown a newsletter documenting 13 slopes needing approximately $20,000 each in renovations, Katz called whoever wrote the report "unknowledgeable." He was then directed to look at the author's name. It was himself. This is the same individual who led the French drain installation without any engineering oversight.
When this report states that we have approximately 13 slopes, what do you think that means?
That whoever wrote this report is unknowledgeable.
So this is another unknowledgeable member?
Correct. Can we go up and see who wrote this report?
Yes.
Oh, it was me. Okay. Interesting.
Pages 83-84
What did GeoTek find about how the French drain was performing?
GeoTek found the drain was reintroducing water into the slope. The May 2024 GeoTek report concluded that, because the drain used perforated pipe, collected surface water was being introduced into the subsurface directly behind the retaining wall. Katz was shown this finding during his deposition and acknowledged he had never reviewed this language before.
[Reading from the GeoTek report:] However, as the system is currently constructed, with perforated drain pipe, surface water that is collected in the area drains is being introduced into the subsurface directly behind the existing retaining wall. Do you see that language?
I do.
When you came back onto the board and you reviewed GeoTek reports, do you recall reviewing this language in this record?
I do not.
Is it fair to say that the installation of the 2019 drain based on this report at least added water back into the slope?
The one statement in here saying that it introduced it into the subsurface would say that. But that -- like I said, I'm not an expert to even know what the subsurface is.
Pages 66-68
Did anyone investigate whether the French drain was working properly?
No. No one hired an engineer or performed any investigation at the time of installation to determine whether the perforated pipe was reintroducing water into the subsurface. No one on the HOA board recommended such an investigation either.
Did you hire anyone to perform an investigation at the time when the French drain was installed in order to determine whether or not water that was collected from the surface by the French drain was reintroduced into the subsurface of the slope?
No.
Did anyone in the HOA make a recommendation to perform that investigation?
Not to my knowledge.
Pages 68-69
Was any other property at Las Brisas damaged by the same rain?
No. Despite attributing the slope failure to "torrential rains" that affected all of California, Katz confirmed that no other property in the Las Brisas community was damaged. The community has approximately 169 homes. Only the slope where the HOA installed the French drain failed.
Was there any property damage at any other Las Brisas lot as a result of this torrential rain?
No. Not that I'm aware of.
Page 77
How was the vendor who installed the French drain selected?
The vendor was selected based on "references and price." Katz never asked whether the vendor had a civil engineering or geotechnical license. The vendor, later identified as Pablos Landscape Services, was a landscaping contractor. Katz acknowledged he assumed a landscape contractor would not be a civil engineer.
When you were vetting vendors for the installation of the French drain, did you ask them: Hey, do you have a civil engineer license?
I did not.
Did you ask them if they have a geotechnical engineer license?
I did not.
What was your main criteria in selecting a vendor for this French drain?
His references and price.
Was that mysterious vendor a licensed civil engineer?
I would assume a landscape contractor would not be a civil engineer, but I couldn't tell you for sure.
Pages 50-51
Who led the French drain project, and what were their qualifications?
Katz led the project himself. His highest education was one year of community college. He spent his career in retail grocery management and wholesale sales for Frito-Lay. He confirmed he holds no civil engineering license, no geotechnical license, and no professional licenses of any kind.
Do you have a civil engineer license?
No.
Do you have a geotechnical license?
No.
You were the lead of the project. Okay.
Yes.
Pages 11, 50
What does Katz believe caused the slope failure?
Rain. Katz testified that the slope failure was caused by "the massive rain that we had the prior two years." He based this on a single sentence in a GeoTek report noting that the 2022-2023 rain season was 170 to 180 percent of normal. When asked what the rest of that sentence meant, he said: "I have no idea what that even means." He later acknowledged he is "not a professional enough to state that."
And what is that understanding?
The -- from the GeoTek report, that it was caused by the massive rain that we had the prior two years.
The sentence says the perched groundwater is often observed in the backscarp of the failure. I have no idea what that even means.
So that sentence of 170 to 180 percent of normal, is that what, in your mind, is the cause of the slope failure at 139?
I'm not an expert that I think I can opinionate on that. But -- I take my "but" back. I don't think I'm a professional enough to state that.
Pages 26-28
How did Katz explain the repeated use of "slope repair" in HOA newsletters?
"Poor choice of words." Across multiple newsletters spanning from 2005 to 2022, different committee chairs used the phrase "slope repair" to describe work on the slopes. Katz dismissed every instance as a "poor choice of words," insisting the HOA only replaced plants and never performed actual slope repairs. When the pattern was pointed out, he acknowledged it but maintained each was simply repeated from prior reports.
Do you know what slope repair means within the context of this report?
Again, poor choice of words.
So one board after the next is using this poor choice of words is your speculation; correct?
One board -- no. I saw one Volunteer Committee chair use it, and now you've pointed out to where a Volunteer Finance Committee chair has used it.
Pages 75, 78, 81, 93
What happened when Katz tried to install a fence on his own slope?
The board denied his request. The written denial stated the fence would "encroach into the Association's common area." Katz confirmed he owns the slope where the fence would have been installed. The HOA used the phrase "the Association's common area" to describe property that belonged to an individual homeowner. Katz obeyed the board's decision and did not proceed.
[Reading from the denial letter:] The board is denying your request for a variance to build a vinyl fence which would encroach into the Association's common area, noting that the proposed construction of this fence would be a violation of the Association's CC&Rs. Do you see that language?
I do.
Who owns that slope?
I do.
But the HOA was directing you not to install a fence on your own property; correct?
Correct.
Pages 102-106
Were homeowners allowed to maintain their own slopes?
No. A 1998 HOA newsletter stated that homeowners "are not permitted to plant anything, nor to attempt to maintain these areas." The newsletter referred to slopes as common areas "owned by individual property owners" but maintained exclusively by the HOA's contracted gardeners. Homeowners were explicitly prohibited from doing their own slope work.
[Reading from the 1998 newsletter:] Common areas in Las Brisas are owned by individual property owners. However, due to insurance stipulations, homeowners are not permitted to plant anything, nor to attempt to maintain these areas. They are maintained by the gardeners by contract with the homeowners association. Do you see that language?
I do.
Pages 95-96
Did the HOA maintain slopes on private property?
Yes, for 30 years. Katz confirmed the HOA's landscape company maintains the landscaping and irrigation on slopes that are on private property "to assist the homeowners that they did not have to go that expense." He confirmed this practice had been in place for at least 30 years.
The slopes that are on private property -- the HOA has maintained the landscaping and the irrigation only to assist the homeowners that they did not have to go that expense.
Has the HOA always treated private slopes as a common area?
To the best of my knowledge, for the last 30 years.
Pages 16-17, 79