(Special thanks to Sharon Guinn for writing this up. It’s too important not to read.)A lot happened but the highlight of the evening was when 2 Twin Rivers patrol cars arrived because Cathy Nelson-Hood called them to remove the audience from the meeting.
The first announcement was that Cathy N-H was not feeling well and she turned the meeting over to Vivien who is the V P.
The agenda item 1 said: “The Interim General Manager will report to the Board on outside legal opinion regarding the new General Counsel Retainer Agreement. The Board will discuss options.”
Mychael diligently tried to read the item but before he could finish the above statement, Belinda Paine had the floor and made a motion to accept the new contract. Ironically they were going to vote on a NEW version that was placed on the table this evening and we were not into the meeting 10 minutes. Please note that they were voting on the contract that begins September 1, 2010 – but all four versions of the contract have had the same exact date. I’m not sure that the historians will be able to keep this one straight.
The termination penalty was changed but we will still be responsible, if it is terminated prior to March 1st, for paying General Counsel $575 hour for all services rendered since September 1st. But in addition, “District shall only be obligated to pay Attorneys the sum equal to the cumulative total hours billed for the previous 12 months multiplied by the difference between the hourly rate charged to the District and the Attorneys’ standard hourly rate.” So for the 12 months prior to the termination we will be responsible to pay him the difference between either $250 or $305 for all hours billed at the $575 rate.
IF the contract is terminated AFTER 180 days he shall be paid the difference between $575 and $305 for all services since September 1, 2010 and . . .”District shall pay Attorney an additional sum calculated as follows: the average hours billed by Attorney to District during the six months prior to termination, multiplied by . . . $575 per hour, multiplied by two.” That means that as a penalty we will pay him an additional $1,150 per hour for the average hours billed for the previous six months.
It still has the provision that the District is responsible to defend him against any lawsuits because he feels vulnerable to being sued by someone (he pointed at Mary and said like you) or some public entity. This was his justification for not removing that clause when Mary Harris asked if he would remove it.
The Board should note that no changes may be made to the contract unless in writing and signed by both parties so it does not matter what he says – he has to sign it.
Prior to their vote, Mary Harris tried to read from the report submitted by Mychael about the contract but was continuously interrupted by the three other directors. There appears to have been some questions regarding whether the District should have proceeded with the contract because of the terms but we were unable to hear what she was trying to say. In addition, the Board is refusing to release the information to the public on the pretense it is not a “public record” because it was not distributed to ALL board members. Vivien and Cathy Nelson-Hood received verbal reports and would not acknowledge receiving the written report.
Again there were multiple pleas from members of the audience to delay approval for further review since the terms had changed AGAIN. There was a public uproar wherein it was a unanimous vote of the ratepayers in attendance to vote “NO”. All of this was to no avail since they appeared to be determined to pass the contract.
The motion passed three ayes and one no.
Please note that Stephanie Suela did not attend this meeting. Why not??
The plan is to gather signatures for a “Referenda” to rescind the contract. We will need approximately 600 signatures from registered voters so that this can be presented to the Water District Board of Directors within 30 days from today. The options will be for the Board to either rescind the contract or call for a special election.
Please contact the writer privately if you can help us gather signatures or you would like to sign the petition. I will need your phone number so we can contact you.
Video of the proceedings:
Rio Linda Water board meeting
