 So, I'd like to convene this meeting of the Board of Directors for the San Lorenzo Valley Water District for October 19th, 2023. Holly, would you take roll? President Smalley? Here. Vice President Hill? Here. Director Ackman? Here. Director Fultz? Here. Director Maynard? Here. This portion of the meeting is for any communications or any oral communications from the public on any items that are in the closed session. I see nobody here in the room. Does anybody who's online wish to make a comment? Seeing none. We will adjourn to the closed session then and to the general public. We will be back in the open session at 6.30. See you then. Meeting of the San Lorenzo Valley Water District Board of Directors for October 19th, 2023. Holly, would you take roll please? President Smalley? Here. Vice President Hill? Here. Director Ackman? Here. Director Fultz? Here. Director Maynard? Here. Okay. Thank you. I think this is the most we've seen in attendance in this room since we restarted after COVID. So, welcome. Thanks, folks. Our changes to the agenda. We need actions first, please. Oh, okay. The report of actions in closed session. We have nothing to report. We took no actions. Thank you. Rick? The staff has no changes or additions to the agenda. Okay. All right. Oral communications for any members of the public that want to bring up something that's not on the agenda for this evening, that's within the purview of the district. And I'll remind folks that presentations at this part and during the rest of the meeting not to exceed three minutes in length. We do have an official timekeeper at this meeting that I've designated. So, my warning is read at one minute. Orange. Okay. If those are the colors that you have. Okay. Good enough. He has two pieces of colored paper that I pulled out of the desk this evening because of the technology that we have here isn't consistently working. He's going to hold up one at a minute. The yellow. Orange. Hold up. Or orange. Sorry. Yellow. Red. When your three minutes are off. So, simple direct and everybody can see it. Okay. With that. Thank you. I'm Rick. I wanted to say some things about some of the recent meetings. In September 7th, the meeting started pretty much identically to this one. The district secretary interrupted the chair and pointed out that he needed to get the report out of closed section. So, in my view, that was the point board raised by a staff member. And on September 7th, you thanked the district secretary for straining that out. Okay. And this is within the jurisdiction of the district. For items that are within the jurisdiction of the. Yes. Yes. Well, I started out by saying that I was talking about the September 7th. And I'm just going to be repeating this. At the September 14th meeting. Both director Atman and director may have made the point that points of order should only be made by board members. And I wanted to point out the contradiction right here in front of us tonight. But a point of order was raised by a staff member. And I'm getting interrupted and I wish that you would have launched the. Please continue. I wish you would have launched the other board members. Please continue Bruce. We are hearing you. They're talking to each other. I can hear you. So, let's see. You've distracted me to the point where I can't remember what I said. When the, when the objection was made, when the, when the district secretary interrupted you on September 7th. There were four, there were four board members that could have made the same point. There are three staff members, district manager, district council, district secretary that all could have. So there were seven people that could have made the objection. And one of them actually did. So in my view, if none of the seven had made the objection, it could have been a member of the public. So I don't know that members of the public should never make a point of order. And I want to point out the three most common ones is reported out of closed session. Public comment, somehow skipping over public comment. And then the third one that comes up pretty often for Mike come up is. Stay on topic. Because it's a, these are all legal requirements. Okay. Thanks. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else want to address. For items that aren't on the agenda. Absolutely. Okay. So in preparing for an item is that is one. I've been looking at a lot of CTV. I wish to get back to the agenda. And I'm not sure if you're in minute. Much like Ruth hallways pointed out this meeting and past meetings, sometimes the agenda item was, like that. Was being discussed or something that has been discussed pretty seriously was not on here. And I'm finding that as well. And other meetings. I'm also finding that. like me to get a real understanding of what was discussed because sometimes the minutes don't really reflect what was discussed. And I know the answer is we'll just watch to see if you think that that's like hours and stuff, but it would be really helpful if a minute could hold to what was discussed and decisions made important discussions, even though the decisions aren't made. And looking at again preparing for another agenda item, I ran across a term called scrutiny committee. I've never heard it. Apparently it's quite common now. And I know we have an admin committee that could probably be looking at it. And I'm just going to suggest that and maybe the district should consider scrutiny committees to make sure that the minutes and the agendas are under some kind of professional standards, particularly with Brown applications. And I also found some pretty big differences in the September 14 meeting against what was on the CTV that I watched and what is in the minute. And this is going to be a real shock to you, but not everybody will come to me. This is pretty hard for us to come. I just got my COVID shot. I needed to come up here. We do not have a phone or service that allows me to go online. We don't have it. Our computer's 12 years old. It doesn't work in a way that needs to be compatible with this. I'm not alone. There are a lot of people who do not have access. And when I watch CTV, my service cuts out. I have to watch the sections. So if there's anything the district would like to consider doing to make it a lot more easier to get accurate information preferably on the minutes. I like reading reports. That would be helpful. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. I see nobody else here in the meeting. I'm trying to check the attendees. I'm attending remotely. I do see one to address us on an item that's not on the agenda this evening. Cynthia? Yes. I would like to express my personal appreciation for Rick Rogers and all his years of service to the water district. I moved to Felton in 1984. So I was involved in the construction of the Kirby Street treatment plant and the flow movement to consolidate with SLV water district. A few years ago, I was concerned about the use of water from Fall Creek to supplement Boulder Creek sources. And Rick met with me several times and patiently explained the reality that Fall Creek was inadequate for Felton at certain times of the year and at times received water from the northern part of the district. It eventually dawned on me that sending the water north was a much better plan than to let it flow out to the ocean as it would eventually flow downstream after making its way through houses, septic systems, creeks, and aquifers. Conjunctive use, in other words. I regret that I have not been more vocal in my support for Rick Rogers and other staff, which most ratepayers realize have gone above and beyond to keep water flowing, reduce fire hazards, and keep rates lower than the reality of our conditions here would dictate. The district will have to pay a premium to recruit a competent replacement for Rick Rogers now that it has a reputation for being a hostile work environment. This may affect recruitment and thus operating expenses for a number of years. I'm very sad that I did not do anything to express my appreciation previously and would like staff to know that there is support for increasing wages and benefits and for any actions the board may take to improve working conditions. I just want to say I also really appreciate the board members. You all give so much time and under very difficult circumstances. I really appreciate your talent and your willingness to contribute to this community. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Cynthia. I see another attendee, attending remotely. Nicole Launderberge? Nicole? Hi, this is Nicole Launderberge. Hi, I'm with Brackenbray and I want to express a concern about the district manager leaving when we're right in the middle of negotiating the consolidation agreement and I was hoping based off of past, sorry, I have COVID, so a little stuffy, but based off of past discussions when Rick had been talking about retiring and had not set the date, there was some indication that he could possibly manage special projects and I would like the board to consider having Rick Rogers stay on for special projects such as the Brackenbray for Springs consolidation. I do appreciate all the help that he has provided over the last three years for Brackenbray. That's it. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Seeing nobody else attending remotely who wants to speak now, I'd like to move into the next item. On our agenda, unfinished business, the Quail Hollow Road failure. I guess the district engineer is here to present this item. We've received the final billing from the contractor and staff recommendation is to authorize an amendment to the existing $600,000 expenditure of timing materials for additional $367,646.99 for a total not to exceed amount of $967,646.99 for the completed emergency storm damage repairs of the portable water main for all the road. Okay. Okay. For the public that's not kept up to speed on this, Rick, could you give us the one minute summary of what this is? Well, I'll try to because it got complicated, but back in the early part of 2000 and every 2023 during the heavy rain fall, Quail Hollow Road had trench failure around our new pipeline that was put down the roadway. Several areas of the trench became undermined and the road opened up creating some very hazardous conditions. At some points, we had to close lanes and even close the road until steel plates were put across the road to restore traffic. It became very problematic as we explored to see the extent of this undermining and the erosion around the pipe. There was considerable undermining. We brought in granite rock at first as an emergency. They addressed some of it and then we brought in Anderson Pacific to continue. And as we kept digging up and polluting, we found more and more voids from the atmosphere events. We hired consultants to review it. We found many possible reasons, but most of the reasons pointed towards heavy underground flow, spring flow off the mountain there above Quail Hollow Ranch that caused the erosion. This result of the 900,000 is making repairs and repaying of all that damage. We have submitted this as a claim to FEMA because it is definitely storm damage related. Do you want to add anything to that? That was kind of quick and dirty. That's good. That I think summarizes it. Okay. Questions on this from the board? And this is an item that the board has heard about sometimes over the last few months just for the public's benefit on that. Bob? No. Joe? It's one of these kind of sigh questions where you just say, oh gosh, one more thing, but I don't think there are any alternatives. No questions. Jamie? I was just going to say that it might be worth sort of rehashing the issue around the county standards, you know, and why that contributed to this complication, particularly for people in the audience who may not have followed it as closely. Okay. Well, to follow on Jamie's point, the specification that we had from the county, I wanted to follow up on staff with that. If we go back to the county, so the county agrees that in certain areas that their standard or their spectrum isn't appropriate yet, if we had any discussions about that. We did have that discussion. Yeah, we met with the county prior to performing the repairs and presented the details of the proposed repairs to the county and they were accepted. But I don't want to say for the Quail Hollow. Yes, I understand for Quail Hollow. I'm saying on a bigger picture, the broader picture, going down the line so that when you're not here two years from now, Eric, if that happens, and Rick is that the institutional knowledge of that standard gets issued to the district again and it doesn't get used. It wasn't correct for this environment. I would agree with that statement. To my knowledge, the county has not updated their standard detail. Early on in the process before Garrett, when Josh Wolfe originally worked with the county on the original holes that opened and the county did state that hindsight slurry backbill was probably not the right type of backbill for that application because it was a sand, the ground out there is all sand and that the slurry backbill caused a layer that deflected flows and hindsight that probably wasn't the best thing to use. Whether that contributed to it or not, there are so many different possibilities that we couldn't put our finger on the one and we had multiple experts. We were concerned, but the county was thinking that. To the Jamie's point described to the public, this slurry backfill in the trench is essentially like putting in a fairly loose cement. That loose cement in this long line that goes down Quail Hollow, water was hitting it, wasn't flowing past it and instead was going this way and washing out sand from around the pipe. Washing out that sand allowed the road to collapse in several areas. That's what we've been repairing that allowing the sand to flow out was due to county things. We think most likely because of the detail that we're required to follow that the county issued to us. With that base background of basis, I want to put out a motion. The board directs district manager to amend the not to exceed amount to 967,646.99 cents for the emergency storm repair damages of the potable water main in Quail Hollow. Second, a friendly amendment. Sure. Could we include in the motion that we would like the staff to document the unique needs of this particular area so that we know, so that we basically have a standard that exists somewhere if we have to go in and replace pipes again in the sandhills, that there is a record of what we had to do here so that we don't just follow the county standard again if we are issued the same standard in the future. Does that, you know, I just feel like we need documentation here so that we don't make the same challenge for ourselves. Right, suggest. That's a separate motion. I was going to say the same thing. Yeah, I think why don't you propose that as a second motion because we don't want to muddy the water. From this and I don't know whether that's tonight or that's part of the engineering committee to discuss at the next meeting that you hold Garrett. So if you could bring that to us as an item and then we could come back to the board with here's a proposed pool that we're going to kind of address both one county aspect of county telling us again because I expect that the same thing would happen again that they're going to, and then two, how do you propose to put the district in a position going forward given a loss of institutional knowledge so that we don't do this again in these centers. So I don't need an answer tonight. Think about that. Bring it to the next engineering committee meeting so that we can discuss that further and then we'll bring it to the pool board. Okay, all right. So I had a motion out there. We can go over a second. I seconded it. Oh, okay. All right. So for this item on Quill Hall Road, does any of the public have questions or comments on this? Seeing none here. I see none online. So, Holly, would you take role, please? President Smalley? Yes. Vice President Hill? Yes. Director Ackman? Yes. Director Falls? Yes. Director Mayhood? Yes. Okay. Okay. Under new business, next item is to change the title of district manager, the general manager. Rick? That's Jeff. That's me and Jamie. Yeah. Oh, okay. All right. So in the process of looking for replacements for Rick and looking in general at other agencies, we concluded that the term general manager was a more descriptive term. More quickly made it clear to people that that person in that role was managing the entire district and that that was pretty much the standard term for similar districts and similar roles. So since we're in the middle of recruiting, we decided it would be a good idea to change the title and make it a clearer picture of exactly what we're looking to fill. Okay. Jamie? I just wanted to add to that. The reason behind the change is that when you are searching for jobs, like if you're Googling for jobs, district manager, there's a lot of district managers that have nothing to do with this kind of work. There's district managers in sales and auto parts and so it just ends up getting lost and general manager is a title that people who do the kind of work leading organizations, special districts like ours, more typically are using now. And so when someone searches for general manager, our job would come up. And so that was what we were thinking, in terms of just aligning it with more easily accessing the people with the kind of backgrounds that we would be looking for for this role. Okay. So I would like to propose the motion to change the title to general manager. Second. Okay. Gail? Makes total sense to me. Okay. Bob? Yeah. Okay. I agree with that. Does anybody from the public want to comment? Excuse me though, but we do have a resolution, right? So do we need to frame the motion differently given it's a resolution? Yeah. The motion was to change the title of the district manager to adopt the resolution. The adopt the attached resolution changing. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Anybody from the public? Seeing none here, seeing none online. Holly, would you take a roll call vote? President Smalley? Yes. Vice President Hill? Yes. Director Ackman? Yes. Director Fultz? Yes. Director Mayford? Yes. Okay. That concludes that. Now on to the next item. Response to damaging impact with Director Fultz having on the district. Gail and you and Rick wrote this issue, this memo? Yeah. So. Yeah. At the last board meeting on October 5th, I asked the board to discuss Director Fultz's treatment of staff. This request was triggered by Kendra's, our director of finance, resignation, and her making it known that disrespectful behavior on the part of Director Fultz was the main reason for her resignation. She said this in her letter of resignation, which Rick distributed to all board members on October 2nd before the last meeting. I'd intended to include the letter in the agenda packet, but district council advised that such personnel matters are generally not made public. In any case, Kendra repeated much of the substance of a resignation letter in her remarks at the October 5th meeting. Coming as Kendra's resignation did shortly after Rick Rogers moved up his retirement date because he could no longer tolerate the impact having to deal with Director Fultz was having on his health. My reaction was both to Smay and a sense of enough is enough. We have to do something. The abrupt departure of two members of the management team has left other staff and the board scrambling to pick up the slack and find interim replacements. In both cases, we're losing important institutional memory that would have been transferred during more orderly transitions. The current crisis is the culmination of a longstanding problem with how Bob treats staff. And it is a result of a pattern of behavior, not simply a few negative encounters. The memo in the agenda packet lays out what Rick and I perceive to be the main ways in which Director Fultz's behavior makes for a difficult work environment for management staff. The first is that Bob's manner of addressing staff at board meetings is frequently perceived by the staff as demeaning and dismissive. For the director of finance who bore the brunt of Director Fultz's most critical and most elaborated questions and statements, disrespectful behavior became a serious source of stress. Members of the board of directors are bound by the district's respectful workplace policy just like members of the staff are. In an air view, Director Fultz's behavior has not been consistent with it. Second, at board and committee meetings and in his request for information from staff behind the scenes, Director Fultz frequently attempts to insert himself into the details of day-to-day operations of the district. And this is contrary to the role of the board as defined in the board policy manual where it states, and I quote, the primary responsibility of the board of directors is the formulation and evaluation of policy. Directors shall not be involved in day-to-day operations of the district, end quote. Director Fultz also involves himself with day-to-day operations by engaging in private, back-and-forth communications with ratepayers who have complaints about District Act pick of these or decisions. When he does this, the staff feel undermined. It's also contrary to board policy manual, which states that all complaints should be referred through the district manager, and if they're not resolved there, they should be brought to the attention of the entire board. In all three of these areas that I've described, there are costs in terms of staff morale that affect performance and retention. There are financial costs as well as staff members spend time trying to anticipate Bob's objections to the work products and spend time unnecessarily dealing with non-essential requests for information or revisiting issues with the public that have already been dealt with by staff applying normal district procedures. I'll leave it to Rick to provide some examples of the intrusive nature of Bob's interactions with staff and with him as district manager in particular. While Bob's interactions with management staff are the main topic of this memo, it's important to realize that this behavior at meetings has ripple effects on the entire staff that may not be readily apparent. For example, I cite Bob's comment repeated at board meetings that operating costs and headcount, so-called, have increased since 2017, but he can't identify any benefit ratepayers have received from these increases. Statements like this make staff feel unappreciated, that Bob thinks they're doing, they're not doing enough and that he believes the district is overstaffed and that the headcount should be reduced. Unfortunately, other board members, myself included, usually let this and other insensitive statements by Bob go unchallenged because to engage with Bob's polemical comments only serves to give them an opportunity to carry on in the same vein, but our silence has a cost and it is that it's interpreted by staff and now I'm talking about all staff, not just management staff, as indicating that the board agrees with Bob and the board doesn't support them and that's simply not true. One thing I hope the discussion of tonight's agenda accomplishes is to send a clear message to all our staff that other board members do not share Bob's views and that we have empathy for the difficult conditions that they've all been laboring under since 2020. It's up to the board to discuss and decide whether they see things similarly to me and Rick. I anticipate that this discussion will be uncomfortable for the board because it involves publicly calling out unwelcome behavior by one of us, but the abrupt departure of Kendra and Rick make it apparent that previous efforts behind the scenes to influence Bob's behavior have had limited success. This makes it the responsibility of the rest of the board to consider what, if any, actions should the board take in the interest of better protecting the district staff going forward. To my mind, the goal of any action should be in the short term to stem further staff losses and to make sure that our future general manager and director of finance experience healthy working relationships with all board members. In the longer term, the goal is to increase the positive impact of the entire board on the efficient functioning of the district. With that, I'd like the president to recognize Rick so he can add some comments. Rick participated in this memo, so yes. Yes, thank you. First off, I want to say I did participate in this memo. I spoke with Gail in depth and reviewed this in several drafts of this memo, added my comments and work putting this memo together. But yes, Gail is a much more eloquent writer than I am and I appreciate that. And I also appreciate the fact that for years I have been complaining to board chairs and to board and district council behind the scenes about interaction and the issues with direct reports going all the way back to the CZU fire and so forth. And we've always kept this within the board family. I believe that's a mistake and I appreciate Gail that you bring this to the public because I do the public part of the meeting because I do believe that the public should know about the working situation here at the district. We don't have a working relationship with Director Fultz. We have an adversarial working relationship and it has caused many problems. A lot of time is spent trying to salvage working relationships and to provide additional data and information that Director Fultz requests that no other board member fails to request. And subsequently, we don't believe that data makes any real difference because it still winds up in a no vote moving ahead on budgets, working agreements, etc. The comments that he sees no returnable benefits on staff and the comments that we didn't lay any staff off after we went to the turnout for nonpayment on the tax rolls are very damaging to our staff. We do have an excess that's going on. We did lose Kendra over the budget process and the rate study and this potential for other management employees that voice concerns and they're taking a wait and see approach with the new management. There was this feeling that I shielded the management staff from this type of behavior. Very difficult work even back all the way to the CZU fire. I was getting daily emails complaining on my outreach and I was doing a horrible job with social media and working around the clock with staff keeping people in water and I'm getting emails saying that I'm not doing a good job. And that reflects all of my staff at the same time. I had two staff members working around the clock that lost their homes to the CZU fire. It's very difficult when your board and board members do not support staff and they work against you and this is a common feeling with staff. There's no support with staff and director folks. I understand that there's a concern with fiscal responsibility but you can have fiscal responsibility at the same time you're complimenting your staff for a job well done and that's not the situation. With that I'm not going to just keep going on. I'll let it go with that and again I thank director Mayhood for bringing this to the public section. Okay before we start discussion of what's contained in this memo I do want to say I don't want to make this a bash director folks discussion. My hope is that we could come to some resolve here or something that better supports the staff that doesn't give the staff the feeling that the board doesn't care or that causes staff to scratch their heads to say well maybe I should be going also if the board's not willing to make any changes to this. So with that as a preface to soliciting comments I do want to ask other board members here two questions. One you know and Rick put this together with a problem statement and then suggestions as to what might change. First is there a problem do you see a problem here for the board members? Second to the suggestions that are made in this memo on pages 43 and 44 do you see anything there or another suggestion as to what might improve the situation here for staff. So Jamie. So to your first question I think that anytime you have a water district or an agency as small as ours you know there's not a lot of redundancy to our staff. We don't have a deep finance department if we lose our director of finance to rely on. We don't have a giant executive team to backfill for the general manager if we lose the general manager. So I think that there's you know a certain amount of collaboration that you you have to you know and compromise that you have to be willing to make because everybody's working under difficult conditions right. We've been working for years under and when I say we I'm talking about the staff because I'm not out there doing this work for years under incredibly challenging conditions you know starting with the CZU fire and all of the things which we've talked at Nauseum about that the staff has been grappling with in addition to running the you know matters of the water district and ensuring that our customers stay in in water and ensuring that we can cover our revenue and and pay our employees fairly. Like these are all really challenging things and I don't think that Director Fultz has offered staff enough grace I have made my views on that pretty clear on multiple occasions. I also think that there is a responsibility that comes with being on a board to recognizing that we have to ensure the healthy day-to-day function of the district that we oversee and if the district that we oversee loses its you know all of its most senior staff what kind of job are we doing as board members. So I feel like based on the the staff departures that we've just seen and frankly past things that I have heard privately about other staffing issues with the water district that this is an appropriate step to take at this point to address the issue. You know I would love to discuss more some of the solutions that are laid out here but did I answer both your questions? You answered the first question do we do you see an issue here? So I'd like to transition to Jeff and then we can talk about potential solutions but I wanted to hear first. Yes I'm the new guy on the board but I have seen clearly times when Bob's questioning of staff has been I thought unwarranted in its pointedness and abruptness. You know I don't need to go through a whole long litany of things but I do think we have a problem here and I think the the issue here is how do we resolve this in a way that gets staff and the board back into harmony and I know I've had some direct interactions with staff but I always go through Rick and I've always taken you know I'm 77 years old I've been an executive in business for years I take a coaching approach when I work with staff I live a number of places where I work with Kendra and I my approach was coaching not criticism and I think that's a thing we could all work on. All right before I ask Bob I wanted to weigh in on this also and yes I see that there's a problem here also I'll cite one example. One of the staff after a board meeting earlier this year contacted me directly following day to say that comments that Bob made at the meeting about how they were doing their work were not the way that he would do it and felt that the comments were offensive and demeaning. I'll leave it at that and I'd like to give Bob the opportunity to to first address the is there a problem here. I'll have a statement later at the end. Okay all right okay well then I do want to talk into the next item because the four board members here see that there is a problem what can we do about that then. So there's four items here let me just go down these I'll read them off and see from the rest of the board is this something that district manager may excuse staff other than the district secretary from attending board meetings to minimize adverse interaction. Is that an implant? Is that something that we could implement effectively and have an effective meeting? So I see you want to Rick? Well I I would hope that we wouldn't have to resort to that because that would put a tremendous strain on the manager and be able to answer all of those questions that the board may have or collect questions and return at the following meeting. I mean I do believe the management team provides great backup and information to the board that I as the manager may not have and it would be a difficult task for me as manager or for the manager to answer questions. It's good that the management team is here right and can provide that level of detail but that is possible one way of doing it where just the manager shows up to board meetings and tries to answer all questions but that would be a last resort I hope that wouldn't be the outcome. But this is something that you and Gail well that could be yes that is definitely an option you know at one time the general manager was the only staff member showing up at board meetings many years ago and then the director of operations started and then as our workload started to expand it was obvious that you know more information and the board wanted to hear this information. Okay okay Jamie here to speak to this. I mean my comment to this would be that obviously a general manager a future general manager may not be able to make every single board meeting and so if you don't have any other staff that are routinely attending board meetings and participating you're talking about someone stepping in on an occasional basis that really has no relationship to the board or the regular ongoing discussions at this level and I just think that that would be you know challenging to just put that all on the general manager alone on an ongoing basis and I think also that the the next general manager whoever that might be may want to weigh in on how they want to manage their staff interactions during board meetings so I don't know that making a decision about this would be helpful. Yeah I would just echo that this this wouldn't actually be a board decision this this would be the sort of decision that a district manager would make on a you know case to case situation and maybe even different you know individuals but also different situations and so I think it's as Rick says it's a it's a last resort but it it is one that I think it would be appropriate for district manager to implement if it was necessary. There's comment. So personally I appreciate having staff members come and present their own projects. It gives them a sense of ownership on their projects and it gives them a chance to see how the sausage is made here in terms of decisions by the board and it gives us a chance to see their skill levels and and their knowledge and I I think it's important frankly that the staff members who have projects that they need board approval for should come and present their projects. It's a good way to move them up the up the chain of decision-making somewhat. Okay I would find that burdensome in the meetings to have that kind of an approach because even if we all as board members submitted all of the questions that I have right now on an agenda item as presented in the agenda pack submitted all of that in writing I think it would be burdensome on the general manager and so that's what we're now calling him to meet with staff prior to the meeting have all of those questions addressed come back to us and say here's what my staff told me to the items that general managers are not intimately familiar with and not all of the questions that we as a board have are something that comes up as I'm reviewing the packet some of the questions that somebody else is asking and the answers cause another question to come up or can you clarify that so I think it would be difficult to do that but okay it's an option all right um the next was uh all questions submitted by director folks at the board committee meetings must be directed uh at the district manager who can decide uh whether to answer the question self or pass the law to the relevant staff member uh Rick yeah you know that would be one thing we could do I mean I I don't know if it solves the problem and it just moves around so to speak you know and you wouldn't want the the general manager to have to you know be to go between and and have the same types of situation going on right there's no you want to aggressive this towards the district manager anybody weigh in on that I think that it's if we have if we're agreeing that staff is going to be at board meetings like it's you know hard to say one member of the board can only speak to one I mean because they're all the staff is hearing the question right it's not like yeah you know the the issue here is that um the staff feel disrespected in the way that director folks engages with them and I don't know that you know redirecting all of his questions and comments to the district manager now general manager solves that problem um you know I I I think I might suggest another solution be added to the consideration here there's other suggestions that could improve this for staff so a suggestion and then a question um my suggestion would be that we um add a bullet or consider a bullet that might direct you know the the general manager to have the discretion to tell staff what they are and are not responsible for responding to and what they can and cannot ignore and um and then I think that you know I I think that you know comments and questions coming in that are outside of a board meeting you know that or instructions if they are going to other members of staff and they shouldn't be they should all be going to the general manager that the general manager then gets to say you know what that's we're not dealing with that because that is outside of that board members purview and I will let that board member know that they have gone beyond you know what is necessarily under their auspice because I think that that's you know part of this is that you know the the general manager should be empowered to make those decisions about board interactions particularly in the way that they affect staff but my question is and I I open this to the board I've worked for as staff to elected bodies my pretty much my entire career and typically when a board member is behaving in a way that's problematic you would consider a censure um and that's not among the the items that we're considering here I'm not saying that I necessarily think that that's the right solution but I am saying that our is a reason that we're not discussing it gail rick you put the memo together yeah I I think um I mean obviously that that would be something that we could have included that or the slightly below that would be a reprimand in some sort but um rather than labeling or having us vote on something like that that just seems excessively contentious I I want to solve the problem and I don't think that a censure or a reprimand solves the problem and so I think that's why Rick and I just kind of push that aside as as not being something that's all that productive that causes lots of heat and you know but flames and whatever but doesn't really address the the fundamental issue which is that that we would like Director Fultz to interact with staff in a different manner okay um I thought about that also Jamie before this meeting the censure and everything that I see going on um in other agencies where I see that come up if the individual isn't interested in change doesn't doesn't do anything it's a slap on the wrist and it lets the public know that we don't like this individual but it doesn't change anything it doesn't change anything I don't want to do this I don't want to do something like that just to just to take that action what what can we do to make some change that you know that either Bob says okay yes I recognize this and I'll do differently or that we can put something else in place that makes makes it so can I comment on the all questions part because I didn't get to say yeah I recognize the difficulties of of having sort of you know one rule for Bob and you know other people but I guess what I would advocate is that it is common courtesy when you have a complex or contentious question to let the recipient know about it beforehand I mean this is you know when when I chaired the faculty senate at Stanford the rule was is that you would send the question to the president before this meeting so that both he wouldn't be blindsided and also so that you could actually have a exchange because the person he could go and get the information that was needed and you could talk about it and so in the case of staff you know doing that courtesy takes away some of the fear of being blindsided or embarrassed in a meeting but it also means that you can have better discussions at at meetings so I guess what I would argue is that we should all do that and because Bob tends to ask more complex and more pointed questions that perhaps is more important that he do it but that we should be moving towards that as as a goal that's not to say that there wouldn't be questions that would come up at the meeting that that would be you know one approach that would take some pressure off the staff and yeah and and then the other part is that you know the district manager can at his or her discretion basically if a question comes in at a meeting that just is off base or they feel you know they they could step in and say no we're you know you don't have to answer that to a staff member or just tell the director that that really isn't within the scope within the scope of what we're talking about or it's too complex and we'll get back to you or whatever so that that's that's what I understand that the way we phrase it here may be kind of unworkable but I think that there's an intermediate ground that we could so I'm not clear on what you were saying here are you suggesting that we submit all of our questions what I'm saying what I'm saying is I think and this really gets to the fundamental problem that we have is that there are norms of behavior that you don't need to put in explicit rules and those norms of behavior are that you show people respect and one of those norms for example that I was just giving an example the faculty senate is that there's no rule that says you must send in your question to the president it's just considered good form the most productive thing for the whole body and so there's a norm of behavior that is out there that everybody agrees to and adopts and what the problem I see fundamentally is that four of us operate on kind of a shared norm of behavior in regard to our interactions with staff and Bob doesn't share those norms and I wish that he would and if he did then this would largely disappear so go ahead one of the things that this all highlights is that as an organization we do not seem to have a process mechanism what have you for resolving issues that are whether based on facts or personalities but when there are conflicts like that we don't seem to have a process for dealing with that and it's been my experience over the years that that sort of issue is best dealt with early on and bringing the parties together and reaching an understanding between them and I think one of the things we as a district need to do is to have sensitive conflict detectors and when we see an issue that might be arising like this that we have a process a procedure of some sort to reconcile the parties and see what we can do to make things work better and I don't see that we have that right now. I'm falling along with what you're saying and I've heard Rick say that staff have reported to him and he has conveyed that information to board chairs or board members in the past but the resignations of two senior staff in a very short period of time have caused us to have this discussion yeah um so I'm not I don't know what I don't know what else as far as what staff have been doing with. Well I guess what I'm saying is I don't think any of us on the board know exactly how those sorts of issues get resolved when there's a board versus staff member issue and I think we we should put some thought into how we processes like this usually involve the two parties being brought together by a a neutral party who chairs a discussion between the two of them on why are you upset with him and why are you upset with her and and what you know work toward a resolution rather than than go back to your cubicle or back to your office and and film and you know but I think one of the things we need to do out of this is come up with a better conflict resolution. Go ahead Jimmy I have a comment to that but I I appreciate that that is you know a way to mediate problems but there is a power dynamic here that we can't ignore and and it goes beyond just a power dynamic it's not like it's the CEO versus you know an employee and they both work for the board it it you know we're talking about an elected board member who can't be fired yep so if you put that person in a mediation with an employee who can be or who could whose whose job can be seriously affected by having to continue to deal with that board member it's I agree it's not easy to do this yeah but it's also not necessarily obvious that both parties are aware of how the other one feels and yep so okay I I don't know that I see you and I would dispute that last statement I think that in part because maybe because I was board president for two years I saw I interacted a lot with Rick and with general counsel and you know saw and as Mark does see you see more of of sort of behind the scenes and so I think that you know it's it's been pretty clear that this has been a problem but and I think that it's a sort of problem and just to emphasize what what Jamie said is that this very different power dynamic that has to do with because we're not a corporation in other words if this these kinds of interactions have been happening in a corporation Bob would have gotten a letter of warning or he would have been asked to attend you know training or something like that but you can't do that with elected you can't force elected officials to do things if they don't want to do them and if they don't change it's very difficult and so that's what makes our job the rest of us so hard because it's not obvious what levers we have the way you have in a in a business if I could add one more thing sure I think that we we have to have this conversation and structure some kind of a strategy because our staff have brought this issue not just to us now but to the public and if we just okay well that's too bad you know two people quit because they don't like him off we go hopefully we'll you know find new replacements what we're saying to staff is we don't care that they are feeling under duress too and that just reinforces the problem right um so that's all that I want to say okay um so there's still two bullets here I think one of them we've sort of addressed already it's the questions and submitting those to uh staff I think we've already said yeah that one we've already addressed I think the last one is by board action removed director folds from the engineering environmental committee to lessen opportunity for diverse interactions with staff being the chair of that committee I don't I don't agree with this recommendation at this point I find Bob's participation on that committee useful uh he has differing viewpoints uh with me at times but then there are other times where we're thinking along a similar enough path but have different ideas on how to get further down that path that um it's helpful I think to get to recommendations in that committee so uh with that this point I wouldn't support that unless unless something changes I'll have him there but Mark that doesn't that that says what you find comfortable that doesn't address what the staff that is correct that is correct but I did want to reflect on that because I'm well of course so with that though um let me just follow on on that I I just want to say that if you you know I could say the same thing about Bob that I value um his expertise in finance right in you know IT and communications and I I want to retain that benefit you know and he's also a very articulate smart guy right so I want to retain that benefit from for the board but that that has to be set separately from my concern about the staff I I concur I understand what you're saying there um and I have not personally queried staff that are in that committee with me at this point to see if that's uh but as the committee chair I can do that going forward to see if that's um um so after discussing these I don't know that we're at any point of trying to make any kind of emotion or resolution at this point but I would like to hear so what is the next step or how would we take the next step or do we move this to a committee level yes I want to hear from Bob yeah I want to hear from Bob but at the same time I want to get a feel for because we've been talking about suggestions but I don't know the word to a point of any resolve yet uh on any of these suggestions so okay uh Bob I think you can go to the public and I'll have something to say later so nothing is in response to my initial question do you see this as a problem I'll have a statement after the public has a chance okay well then I do want to come back to the rest of the board to say what do we think is the next uh step here where do we go with this what do we do um I have one thought and that's do we punt this to a committee and I see you rolling your eyes JD that's an unfortunate choice of words to say punt thank you very much but uh do we do we ask committee you know to think about what we're saying here to see if this is or do we need to resolve that fear as as the board this okay here's what yes we say good you you skipped the first thing under potential remedies and that is to just simply follow the district's respectful workplace policy which outlines a procedure for what you do under this case and uh okay I would recommend that that's what we do and basically it says if the board member is I'm quoting now from the respectful workplace policy since not everybody has it if a board member is perceived to be the cause of disrespectful workplace behavior incident involving district personnel the report will be made directly to the district manager and referred to district council who will undertake the necessary investigation the district council will report his or her findings to the board of directors which will take action as deemed appropriate and pending completion of the investigation the district manager may at his or her discretion take appropriate action to protect the alleged victim other employees or citizens okay I support that as in as a first step and I just wanted to add that you know I I appreciate all the thought that went into like what can can we do to make more effective working relationships and these are all like great ideas as long as director fault also agrees and wants to perform his duties in this manner because going back to the original problem statement we are elected officials and if he chooses not to then there's not a lot that we can do besides continue to have these conversations and so I think that that is a really reasonable step and it holds us all to the same standard agree yes I I do support that and I would hope that having this discussion in a public forum encourages staff going forward to let the district manager know and if the district manager isn't responding yes exactly either yeah either me or they have HR also they have other in order to be able to funnel that to the board president so that so that we can have some discussion about this I think that staff has probably been hesitant over the years because they don't want to feel any of the repercussion but I hope that surfacing this now and saying it publicly this is an issue if you're you have comments along this line let the general manager know let me know so I see two three staff here I hope you can convey that to your peers we've had this discussion keep in mind you will have a new general manager your general manager will be hesitant and there has been discussion brought to the board chair and to legal counsel in the past yes nothing gets done because you really can't do it understand so it just yes it has the same yes we even had a counselor come in and speak to the board and so forth very difficult situation okay all right um so I appreciate you checking me on that gale fact that there was another suggestion in here okay um well I'd like to hear from the public then but before we start public comments oh did y'all okay before we start again I want to reiterate I don't want to make this a bash director faults nor do I expect comments from the public that are adversarial to any of the rest of the board for us trying to surface this we're trying to improve working conditions for staff that's our concern here so with that uh is anybody here in attendance uh want to speak yeah okay my name is Rick Morandy I've proudly lived in Denver um I'd like to build on what director Bill was saying I think a proper remedy to this these difficulties would be to have the board senior staff take part in training mode effective communication the 2018 grand jury made a similar recommendation to this board about when they were dealing with contentious issues I took part in that training and I believe it resulted in a much more civil atmosphere the foundation of this district is built on civil and fair treatment of everyone concerned we rely on community members to run for the board serve on committees and to work for the water district we should all be assured that we will be treated fairly as with all things we can all benefit from a little trunk so in that view I suggest that the board committee members and senior staff receive formal training on effective communication thank you okay thank you does anybody else here in the audience want to speak I'm here to provide testimony and insight from having history in the district that proceeds that have done with most people here um my association of the district started in 2014 and I can testify that it was a very tough atmosphere one staff member told me that they felt everyone had PTSD just about the time the new board came in 2018 there are many examples of positive impact director folks has on the district like healthy reserves system inventory and master plan that were in place in just the right time to put the district significantly better position responding to season fire director post was elected to the board in 2018 with an impressive credential and then reelected another firm because we like how he works and want him to continue any interference with allowing him full and unfettered access to what he's entitled to do in his job as a board member is enough front to voters to board policy the ground action open meeting law I've had an opportunity as I said to work with Rick and that was about the one peak of order um and it's on district business and I've shared with him my opinion many times over the years how things that have observed about this district and the underlying factors that I feel are making play a very big part in today's discussion and uh in 2018 when the new board came in they were voted in on a change platform and those effects mainly having more focus on previous on than previously on oversight and finance just one example is director folks asked the finance manager if he can include the if they can include on reports to the board the balance of account percent you never saw a few years later that became a state requirement because that can be a really substantial debt and cities were going out of business it was something the board needed to know met a lot of resistance I've heard staff members just tell him you don't need to know that I don't have time to answer you I don't think that really presents a collaborative relationship on the other side too as I said there's two sides and there's a lot of background here it was quite toxic before director folks came on board and discussions with Rick I've also talked about um outside pressures that we have the special interest groups that were that had control of the board at my time they're now trying to regain that there's a little bit of kind of revenge and a lot of hostile feelings um and professional standard these all play a part I only mentioned them because I agree there are very big problems in this district and that that demonizing director folks is a symptom and not a solution I think the best option is to withdraw this item without discussion to refer it back to the new manager if the board wishes to pursue it further it invites dishonest debate by its lack of fact based data been driven argument but merely presents a singular predetermined judgment conclusion that is a personal opinion it is the district manager's job to handle personnel issues having a director interfere may expose the district to liability and risk as a false outside the scope of your protective do-onc duties and it does not appear to be all important I have to ask you to wrap up thank you there's a great deal of labor issues on privacy that scales printed out of the attorney preventive have to ask you to wrap up thank you yes I think that we are going to have to ask you to wrap up thank you that means your time is up one more thing I'd like to say I'd like to have your retirement to Rick I really appreciate I'd like you to wrap up your comments please uh anybody else here in the public okay go ahead Eric Martin from Boulder Creek I'm here I agree with employees contrary popular belief I believe the board has failed the employment employees by not insulating them from the day-to-day issues at the board versus their day-to-day issues at the job there's one person and one person only that any employee as a member of the water district wants to it's that man now he can delegate authority for answers but any answers that you guys need his policy this is not something that this is not a water main verse this is not a hole in the ground this is policy stuff this is bigger picture stuff everything that the board wants answers to should be submitted in writing to the director and then he can delegate the people to get the answers and if it doesn't come to a conclusion at the meeting then it can be carried forward to the next meeting but having members messing around in the day-to-day operation of the of the water district is absolutely unheard of and I've worked in one-man shops all the way up to a multi-billion dollar corporations and this is I have never seen this kind of behavior before so I say this is the board's problem this is not the employee's problem this is the board and my suggestion is is one point of contact any of you have a question you ask him put it in writing no give me call phone call give me an answer right now submit it in writing I need this within three days 72 hours whatever you want to call it and then let the manager delegate get the answer submit it back to the individual board member that needs it I think that would solve a lot of the contentious behavior and hurt feelings people this politics is is a full context for it as you all know it's not it's not pretty it's not painless and it's quite messy at times but that should not bleed over into the district operation and by just eliminating the board from the day-to-day operation and if you have questions submit submit them to that chair right there and then you can go on with your business they can go on with their business and nobody gets hurt in my world if somebody's quitting because of bad feelings that's a hostile work environment and that means that all of the board is allowing that hostile work environment to occur not these people they're just doing their jobs so I think you guys probably could come up with something where you just step back from the day-to-day operation let these guys do what they do and if you have questions about what they're doing submit them in writing and let him answer the question that's all I have thank you okay thank you anybody else uh jim mozier living felton first I just want to thank all all five of you and the board for your dedication to the water district and to the staff um and I want to say that I was very dismayed when I learned about our tent was a sudden resignation and a rich decision to retire early I know this puts the district in a really bad situation in the midst of a lot of prices that were facing a rape study um and recovery from all the damage done from the fire floods I was dismayed but I can't say in much respect I was surprised I've witnessed uh director folx's behavior at the board meetings I just hadn't translated into that how that would make staff feel um and I think you need to recognize the potential long-term impact to this both from earlier times as well as in the future which is that as we get a reputation for having an unsafe and unhealthy work environment it's going to be harder to recruit people to these jobs and that may have already been happening since we've had so much trouble recruiting people we don't know what the word is out there but this is a relatively small work community and the word can get around so I think it is a problem that needs to be addressed and I appreciate the board bringing this to the attention of the public to me the challenge is that we need to be working together we need to work as a team all of us we need to have support and respect for each other and work to be collaborative rather than at the server I believe that director folx has very important contributions to make to the district that he's already made I respect his opinions I often disagree with him but that disagreement doesn't mean we can't work together in a collaborative and respectful manner and that is my goal personally as someone who's been quite active as a citizen in water district activity most importantly I'd like to say how important is I think that we express our support to staff right now so that they understand that that is our goal collective and I want to say that what Denzel said at the beginning of the meeting is something I feel quite strongly also I want to thank Rick for his long service I think it's important that we demonstrate to the staff how appreciative we are of the hard work they've done through these very very difficult situations but the friends of sander rinsor valley water at this discussion last night how we can do something to as ratepayers to let the staff know that we respect them we thank them and we want them to feel that they work in a healthy community with great payers who really care about thank you okay um I see two oh I'm sorry I let me let me call up a couple of folks that are attending remotely and then we can come back if there's anybody else here uh in the audience um I see two right now April uh zilber you've got the floor thank you I'm April I'm a felton rate payer and first I want to say I honestly I appreciate each board member for their unique set of skills and experiences that you're bringing to decisions they have to be made at the high level about our water district I serve on a nonprofit board I've been facing a kind of parallel situation recently where I feel that other board members are being very um demanding rather than thanking me for my work and then asking me further questions and so I see how you know maybe even just ways of figuring out how to frame questions so that staff don't feel like their competence is being called into question um that might be helpful uh certainly communication training could be helpful the non-profit board I serve on is rather unruly so I for my case I've asked the president to make sure to enforce Robert's rules and to make sure people don't talk too long and go way way past the time allotted on the agenda and it's this is a different situation here in this board but I think there's a way to still take advantage of everybody's um knowledge and experience and have meaningful questions but not have it feel punishing to the board to the staff and that's super important so thank you thank you April um Alina Lang hi there Alina Lang Boulder Creek um I've also had the pleasure of serving for the past three years on the Environmental and Engineering Committee uh with Bob Folt I'm going to start off very positive that I think that this last year working with him has been my best year um I I do agree to a point uh with uh President Smalley that he's had some wonderful insights into uh the current issues this past year and we've been able to come to a point where we do work as a team but I do want to back that up through the first two years of working with Bob Folt um that were extremely extremely challenging and I did witness him um raise his voice or yell at staff and he has also yelled at me I would view one example of when he screamed over and over again of what my agenda was um and to the point like it just didn't it got to uh Director Smalley said okay and we're moving on and it was it was horrible and every time I showed up to a meeting it's like all right here I am walking in to be yelled at and I'm like I'm a volunteer committee person and walking into that environment was extremely tough and I can't imagine being a staff member and having to go through multiple meetings um a month and dealing with that is draining um so I just wanted to add my perspective I think that that Bob has some really great knowledge uh great knowledge of our district and how it functions and I do appreciate what he has to say on the committee and if you could just continue the trajectory and the respect that he's showing there across the board like I feel like we we could move on but um I think that he needs to make that change but anyways I am sorry that we're losing the senior staff that we are and um I'm glad this got brought forward because it is basically the reason I I ran um and the last election was to unseat Bob because I I didn't think how he was treating everyone was there all right thank you guys okay um Elaine Fresco you have the floor hi Elaine Fresco Felton uh mostly I just want to thank Gail and the other directors Gail especially for writing this up and bringing this up I think it's really important and it's been um ignored for too long um and the other directors for taking this issue so seriously um I agree that director Fultz has many has has um added many positive things to the district however that does not take away from the seriousness of people uh resigning because of feeling that they were intimidated or demeaned and I am now waiting to hear from you director Fultz to see what your response is I hope you are a mensch and that you acknowledge that some of these uh people they've had a problem with you and resolve to change your behaviors for the benefit of the district thanks okay um I see nobody else online yet uh is there somebody else in the audience that wanted to speak I see please go ahead hi I'm I'm Barbara Spanner from Felton thank you um and respectfully this isn't a new issue Bob and I served together on the school board for many years and I think it was the same pattern so I do want you know to say that that has been there the only I think it's very important that the only power of a board member is your ability to get others to agree with you an individual board member has no power um and I think that's an important statement to make here there's two things that I think are really important for the board to do very quickly one is a resolution on changes that you are going to make you have no power to change and elect good board members behavior as as director Ackerman so beautifully said but you do have the ability to to give yourself some tools and the and it's basically tools for the general manager and for the board president um and I would suggest that uh if and I'm sure most of this is already in your in your policies but then as you said that you establish and you write out the board norms so that the board members send questions ahead of time the general manager does not respond to those directly back those are just gathered for the for response at the board meeting and when they come up anything that requires um any board time any staff time the president of the board gets a sense of the board and those are directions to get to the gm to get the information only if it is a sense of the board okay so the two things I I uh respectfully disagree on the issue of censure because what that censure statement does is it tells staff we this is important to us and we will take care of and that's why it is an important thing to do it is not just a slap on the wrist it's a statement to just to them um I think yes it's basically uh the message to the gm about how he has the tools to protect staff and respond um you know stop the statement in the middle and say you that is not good you to respond to now does the board want us to get this answer so that's basically what I wanted to say those two things they need your um they need a board resolution and they need perhaps a censure statement so they know you're there thank you thank you okay um I see nobody else online nobody else here wanting to comment uh Bob I need to give you the floor great well as everybody knows there's two sides to every story and we'll see that come out in time shouldn't the board wish to pursue this as vigorously as they seem to intend to excuse me the past five years have most definitely been a stressful time for our community and district the pandemic CZU fire storm damages josh's tragic death supply chain issues two district manager transitions and the need for money as embodied in the upcoming rate increase not to mention a critical grand grand jury report and significant turnover and board membership public service is difficult and conducting business in public is stressful as well for everyone regardless of where we stand on any particular issue or what disagreements we have the community should be proud of the fact that the water continued to flow it's also important to realize that we agree more than we disagree I think this fact sometimes get lost in this the disagreements we have about budgets money and the rate increase process as well as the role of the board members in a public agency a truly transparent democratic process can appear chaotic especially over these fundamental issues that reflects the nature of our community as well we're not everyone agrees on everything I do my very best to keep a focus on policy not personalities as well as a focus on my fiduciary responsibilities to the people I work for the voting community I also recognize that we are all human and understand that my vigorous advocacy for positive change made with the best of intentions could very well be perceived differently our respectful workplace policy makes room for differing opinions honest debate and constructive criticism essential to our system of open government for us the message is to focus on business and not make it personal and that is how I view my role as a board member early on I was told by a former board member based in her years of experience that board members have the right to ask anything and see everything regarding the district operations within the limits of the law that seemed very logical to me and fit with my view and our board training that the primary role of the board is oversight particularly with respect to how money was being spent and within my campaign promises to work towards positive changes and transparency in fact the csda the california special districts association explicitly states in its board handbook and I quote overseeing finances boards ensure sound fiscal policy exists and that practices and controls are in place so that the district board general manager and staff have direct accountability to their constituents accountability means oversight oversight means scrutiny scrutiny means questions in my view it is impossible for a board member to fulfill their fiduciary responsibilities to the community without asking questions our district doesn't have a robust onboarding program and so in lieu of that questions are the substitute I'm happy to say that some of my questions have resulted in improvements to the district's financial reports and I thank both Kendra and her predecessor Stephanie ill for those in public our district is constantly being watched and measured by our community and beyond a 2018 grand jury report reviewed our district and identified contention between the board and district manager on one side and community members who are exercising their rights to free speech on the other this inherent right of citizens to bring grievances to the board is the responsibility of government to protect but instead the district was trying to control those community members with the election of 2018 the community was no longer excluded from the conversation there may still be disagreement but there were no longer avert acts to shut down community input into the process that represented a dramatic cultural shift and I'm proud of the fact that I helped usher that in unfortunately the apparent need for control is now shifted to within the board causing needless conflict outside of well-defined boundaries and free speech which have been established by the Supreme Court and Robert's rules of order in my opinion the best approach is to let people have their say about policy especially on contentious issues I'm very concerned that this action will send a chilling message into our community that free speech is not valued which I believe to be the antithesis of our system of government let me be very specific I will continue to engage with community members and discuss issues as it is my duty to do so particularly if they have exhausted all other avenues for their grievances I will continue to be transparent with our community and encourage us to reflect reality in the financials supporting the rape model and process backs are sometimes uncomfortable we have a history showing the operating expense increases and past rape models have with one exception always been exceeded by actual budgets let's agree to make the process match reality I will continue to ask questions of senior staff and senior staff should expect questions as part of our oversight role and fiduciary responsibilities through the general manager without this oversight role our district would be no different than most private companies where community concerns are ignored as was the case in Felton answering questions is part of the job of staff at any public agency I understand that this district has historically not had a culture of directors asking a lot of questions but I would also point out some undesirable outcomes that occurred in the past due to directors not asking questions I'm concerned that we may be taking philosophical and process disagreements to a place where a vague though I'm sure well intentioned policy is being weaponized against core political speech of a member of this agency's governing board I'm concerned that a successful weaponization will metastasize over time regardless of our disagreements I wish Rick a happy retirement he served the district for many years likewise I wish Kendra's success in her new position she made improvements that benefit the district in our community where do we go from here I'm always in the opinion that there is room for continuous improvement in everything that's because humans aren't perfect I agree with Rick Moran it might be worthwhile to do another session on contentious issues with an emphasis on getting to the core of the disagreements and figuring out a better way for presentation of dissenting views also with a new district manager coming soon I believe it is prudent to hit pause that person may very well have a different approach to make decisions for that person that would in any way limit their ability to freely interact with any member of the board is counterproductive I look forward to establishing a good working relationship with that person which I hope will include ideas about handling questions that are vital to providing transparency to the community and support for the board members community the douche excuse me board members fiduciary responsibilities I will continue to do my best to focus on policy but I will vigorously oppose any attempts by this board and our district to suppress my speech my ability to communicate with our community or my critiques of the district's approach to the rate increase process or any other topic with which I have an issue I believe we need to refocus away from us them politics and get to work perhaps reminding ourselves of csa's directives that all of us board and staff have direct accountability to those we serve the voters thank you hey well I want to come back to the rest of the board after what Bob said personally I see no recognition in what he has responded to the primary issue that's being brought up here his treatment of staff in particular here at these board meetings so with that I'd like to hear from the rest of the board and see where we might go with this at this point Jamie so I would like to recommend a proposal for how we move forward um first I I have heard from multiple members of the public about a conflict resolution training of some kind and I think that that's a really good suggestion and I'd like to ask that the admin committee take that up to consider you know go a contract to identify consultants or coach that would do those kinds of things and that's so that's a first step that I'd like to suggest and then second to that I I think and I don't know if it's tonight or if we need to come back with a more formal resolution but I think that formalizing the first recommendation that director may hood identified on the list of potential solutions that directs staff to bring concerns about behavior through a process you know I think that like I said earlier I think that that's a you know a firm good step that we can take that holds us all to the same accountable standard of of conduct I think that there's a you know I this is such a difficult issue because um you know the fact of the matter is we are not the first elected body to have an oppositional member that that is you know frustrated with the way that the the um organization that they are now elected to lead is is um doing business and um and so I think that we would have to consider any steps that we take in the larger context of setting precedent for future board members um but I do want to say so that's my suggestion recommendation then I just want to respond separately to something that director folds said about how he engages with the public um I agree that it is our responsibility to hear from the public but in in my experience the the the method for doing so is that you take in a public question or concern or comment you bring it to the staff and you first ask them to engage with the member of the public because I think that one of the things that can be really problematic when a board member engages directly in ongoing conversation with a member of the public who's raising concerns you are crossing the line from policymaking to directing day to day actions because you are now perhaps investigating main breaks or you know what main you know other kinds of problems that are being brought to you by a member of the public without the input of staff and that is not our role our role is to set policy about how generally those things are handled not to go engage on an individual basis and investigations about what is happening with any specific community member so I just disagree I think that that director folds crosses that line from policymaking into engaging in day to day direction of activities of the staff when he does that okay uh gail what's going on um I guess my reaction is similar to yours I saw no uh acknowledgement and director folds his comments about his effect on staff and instead he turned it into a polemic about his rights to speak his mind or ask questions nobody's disputing that and to deflect to that is just trying to avoid that and frankly I'm disappointed that he couldn't even say something like gosh I had no idea I'm really sorry and I'll try to be better right I mean that would have done for me it would have been a start okay but we don't but he can't even do that and so what that says to me is that something you know that brings to mind what Barbara Springer said is it maybe we have to look at the idea of reprimand or censure if you know if he's not willing to even acknowledge that this is an issue that he's damaging the district um then maybe we have to go farther I I think in theory the idea of bringing in uh you know somebody to talk about conflict but the problem here is this is not conflict Bob tried to turn it into conflict that was among board members because we disagreed about things that's not what this is about this is about behavior that's directed at staff and affects staff the the conflict that we have among the board you know I that's okay I signed up for that yeah that's I'm putting it and so I think that that's that's to be expected but so I yeah I think that what I would like to do is to make a motion that we direct the district council to undertake an investigation along the lines of the respectful workplace policy regarding director Bolz's behavior towards staff that is a motion that I'm placing on the table okay I'll second it okay uh Jeff comets on the motion or just just in general at this point um so factually I don't disagree with much of what Bob said the problem here is not that you don't have control of the facts or that you don't know what is right for the district from a financial point of view the issue is how you go about um expressing that particularly with staff and in my mind you've missed the point entirely um so that's where we are we're not saying you're wrong about what you want us to do from a factual point of view from a budget point of view just saying the way you go about it is not good for the staff okay um Bob anything else you want to respond to well since we have a motion out there on the table I'm assuming they'll be due process and as I said there's two sides every story and as part of that investigation we will get into it okay if the intent is you're going to have a one-sided investigation then okay you can do that but um there's a lot here that we're gonna have to get into I'd like to say that I don't think that we want to direct the investigation right like we don't I get that I get that you that the board wouldn't do the work but there's two sides every story in all of this okay then uh and and if we're going to get into that then I mean I I think it's uh um not going to be particularly productive um but okay okay um I would like to ask our council to comment on that um Barbara in light of what the motion is at this point can you reflect to us how you might go about this what what your process might be well generally speaking when we're asked to do an investigation and what would be considered a workplace issue we would hire an independent investigator it's not something that I would do okay or anybody in my office would do we would actually hire somebody independent um and so in this instance it's a little bit different because as directors you're not employees right and so it's it's a little different situation um and I am I actually thinking about it I was looking at that at the memo and and and the policy I'm curious of what might have been in mind with the adoption of that policy but I it reads very similar to what we would do under a personnel issue and so that's what I have to base it on is when we are asked to do something like this we hire an independent and and some of those independence are lawyers um generally speaking that's their their labor type employers and they have the you know the the background and the skill set etc to conduct those type of investigations and obviously they're very independent that's the whole point is it somebody that nobody it's somebody new to the district it's not something that's already known um and that's probably I mean that's what I would recommend that you do you wouldn't have your district council actually conduct it but I would be the one to engage the independent and then take the first draft of what would be considered a confidential investigation and test it for any factual inaccuracies etc and then it would then become a final report and you would have to determine if you want that report to stay confidential be public etc again we usually do this in an employee employer setting so it's a little different to do this as a with regard to a board member that's my that's my immediate reaction to it just to have an independent an independent investigator come in and they would obviously talk talk like board member etc right thank you um any of the other board members have a question I think it's time for us to draw this to a close okay uh at least for this evening I think we've kind of reached okay we have a motion on the table in front of us so um thank you for that Gil uh we have a motion on the table in front of us uh does anybody from the public now that we have a motion want to comment on that? Yes I'm Rick Moran again from the Beale Towneville um what I heard Bob speak I heard two points where he was making some sort of I would call an outright contrition but he agreed in principle with what I think Jeff was talking about you know what Jamie was talking about and what I was talking about some sort of inappropriate training that has a precedent within the water district and he also said that no one is perfect and he included himself in that now I don't know if you you know you take small steps or those steps as uh exactly what you need but uh besides kneeling down and genuinely reflecting to everybody here I think um Bob has made some uh important statements about his uh willingness to resolve this issue thank you okay um I see one individual participating remotely Mark Lee you have the floor thank you Mark Smalley can you hear me yes I can yeah I think uh the Bob's response was perfectly uh contritious he talked about representing the people who voted him into office and I think these this is a problem where the the issue of of actually trying to punish Bob is ridiculous this is weaponizing policy based on back the background politics between other policy other board members here and I think it's it's a disgrace and I think it's more it's better stop wasting money work together if Bob wants to uh if you recommend a communications program that's fine why waste more money on attorneys I think this is ridiculous and I'm I'm I'm I'm actually directing the the question to those board members who would make such an absolute ridiculous motion to censure or punish Bob he's worked his butt off for this district for a long time he's a very valued member of the community and it's absolutely absurd it's counterproductive he's made his comments as uh other members of the the community have said that he's been contritious in his statement I would recommend that you drop this whole this whole motion completely and get back to work representing our interest period end of story thank you you and I also see Alina like welcome to speak hi I just wanted uh say I agree with this motion and I'm I'm a little disappointed that Bob couldn't take a little bit more responsibility for his actions on this and also just to point out to the public that while we're talking about two senior staff the body counts probably more realistically at five and that doesn't include like committee members that are on the subcommittees that have also been lost because of his actions so I just just see say the bigger picture on that and I just I hope Bob that I really do appreciate your input and I hope you take a little bit more of an internal look about how you speak to people especially women I think that is a bit a little bit of a bigger issue there too um because I do want to see you continue with your expertise on this I think everyone just wants to feel a little bit more respected in value that are in these conversations thanks okay thank you um and I see that Elaine Fresco would like to speak again Elaine you're over the floor um hi yeah I just want to say I I felt like I'm sorry but director folks didn't hear anything that anyone said about the way he has hurt the district he's helped the district but he's also hurt it and these are two separate issues and I don't think anyone was is taking issue with his policies it's his actions that have hurt the district in terms of money and staff and that just like that's there and it needs to be acknowledged to give like basically one and a half okay uh thank you Elaine uh anybody else in the public here want to speak well I don't know I don't know who it was um people online um their mics are off yeah I don't know who that was okay please yes and again back to my experience but the toxic culture that existed in this district before and was not addressed and the staffs having broken the STD problems as they described itself years before Bob came on the board I think what we're missing in this is staff training and what we're maybe missing in this is really looking at our job descriptions these are public positions but I heard the particular employee that was resigning said she didn't want a public-facing job she didn't want to work for a board just very happy and a job before when she worked in the back room without so much staining we know that rick was going to be considering leaving in 2020 21 I think when his last contract was up he considered it so it's a little bit of a stretch to say this is a sudden departure and I'm not denigrating anyone's reasons for leaving but I think these are very high pressure positions and if we are not supporting staff and being able to know how to communicate or work with a public being on videos preparing reports that's pretty stressful so whatever you intend to do to this board member the next board member who you don't like what they say or their methodology again there is another side to it we need to prepare staff to know how to act professionally that we know that they can be told that we appreciate them maybe as has been suggested other methods of showing appreciation but demonizing one person for faults that have been in this district for since I've seen it since 2014 I think is a really wrong path and I suggest you really think rethink this I agree that it's way over the top to hire an attorney to investigate this is the second you can resolve yourselves you have the policies in place you just need to follow them thank you okay on august 30th the board had a closed session and came out and there was a what appeared to be a carefully crafted statement about a general manager retiring I didn't say anything about his health and it didn't say anything about director foals so when I when I read the safe page memo this week I guess I felt like the board wasn't really uh wasn't really honest with the community on august 30th no matter how you came up with that statement but you seem to have reversed you've got a whole new reason uh why the general manager is leaving so I think you you let us down on august 30th thanks I respond to that uh jimmy let me see if there's anybody else here from the from the public that wants to speak the motion from felton and I just want to say briefly I support the motion we need to realize how damaging behavior has been for the district in terms of losing senior staff it's it's a really serious problem that he did not address and we need to take action thank you okay one more from the public eric marvin from boulder creek um again hiring an attorney and a private investigator to investigate the situation that's already happened the results are already in people are leaving to just confirm that possibly bob might not have behaved in proper roberts or even workplace behavior my question is you can spend that money for one situation what happens when the next board member that comes on in the next election reverts back to the same behavior you're not doing anything to prevent the staff from having to deal with this by insulating the staff from board members via either paper or electronic communication 90 of this will no longer be a factor and spending my money to hire an attorney and a private investigator to come get to the bottom of what already happened the bottom is already there easily general managers leaving or district managers leaving and the finance directors leaving so you're basically closing the gate after the horse is out but you're not going to walk on the gate you need to insulate the workforce from the board and that is the true solution of this problem not hiring investigators and attorneys and throwing money after a situation that's already hit fix it so that it doesn't happen again and that's my point is when you insulate the the staff from the board to decisions all of a sudden they can do their jobs they don't have five losses they have one not him not him not him not her not her let these guys have one loss and then they can make him dance out public to their tune and that's just my opinion so I I vigorously disagree with the spending of more money in a district that already has stated that there's financial issues well at the same time you're talking about great increases so you throw more money after a situation that's already occurred I disagree vigorous thank you okay thank you um but before you all right Jamie you wanted to comment yeah I just I I think it's important to say for the record that the the board is subject to personnel pile and we can't just reveal personal information that our employees give to us about their retirement or health or any other issues that they may bring to us in private therefore when we reported out we we were not authorized by the staff member whose issues that were being discussed in that context to say anything further nor at that point to be perfectly frank did we have a whole lot more information some of that came out later so I just think it's it's unreasonable to think that that the board should discuss personal personnel issues in open session without the authorization of the personnel members who are being discussed okay Gil I just wanted to respond to Mr. Martin I I I do agree with what you said and I guess I was a little bit surprised by our district council response because our policy says that the district council undertakes the study and if it starts to and we certainly are not talking about a private investigator that that would never come up you know and if we were starting to talk about some expensive thing with hiring an outside lawyer first that's not what is in it's not what's in the policy and so I guess what I would like to say is that we should that that would be something that would be discussed that we should do what's in the policy and not turn it into something that is elaborate and costs a lot of money okay well with with that comment then and with what our council was saying earlier about that and we come to some uh resolve then Barbara on what on what you heard with this because if it's an outside investigator my first question is tell us what that's going to cost and how long and how long it's going to take but then I also want to know what's the likely outcome if you find what the rest of what where does that get us what I what I indicated is what we would what we do under those circumstances I've never had a policy that says hey district council go investigate this board member for these reasons so you asked me how I would do it and I'm saying I don't have a context for that this is what I do have a context for so there there certainly can be dialogue about what you want done it's not a private investigator it's that what what you do it in the employee employee situation it's it's usually a labor attorney and that's part of what they do that's that part of their job and so I would have to talk to somebody like that and say under this situation what would you charge you know etc um I don't I don't do those things I'm not I'm not a labor attorney etc so so that's that where where it's going to get you is if if I independently let's say I did it and I independently come to the same conclusion as the forum you are reaching then you're right back where you're where you're at I mean um make recommendations it goes to the district manager it says and then in their discretion take appropriate action or bring back my findings and then you'll take the action you deem appropriate okay I don't think that solves our solution a problem I'm sorry Jeff I could hear what you were whispering but I I said I don't think that solves our problem all right then I will uh I don't think that's the correct reading of the wording and the policy but if uh I'll I'm happy I withdraw the motion because I I don't I don't want to if if I mean one thing that would come out is that some of what we have now is just hearsay and I think that if you had and what I expected that would happen is that there would somebody would go around and talk the individual staff and get their take on this and whether there's an impact or not and under what circumstances and that to me illuminates what we should do if it turns out that it's just a few positions or a few contexts that is useful information but um I I agree I don't want to get in if if Barbara if you don't want to do this and you want to hire a legal uh you know some kind of labor lawyer um I I think we should discuss this further and I withdraw my motion thank you yeah I think that it's it's just I'm just reading I have it sitting in front of me and I'm just reading what it says so I'm not I'm not paraphrasing it or anything it says the district council will report what it is for finding to the board of directors which will take the action it seems appropriate so you have something in mind that I you know do an investigation in your report um yeah yeah it just when you say investigation it's it's what it what is intended by that right well can I enter Jill Gail at this point um is it simply instead of investigating interviewing yeah staff yeah and and also interviewing director folds but the same um in other work members in response to well but I don't know Gail that the board I think Barbara's heard from board members this evening we've identified we're trying to protect staff do we as board members have we have observations um yes I agree with that okay well Barbara given that um we're not asking you to investigate but simply interview as an outside I don't want to say third party but an outside party that's not directly involved with the rest of us here at the board to then come to some conclusion presenting it back to us without hiring another attorney yeah I can certainly talk to your staff about you know their their experiences right okay well let's let's be clear though the district council works for the board yes she does that is not a independent investigation I didn't say that it was independent well okay this gets in the issue of due process um and so the only way that we can figure this out is to go spend more money for the independent that we don't the four of us don't want to do because we're constrained because we can't use Jamie the tools excuse me Barbara the tools that are available to us as a board to reprimand a board member whose behavior that we don't like are censure that is why this conversation is so complicated because we are trying to do something that is outside of the process that you typically take to handle these kinds of things right but we have a testimony from Kendra on the record about her feelings and treatment I don't know what what more an investigator would would develop in that we have testimony from our general manager we even heard tonight testimony from a long serving committee member who has had similar experiences I think that you know if we're going to do an investigation we're only gonna have or an interview I guess we're only gonna have more they're just gonna say the same things so I I guess my question is at some point then okay let's say we do the interview and they come back and say all these people said these same things to us so they must be true what are we going to do with that information I think that mr. Martin is right that we need a policy to ensure that board members are you know going through the general manager I think that it's probably going to mean tabling some of that until we hire the new general manager and maybe the board puts together some kind of like guideline for how we would like the new general manager to manage board member interactions and to you know prevent staff from becoming involved and I hear what you're saying about this is not a board problem in terms of training but I do think we're going to have a whole basically brand new senior staff we've we've just hired on Garrett we have a new temporary director of finance we have and we're still looking for another you know finance person we have we're going to have a new interim general manager hopefully at some point very soon and so having maybe some kind of like let's talk about how we can do better going forward might be helpful so I I think that that we as a board have to consider whether we want to spend the time and money to investigate things that we already have evidence on the record for I would I would say if we are going to do that we need to start a balance sheet for the cost that director fault has you know subjected the district to as a result of his behavior because director fault is always very interested in managing costs and and then I think that we need to make a decision about whether we as a board are going to censure director faults I heard similar suggestion Jamie from a member of the public using the word censure that that's where we should be going to your points of is interviewing other staff going to get us any further down that path I don't know what it does I I've I've had personal interactions with staff that have but I'm not relating who but it's similar so is that where we're going then censure I don't know I'm Gil I think maybe we're reaching the limits of our ability to resolve this tonight and that we might need to think about it's more I I retracted my motion and I think there's a lot of things have been said tonight and I guess I was really really hoping that I would get some indication from Bob that he heard what we were talking about and we didn't okay and so I personally need to think more I need to like let this settle in and think more about what I think the appropriate action is I think you've suggested some things I'm not optimistic about the effect of training in theory it should be but I know that Rick Moran suggested this back in the years and I was watching the board interactions before there was the training I watched them afterwards I saw absolutely no change in behavior and in the board and I know from that there were some people that thought that that training was a waste of time because and that Bob didn't engage so I I'm not sure that you know if you don't have somebody that really wants to change all you're doing really then is is punishing the victim you're dragging all of the staff in to do something when you don't have the one person that needs to come to the table participate and I'm not willing to do that to staff and I agree in theory but I think that history has shown that that's not going to be a very good thing to do so I guess what I'm saying is I'm getting the point that I need to think about it I'm not sure that I would be able to make a motion tonight and again about what we should do and maybe we shouldn't so I don't want to let this be the leaving this discussion unfinished Gail since you and Rick put this motion together are you willing as I think you're saying right now go back and think about this come back based on everything you've heard here with a a briefer memo here's what so that so that the board could look at suggestions I hear you saying you want to go think about this okay I mean I I hadn't you know I because of brown act things I haven't talked to people about this and so hearing people's response to Rick and my memo is this is all you know new information to me so I think that you know to expect us to make a decision maybe it's not really the best idea right it's kind of a snap decision and maybe we all need to go home think about it sleep on it and think about it that's that's what I'm saying and I'm willing to to come back to the board at some later time and do this but I guess I guess what I the main goal and you know and I think I hope that we accomplish that tonight was that no matter who spoke everybody is supportive of our staff right and they want to make sure that this is a healthy work environment and that everybody's treated with respect and I don't think there's any disagreement about that and so I just want to make sure that you know and I think hopefully we've let our staff know that and that this is something that we're going to work on question to the chair sure would it be appropriate to task the administrative committee with coming up with a board interaction guideline that we would like to offer to the new whoever it is general manager and that could be something that I mean obviously would have to come back to the board for consideration but there there is annually the board policy manual gets revised and so some of these things could be taken up in that context and that would certainly be something that that usually happens in January really January so the admin committee could potentially bolster suggestions that we've been hearing here is to either one how to empower the general manager further or to empower the board president further on how to control what either one of them might consider to be unruly behavior so yes I think that would be appropriate for the admin committee to consider that based on everything that we've heard here tonight as far as set better boundaries set better rules of the general manager is the is the sole point of well that rule is already there right I know it's already there but how do we better emphasize that I don't know what tools do we give the general manager to exercise that authority yes right okay then if the admin committee is willing to go wrestle with us for a while we have two different two different tasks here at this point one trying to come up with the with the boundaries and then gales agreed to go back and think about this come back with reflections or thoughts on suggestions on what else we might be able to do we're not asking our legal counsel to do anything further at this point we don't have another motion at this point simply this is a discussion to be continued okay then I think we are concluding that item and I'm searching for my agenda to see what else if anything is there anything on the consent agenda since we've concluded that item the consent agenda is there anything there that somebody wants to comment on from the board okay this reports no I believe this is the this is the purview of the directors from what I'm reading point of view can you confirm for that for me barba point of order I think can you firm up if there's a are you getting a comment on the consent agenda yes right that was just from the directors you have to take it from the point of order you have to take comments from the point of order okay point of order we have allowed committee members to pull items from the consent agenda and comment on them oh in the past okay all right then mr holly meet proceed I want to comment on the minutes for the September 14th meeting there's a place in those minutes where it's got some words from me and there's some asterisks and I think that what's missing at that point in the minutes is the context of what was taking place so there was a particular interchange that involved at least five people actually maybe six the first three were you invited public comments a woman came to the podium to give her comments then she was interrupted by the district secretary so that was the third person and then I was the fourth person because I objected to the interruption and then there was a fifth person was director Ackman objected to my objection so it was an interchange that involved at least five people and then at the end I reviewed the video I saw that director may have also chimed in um well eventually I heard president smalley say the word correct and allowed the the woman who was here at the podium to continue and I think I remember seeing that her timer was resets of three minutes also so it was kind of a complicated interchange but what's in the minutes doesn't name the first three people at all so you you see my name but you can't see what I was responding to so I think that either one way to fix it would be to put in one sentence that named all three people that said that the board president recognized a member of the public she began speaking and then she was interrupted by the district secretary so that sentence were added then I think the context would be there from my comment and for director Ackman's comment and then at the end I think it should actually say that you resolved the point of order in my favor you used the word correct she was allowed to continue now as an alternative to all that I think you can just strike all that stuff and just put the comment from the woman because that was really the point of the meeting that you reached you turned it over to public comments and she tried to make her comment and then all this other stuff happened but anyway I don't think what's in the minutes there is accurate doesn't show the context then the next time I spoke a little further down in those minutes it's the sentence he is disturbed okay I did use the word disturbed I said I was disturbed with the process but to say he is disturbed I think it's the meaning and dismissive and to the point of being insulting to quote direct and negative and then there's a third place where Ms. Lang is it says that she was confused confused well I heard her comment and I don't think she was confused at all if she didn't say she was confused but I think she was just being diplomatic so I don't think the history is thoroughly in the minutes of it okay my suggestion to that is could you just strike those comments which comments did you want I don't support that so if you you need to make that as a motion and you need a second you that has to be moved okay all right I appreciate the comments then I don't think anything needs to change on those but I want to hear from the rest of the board so if nobody makes a motion then nothing happens um so if Lord Secretary accurately records Mr. Holloway's comments this evening this evening okay then that will provide the necessary correction for anyone who reads more than one set of minutes right um okay and I think that's probably the best way to ask your question sure in that case are you requesting that they be verbatim whatever he said I have to write down um in this instance yes all needs to be made as a motion in a second right for the board to vote on it yeah okay so I heard a suggestion from Jeff so that's a motion that's a motion yes okay the move that the district secretary record Mr. Holloway's comments this evening in the minutes accurately as a means of correcting any deficiencies that occurred in the prior meetings mats okay I'll second that can I speak sure I'm not going to vote in favor of this motion and I'll explain why we um queried the board council about that particular interaction and she issued a memo which I think that we need to take to the admin committee to form a policy about whether we ask people for their name when they get up to speak because according to the memo that was provided to us that's within our purview to make the decision now a person can choose not to give their name according to what we were told but we have the right to ask so I think that the you know the appropriate next step rather than change the minutes would be to take that memo that the our lawyer our legal counsel provided to the board to the admin committee where we can consider recommendations to a policy for how we encourage public comment I in terms of these comments specifically I don't think that that needs to be changed and so I don't support that motion okay all right I will vote no because minutes should only be detailed when it's an action item and this was far from an action item it was you know just a not part of a very important discussion and so the standard for minutes is that it's the action items that you focus on and the other things you just I mean we you could even not report it but I don't want to get into a practice where we start micromanaging the minutes just because somebody doesn't quite like the way some phrase was in there because that's not the way minutes are supposed to operate okay um so uh we have a we have a motion so I'm with drive my motion okay all right I'm sorry the memo you were referring to from council what what date was that let me look at my email um Barbara could you answer that question but not off the top of my head I don't know the date of the memo I would have to look at uh I'm not I'm not seeing anything from her but maybe it came through Holly I don't know but I saw an email on it yeah I don't recall that distributed yeah I'm seeing that um but um let's deal with that offline yeah for that I don't think we need to to deal with that in order to be able to get through the rest of this meeting that's something that Jamie is proposing for the admin committee yeah I'll I will clarify that it was sent to staff it wasn't sent directly from me to each of the board members okay from Holly um but we don't need to go into the details of when that was Jamie's agreeing or suggesting that the admin committee review that and revise additional in uh board policy so um okay uh given that um I have a separate comment in the minutes it's minor but my name has been misspelled in the minutes for years could we please spell my name right yeah that's not trivial and this one yeah in the september 14th minutes my name is phil jay m e do you mean like it is there yes and they're repeatedly in the minutes um at the top where you show directors present it's j a i i mean and i mean it seems trivial but it's been years so uh that was consent agenda that was the consent agenda you need to come back and do you have any other does anybody want to pull anything or any other comments on the consent agenda well that was pulled in order to comment so we need to have a motion to approve the minutes as is if you're not conveying that the change it's an agenda um I'll second that okay well actually there's only one was there only one pulled or was both pulled it was just the one so the other one can go through right we don't have to do anything with that just we have to vote to approve that one yes that's correct yes okay so uh we have a motion uh and a second to approve and I seconded okay all right uh we have a motion then point of order to go ahead are we going to go to the public for comment um Barbara yeah yeah you have a pending motion you go back to public comment okay all right uh any comments from the public either here or attending remotely I see nobody putting their hands up for that uh so we have a motion then to approve minutes so the motion is to approve the uh September 14th 22 I mean 23 minutes as written and that was seconded yes President Smalley yes Vice President Hill yes Director Ackman yes Director Falls no Director Maygood yes um what about your rest of the consent agenda motion passes um am I correct to move on to district reports now okay did you did you the consent agenda the the remaining portion of the consent agenda was approved right yes you don't have to do anything yeah right nobody's pulling okay I just want to make sure that we're okay okay district reports uh does anybody want to ask questions on the district reports or the committee reports uh from the board uh Jamie you know Jeff okay uh with that I think we can adjourn this meeting thanks to all of the public for attending thank you and hanging in there thanks have a good evening thanks Barbara um yep see you all for it