RANCHO MURIETA, CA (MPG) - Steve Booth, who resigned as a Rancho Murieta Community Services District director in May, has publicly criticized the board’s handling of an investigation into an employee complaint filed against him by former General Manager Mimi Morris.

Booth raised the issue at the board’s July 16 meeting, citing a “closure letter” summarizing the investigation’s findings that he received the day before.

“The district has determined that you did not engage in unlawful hostile workplace harassment, specifically, the investigation determined there was insufficient evidence to sustain the allegations against you,” the letter stated.

Although the result didn’t surprise Booth, “it raised serious questions to which the community deserves answers from this board,” he told the board.

The rift between Morris and Booth first became public in January. After the other board members approved a $375,000 settlement with her on May 12, Morris agreed to resign and Booth unexpectedly resigned at the next meeting.

Booth’s Critique

Booth spoke during public comments at the beginning of the July meeting. He said that “after seven months of inexplicable delay, he had been informed on June 27 that the board had received a summary of the findings.

“The allegations were found to be without merit; the comments and actions complained about were found to be legitimate business inquiries,” he said. “All contested actions were found not to be discriminatory and not retaliatory,” Booth said. These findings were confirmed in the “closure letter” sent to him on July 15.

Booth outlined his criticism of board actions in a series of pointed questions.

“One. Why did it take over seven months for the investigation to be completed?”

“Two. Why was Morris permitted to refuse to be interviewed by the investigator for five and a half months, even though a public employer has the absolute right to direct an employee to be interviewed in an internal investigation at a time and place set by the employer?

“Three. Why was Morris given $375,000 of this community's money, as her complaints were found to be without merit?

”Four. How was that decision made?

“Five. Why was the commitment to give Morris $375,000 made months before the investigation was completed and the results of the investigation were known?

“Six. Why was only one board member (Booth) excluded from the discussion regarding the complaints and potential for settlement when two other board members (directors John Merchant and Linda Butler) were mentioned in the government claim as well?”

Booth said the explanation that settling was more cost-effective than litigation did not hold up, given that the investigation found no merit in Morris’ complaint.

He noted that the core of her complaint – his comments during the Nov. 20 board meeting – would likely have been subject to an early dismissal motion under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, which protects speech made in a public forum on matters of public interest.

“The attorneys representing CSD should have had a discussion about that principle with the board,” he said.

Booth concluded by urging the board to provide the community with answers to the questions he raised.

None of the board members present – Butler, Tim Maybee or newly appointed Director William Gere – responded to Booth’s questions. Under the Brown Act, board members are not required to respond to public comments, although they may do so briefly if they choose to do so.

Background

The conflict between Morris and Booth became public on Jan. 6 during a special board meeting to evaluate her performance. Before the board entered closed session – without Booth – Morris accused him of retaliation, discrimination and harassment. She also revealed that she had filed an internal complaint against him following the Nov. 20 board meeting.

During the closed session on Jan. 6, the board voted 4-0 to place Morris on administrative leave pending an investigation. The next day, Booth told The River Valley Times, “I categorically deny that there has been any discrimination against her for any reason.”

Morris alleged that Booth pressured her to return to in-office work despite having a medical condition and defamed her by criticizing her performance during the November board meeting.

On Jan. 8, her attorney filed a government claim against the district, expanding her allegations against Booth. It also listed District Counsel Patrick Enright and directors Merchant and Butler as district employees causing injury.

Under California law, a government claim against a public agency must be made before filing a lawsuit against it. On Feb. 19, the board voted 4-0 to deny Morris’ claim, clearing the path for legal action.

On March 14, the board met in closed session without Booth and later announced Morris would return from leave. She resumed  her duties on March 24. That same day, Booth informed the district he would no longer attend district meetings.

Following a closed session at the May 12 meeting, Merchant announced that the board had voted to 3-0 to reach a settlement with Morris. Booth and Randy Jenco didn’t attend the meeting.