You will recall I earlier mentioned how Director Ross misrepresented the “email exchange” regarding his multiple requests for a special two agenda meeting on August 31st to:

1) Reorganize the board (new President and Vice President), and,

2) “rubber stamp” a past and inadequately reviewed budget so as to meet a September 1st deadline.

[Do not fear, the budget that was approved can be modified later by a board willing to do the work as a budget is only a suggested guideline and not set in stone.]

As most will appreciate, having a budget prepared by the deadline is not as important as having a good budget that is adequate and workable. There are not any serious ramifications for taking more time to do the job right the first time.

{I can hear it already…….”I was the director who made sure the LDPCSD budget was on time!” —-But the flip side is actually: “Don’t worry about the deteriorating and leaning foundation – keep stuccoing the walls, tiling the roof and painting that barn those hideous colors and patterns I picked out!”- LOL}

ANYWAY, Director Ross (in his board packet supporting the Special Meeting) only included his most recent request and my second “short” response denying the request. Hardly an accurate record of what really occurred.

This is how the communication actually transpired, starting with Director Ross’s August 28th request:

_________________

Lew:

 

Since the budget is due by September 1st, we need to schedule a special meeting to get the budget approved ASAP to be in compliance with the law. We could approve the budget that Charise prepared, but direct staff to make any adjustments that the Board wants, like pay increases.

 

Also, the Department of Public Health needs a five year plan and a capital improvement plan submitted by September 15th per Randy. Our next regular meeting is on the 17th. That item could be addressed at the special budget meeting.

 

For the five year plan, we could take the Prop 218 five year plan and extend it out for two years. Betsy could help the staff prepare this if necessary.

 

Thanks, Lew.

 

Emery

 

 

ER: br

_________________________

[NOTE: Director Ross offering his wife’s assistance (Betsy Ross) to help with the budget was the second such offering because immediately after the Financial Administrator/Treasurer/Board Secretary quit Emery suggested Betsy could also perform the duties as the Financial Administrator. Anticipating the question – yes, Betsy Ross (br) usually prepares all such correspondence for Mr. Ross.] The following was my same day (August 28th) response to Director Ross:

___________________________

Syndie, could you please see to it that all directors receive the CDPH communication with which Randy apparently briefed Director Ross? Thank you.

 

Emery, considering the recent information from Mr. Herrera: (1) that the board may have some applicants to interview for the vacant positions very soon; (2) those positions are intimately involved with the budget; and (3) the fact the budget has often been late in the past without any serious ramifications, I believe following up on the hiring process should take priority. Having an experienced new employee(s) working on the budget would be of great benefit to the district as well as a good introduction to our district business for the new employee(s).

 

This would also apply to any CDPH reporting procedures. Regarding the CDPH five year plan and CIP submittal, I believe your stated Sept 15th deadline is incorrect and is merely a required response date, not a completed work deadline. Lew

___________________________

NOTE: Mr. Ross was indeed incorrect about the deadline and all subsequent follow up was unnecessary.

Director Ross to Richardson, August 29th, 2012

___________________________

Lew:

 

On July 16, 2012, there was a special Board meeting with a public hearing and presentation of the proposed FY 2013 budget. The budget mirrored the budget in the voter-approved Prop 218 five year plan.

 

All the Board needs to do now is approve Resolution 2012-7 (page 2 of the July 16 Board packet) changing the resolution with a new date and the President and Secretary names. No one needs to prepare a new budget; it has been completed already and presented to the ratepayers. As I recall, we did not approve the budget on the 16th because of questions on the salary plan. We could approve the resolution but freeze pay rates pending a recommendation from the new IGM. The new IGM could spend their time developing a new salary plan and working on policies, as recommended by the auditors and the Grand Jury.

 

Let’s have a short meeting and get this budget approved ASAP, prior to September 1st, to be in compliance with the law. Adoption of the budget will give the staff the authority to make expenditures and will allow our financial statements to be completed.

 

Thanks.

 

Emery

 

ER: br

____________________________

Notice how Mr. Ross’s first email speaks of possible pay increases, yet the following one suggests freezing pay rates along with omitting his wife’s involvement with his big plan. Believing I had already appropriately responded to Mr. Ross’s request for another unnecessary Special Meeting on August 28th, my second (and final) answer was short and to the point on August 29th:

____________________________

“Director Ross, I understand your email as a request to schedule a Special Meeting. I decline to do so. Lew Richardson, Vice President”

____________________________

Director Ross’s self-prepared August 31st packet totally misrepresented my response to his repeated requests for a Special Meeting by including his last (different) request and my second short final answer. What do you expect when the request was disingenuous in the first place with the primary focus of removing me as Vice President?

Gee, Mr. Ross evidently wrote a nice reasonable request and I dismissively responded so impolitely. Oh please – total misrepresentation.

Apparently, Directors Ross, Skoien and Kinsella, believe presenting and approving a budget on the same day is reasonable. I disagree. Far more study and deliberation should have been made – especially when your financial administrator/treasurer just quit. (There is another issue which the public is unaware but in light of the resignation reporting such doesn’t make much sense since the matter was OBE…..Overtaken By Events.)

IMAGINE WHAT WAS GOING ON

Think about the chaos going on at the LDPCSD and in the community at this time ….. our Administration Office was destroyed by a suspicious fire; then the termination of a long time employee (the entire board was never involved in that termination); then three resignations in a row, starting with a part time hourly worker all the way to – the most recent by our former IGM who had 31 years experience as a water professional and who was making major positive changes while continuing to research and evaluate more efficient ways to operate……but that’s another story that will have to wait for a while.

(Heck it will probably take a whole chapter in the book explaining how this district was once again derailed by people pursuing their own personal interests which is absolutely reprehensible.)

ANYWAY, I was not satisfied (either are many others) with the lack of research and study of this hastily approved budget. Wes Barton did a wonderful job in explaining to the public that Ross’s proposal WAS NOT A MIRROR IMAGE OF THE VOTER APPROVED 5 YEAR PLAN AND HAD MAJOR FLAWS THAT NEEDED ADDRESSING. Barton also pointed out the apparent consensus of the attendees that the two item agenda meeting was unnecessary and planned poorly for a Friday before a three day weekend when many people had company visiting.

I will agree that Barton needs to “talk down” a bit to the public with less financial terms and provide more everyday examples of what he is saying, but his “watch” over our finances is comforting.

ATTORNEY RECOMMENDED MATTER CONTINUED TO SEPTEMBER 6th

So, a September 6th meeting was later required because Directors Ross and Skoien refused to hear a legal matter that the attorney requested the board decide on August 31st.. Their failure to act was {incorrectly} justified by stating the attorney’s recommendation and Government Code (Brown Act) authorizing such action was a violation of the Brown Act….in the opinions of Ross and Skoien. (Still stuccoing and painting the barn weird colors.)

Once again, on September 6th, Director Ross refused to participate in a Closed Session meeting this time citing personal reasons which have never been adequately explained to the attending public who asked legitimate questions. While walking out of the board room into the parking lot Ross confidently assured the attendees the Closed Session meeting would take a long time.

How curious that he was absolutely correct. A very simple issue that should have taken a “normal board” maybe 15 minutes at the most was dragged out unmercifully due to a director’s obvious personal interest and concern. But I can’t tell you the story because it was closed session material. This is insane.

NO CRYSTAL BALL NECESSARY THIS ELECTION

NOTE: THE FOLLOWING IS NOT A PERSONAL ATTACK – IT IS DOCUMENTED FACT AND ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY FOR EVERY VOTER IN THE UPCOMING LDPCSD ELECTION TO UNDERSTAND!

Directors Ross and Skoien, in addition to elevating their opinions above that of our attorney, have dismal attendance and voting records for meetings and general participation (probably record setting), yet both are running for re-election. It would take much work in researching the matter, but I am relatively confident Director Mark Skoien has the record for abstaining on a vote which even district policy recommends avoiding. Repeatedly sitting on the fence of important issues is not taking an active role in leadership and ignores the “Oath of Office” every director takes.

Perhaps without the adequate preparation as to the matter at hand – and fearful of making a decision – “non decisions” are the best policy for directors who apparently walk a thin line in pandering to both sides of an equation. Placate everyone without actually doing anything. Track record my friends, track record. This is not responsible representation of the public’s interests.

A MODERN DAY HYDRA MONSTER?  

Poor Hercules, every time he cut off one of the heads of that multi-headed monster, two grew back! LOL

You know, it is extremely difficult to keep up with the nonsense perpetrated by some directors that inevitability, and intentionally, distract from the important issues of this district. It happens again, and again, and again with absolutely no accountability for serious past transgressions. Seems one untruth is simply replaced with another. Honestly, every time I post a report about this mess I realize there was much more that should have been included, but ten or fifteen pages is already over-kill for the average reader.

Being an active participating member of a board takes work, plain and simple. The sad part is the work is not that difficult when a board is focused on district issues and not pandering for votes or creating “look at me – proposed quick fix –resolutions” without proper research or investigation.

CHECK OUT THOSE BODs

The concept of a Board of Directors being 5 bodies (individual directors) with one head (ultimate decision making authority) is exactly the opposite here at the LDPCSD because what we have are 5 heads with one body. (Actually the “5 head comment” is being extremely generous if considering relevant contributions.)

Like the old science fiction monster movies where cephalic disorders reign high as a result of over exposure to chemicals and/or radiation, our “multi-headed board” pursues and obstructs various courses of action simultaneously in a never ending battle of single-headed perspectives which are often oblivious to the public interest.

That’s the kicker, most of the wasted time and effort has little to do with promoting what is best for our district and customers, now or in the future.

LAST MEETING SO TYPICAL

OK, forward to the Monday, September 17th, 2012 Meeting where Director Emery Ross proposed his Resolution 2012-12. Although my previously posted poem (Wannabe King?) pretty much sums it up, this “dog and pony show” (or “hydra-monster presentation”) warrants further comment since the far majority of viewers were not at the meeting which actually boasted an audience of 25 people. Excellent attendance – please keep coming to meetings and thank you all for addressing the podium during comments and staying on subject.

HELP YOUR LDPCSD— BRING STRANGERS TO MEETINGS!

I was quite pleased with the meeting but it probably didn’t hurt that there were some unfamiliar faces in the audience. Maybe we should start paying strangers to attend meetings so the traditional disrupters will never know if there is an official from another governmental entity present? Pickup hitch-hikers and drop them off at meetings with promises of free food and drink? Maybe a BIG inflatable “Sergeant at Arms” in the corner? LOL 

DIRECTOR ROSS’S RESOLUTION 2012-12 WAS EXTREMELY PREMATURE

Director Ross’s RESOLUTION 2012-12 was another “short circuit” to the TRANSPARENCY OF GOVERNMENT concept where the people (in this case LDPCSD ratepayers) have a right to be advised of proposed government action along with the opportunity to comment prior to final decisions.

1. There was no adequate investigation as to the feasibility or possible ramifications of such a major change in district financial operations.

2. There was no serious discussion by the entire board at a public meeting

3. The stated reasons for necessity were weak and unsupported.

4. Resolution 2012-12 needlessly expended staff, attorney and director time.

MY FIRST REACTION TO ROSS’S RESOLUTION?

(Other than the traditional disbelief and frustration?)

I telephoned Mariposa County Tax Collector Keith Williams on Friday morning, September 16th, 2012 since Ross had already publically stated he had spoken with Mr. Williams about the matter.

NOTE: Mr. Keith Williams has always accepted calls and should be acknowledged and commended for his personal response and clarity of information regarding such matters.

Mr. Williams confirmed he had spoken with Director Ross, however,

1. No research or preparation for such designation had been started by his department;

2. Such designation would likely take months due to the involvement of other County Departments and the Board of Supervisors;

3. He was unaware that LDPCSD Resolution 2012-12 was ready for possible approval by the LDPCSD Board of Directors at the next Monday meeting, and

4. Even if the LDPCSD Board approved the Resolution it would have no effect with the County of Mariposa.

I still cannot believe this was even proposed because by definition, a resolution is a formal expression of determination to pursue a particular course of action already deliberated and decided!

The intent to immediately make this major change in District financial operations, without adequate research, discussion or public input is evidenced in three parts of this Resolution.

1. “hereby designate the County Treasurer of Mariposa County as the treasurer of the Lake Don Pedro Community Services District…”

2. “….district staff is authorized to work with the County Treasurer to begin the process of establishing the district’s funds with the County including closing bank accounts and alternative depositories as necessary, and

3. “THEREFORE, this resolution was passed and approved by the Board of Directors of the Lake Don Pedro Community Services District, this 17th, day of September, 2012, by the following vote:…”

VOTERS IN LESS THAN 2 MONTHS will decide which directors will represent their interests in this district and such a major decision should likely be made by that governing board. Obviously research into the feasibility of such a change could start now if the board wanted and the results presented to the new board for possible action. I have no problem with ideas, but please, let’s all take a deep breath, study and think about issues before running off and unilaterally creating resolutions changing district financial operations.

ROSS REASONS FOR THIS MAJOR CHANGE WERE VERY WEAK

1. Financial Administrator resigned: Radically changing the traditional District financial operation because one employee resigned is analogous to throwing away a useful piece of equipment because one replaceable component failed. (REPLACE THE COMPONENT!)

2. Government Code 61050: General Manager and Treasurer can be the same person. Hiring a GM could remedy the necessity of another employee for Board Treasurer.

3. Designating the County Treasure to serve as treasurer of the district (transferring responsibilities) is not synonymous with more oversight of district finances and improving internal controls. Director Ross has again confused two very different issues yet combines them as justification for his proposed transfer of financial responsibilities.

 

Viewers might be reassured with the fact our LDPCSD attorney also commented on the seriousness of such a change and cautioned about a hasty decision.

LEW! SHUT THE HECK UP. WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE RESOLUTION?

Okay, sorry—nothing. After opening the meeting and immediately after the Pledge of Allegiance, Director Ross repeatedly tried to remove his curiously inappropriate Resolution from the agenda. I stated it would be addressed in order as listed on the agenda, which it was.

At that time I made many of the same arguments and comments already presented to you viewers here. Director Ross withdrew the item for discussion and vote. I wonder what would have happened if we had a more traditional audience of 3-5 people and there was no public knowledge about the proposed action? Could such nonsense have been approved?

“Oh, you didn’t happen to stop by and read the public notice? Sorry, the board has already approved this major change in financial operations at the last meeting. You should have been more vigilant in checking the posted notice.”

The above example is one of the things the Open Meeting Act is designed to prevent – lack of prior public notice before government action.

Actually there is one other point I would like to make regarding Ross’s proposed and withdrawn Resolution and how it is very similar to other situations where he has unilaterally scheduled and then simply withdrawn a matter from the agenda and board consideration.

“HANG ON”…… NOT THIS TIME, MAYBE NEXT

Previous IGMs have been subjected to similar erratic and improper activity as well, including late night telephone calls advising how the IGM should perform. [Telephone records could easily verify the times, duration and frequency of such calls.] I recall one former IGM who had a day or so to fret and worry about whether he was going to be disciplined or even have his employment terminated over some disagreement he had with Director Ross yet when the meeting item came up on the agenda, Ross simply withdrew the request like it was no big deal at all. It just disappeared like water vapor. WHAT?

I’m sorry, but that’s the employment equivalent to marching someone up to the gallows, placing the noose around their neck, vocalizing all legal notices to the public like the execution order, maybe a short prayer, placing a hand on the lever to the trap door, then halting the whole process with a simple: “ahhhh, not today”.

Psychologically this is a form of torture and a totally inappropriate way to treat any employee. It is simply a diabolical method of control – constantly reminding an IGM that he is an “at will employee and serving at the pleasure of the board”.

Reprehensible conduct for any director much less one who consistently brags about how many years supervising experience he has with a Special District. A special district, where according to Mr. Ross’s own writings, routinely kept resignation forms handy in files in case any employee might want to resign. Seriously, I kid you not. Every HR (Human Resource) person I have talked with has never heard of such a thing.

MOSTLY HOUSE KEEPING CHORES

Most of Monday’s meeting was pretty straight forward with the required board approvals of routine stuff, Treasurer’s Report (Wes Barton has agreed to fill in until an employee is designated with that responsibility), paying bills, Minutes, and correspondence.

RESIGNED FROM THE FINANCE COMMITTEE

I believe my submitted resignation speaks for itself:

_______________________

“Please be advised as of Monday, August 20th, 2012 I hereby resign my position on the Finance Committee. I’ve learned much and will continue to study and attend meetings as an observer when able. Since Director Ross has already suggested that his wife Betsy, who is experienced in such matters, could temporarily fill the Financial Administrator position (Emery acknowledged it would be voluntary with no pay since he was a director), I think the Finance Committee would be the perfect place for Director Ross and his wife especially since Mr. Ross has suddenly become interested in joining committees.

Thanks for the education, Lew Richardson”

__________________________________

[NOTE: I am still on the Public Relations, MID, and Personnel Committees.]

Director Ross agreed to serve on the Finance Committee but do not worry about any other strange resolutions coming out of that committee because “Bean Counter” Wes Barton keeps a keen eye on our finances.

Say what you want about his emphatic lectures at meetings but this district is lucky to have access to his experience. I cannot count the number of times he has discovered and reported financial errors or omissions in public meetings. Heck, the reporting process Mr. Barton set up years ago was one of the examples of a good documentation procedure in a recent Finance Training class I attended. Comforting to know we were already doing it like the class recommended.

ORGANIZATIONAL CHART

Item H, Organizational Chart of the district was something I requested that did receive  approval by the board (4-1 Skoien abstained).   Essentially it streamlines the hierarchy of employees by clearly designating the General Manager as the top district supervisor as outlined in various sections of the Government Code.

________________________

61000. This division shall be known and may be cited as the

Community Services District Law.

_____________________________

Government Code 61051 states:

The general manager shall be responsible for all of the

following:

(a) The implementation of the policies established by the board of

directors for the operation of the district.

(b) The appointment, supervision, discipline, and dismissal of the

district’s employees, consistent with the employee relations system

established by the board of directors.

(c) The supervision of the district’s facilities and services.

(d) The supervision of the district’s finances.

_____________________________

Government Code 61002:

(f) “General manager” means the highest level management appointee

who is directly responsible to the board of directors for the

implementation of the policies established by the board of directors.

__________________________________

Our previous organizational chart came about due to vacancies in the key positions of Financial Administrator, Treasurer and Board Secretary which were filled by one salaried employee. Our district was “top heavy” with two salaried employees, the General manager and the Financial Administrator/Treasurer/Board Secretary.

NOTE: The same person being both Treasurer and Financial Administrator was a problem of “checks and balances” for our auditors who also advised changing that position.

This prior organization created a situation where (arguably) one employee answered only to the board of directors who appointed them and could not be disciplined or terminated by the GM. This had the unintended result of that position being basically immune from GM supervision and correction if necessary. I believe this new organizational chart not only now conforms to Special District regulations under the Government Code but will also provide a more stable and cleaner supervisory structure. (Our next IGM/GM will not be plugged into that same untenable working dilemma.)

RESOLUTION 2012-12 By Director Emery Ross: WITHDRAWN.

CLOSED SESSION

j. Government Code Section 54957 (b)(1) – Public Employment Title: General Manager: Request: Director Richardson – Possible Board action of filling the GM Position.

This Item was dropped due to a majority of the board preferring to continue advertising for the GM position.

Well, that’s about it for now. I need to get out and financially contribute to the District through more water usage on my landscaping!

LOL!

 

My best to you and yours, Lew