Judge Orders Palo Alto Water District Director to Return Confidential Documents in Ongoing Legal Battle
Judge Orders Palo Alto Water District Director to Return Confidential Documents in Ongoing Legal Battle
TLDR: A judge ordered Rebecca Eisenberg to return approximately 2,000 confidential pages she took from Santa Clara Valley Water District offices, following a lawsuit over her unauthorized removal of sensitive documents.
A Santa Clara County Superior Court judge has ruled in favor of the Santa Clara Valley Water District in its lawsuit against Director Rebecca Eisenberg of Palo Alto. Eisenberg had taken thousands of pages of internal documents from the district’s offices, prompting legal action. The decision marks a significant development in a contentious dispute between the director and the water agency.
On Tuesday, Sept. 3, Judge Ellen E. Williams ordered Eisenberg to return approximately 2,000 pages of confidential materials to Valley Water officials within five days. The documents were part of an investigation into allegations against Eisenberg, and their unauthorized removal led to the lawsuit. The ruling reinforces the district’s concerns over the handling of sensitive information.
In January, Eisenberg, along with the rest of the board of directors, was given access to the 2,000-page report, which included confidential employee interviews and supporting documents. The materials were available for viewing only in a secure room at the district’s headquarters in San Jose, and directors were expressly prohibited from taking photos, making copies, or removing the documents.
However, surveillance footage captured Eisenberg taking the documents to her car and driving away. This act prompted the water district to file a lawsuit, arguing that the removal of the sensitive materials posed a risk to the agency. Eisenberg, meanwhile, maintained that she had every right to review the documents as a director, as long as she did not disclose their contents.
Eisenberg has consistently denied sharing or discussing the report with anyone, even signing an oath affirming her confidentiality. She has called the lawsuit an overreach by the district, labeling it “an intentional abuse of ratepayer funds.” Eisenberg argues that the agency is suing her over a hypothetical risk that has no basis in fact, claiming there is no evidence to suggest she would ever leak the documents.
The water district, however, has spent a significant amount of money pursuing the lawsuit. According to Valley Water spokesman Matt Keller, the agency has already incurred $143,694 in legal costs related to the case, in addition to the $587,497 spent on the initial investigation into Eisenberg.
The report that Eisenberg removed documented 25 complaints against her, of which nine were substantiated. One notable incident involved Eisenberg telling Board Chair Nai Hsueh, "English isn’t your first language so I want to make sure you understand," after Hsueh expressed confusion over the term "ad hominem." Eisenberg later explained that she wasn’t disparaging Hsueh based on her race or national origin but was instead accommodating what she called a “language barrier.”
In response to the report, Eisenberg filed her own set of accusations, including claims of discrimination, harassment, and retaliation against Valley Water’s Chief Executive Rick Callender, General Counsel J. Carlos Orellana, and the district itself. However, an external investigation determined there was insufficient evidence to support Eisenberg’s claims.
Eisenberg has since argued that the entire investigation into her behavior was a retaliatory measure orchestrated by Callender and Orellana after she raised concerns about sexism within the agency. The ongoing dispute highlights the deep tensions between Eisenberg and the district’s leadership.
The case continues under the docket number 24CV436448 in Santa Clara County Superior Court, as the legal battle over the handling of confidential documents and internal power struggles unfolds.