RANCHO MURIETA, CA (MPG) - Three Rancho Murieta Community Services District board members have essentially been cleared of conflict-of-interest allegations by the California Fair Political Practices Commission.

The commission, which reviews potential financial conflicts of interest but does not rule on questions of bias, announced in separate Nov. 21 emails to the complainants that it will not pursue enforcement actions against Director Randy Jenco, Board President John Merchant or Director Linda Butler, citing insufficient evidence.

Former board member Stephen Booth filed the FPPC complaint against Jenco, while developer Bob Keil submitted a separate complaint against Merchant and Butler.

The two complaints raised different concerns: One alleged that Jenco could have a financial interest in development on his property, while the other claimed Merchant and Butler were biased because of their involvement in a petition supporting a moratorium.

Both complaints stemmed from a tense Sept. 17 board meeting in which the board voted 3–2 to begin the process of enacting a moratorium on new development due to insufficient water supply. Merchant, Butler and Director Bill Gere supported the motion, while Jenco and Director Tim Maybee opposed it.

Before the board began discussing the moratorium, audience member Richard Gehrs told the directors that there was a perception in the community that Jenco had a financial conflict because he had purchased the Granlees property, which could be subdivided and developed in the future.

Later in the meeting, Booth questioned whether Jenco should participate in discussions about a moratorium or even the Integrated Water Master Plan, given that he could subdivide the 11-acre property, “which I think, by definition, makes him a potential developer.”

Jenco rejected the suggestion, noting that General Counsel Patrick Enright had already reviewed a possible conflict in another context involving a drainage easement on his property. He said he had no conflict of interest despite what he described as “wild speculation on social media.”

Speaking at the Oct. 15 board meeting, Booth expanded on his concerns and confirmed that he had filed a formal complaint against Jenco with the FPPC.

Merchant also reported that he and Butler were named in a second FPPC complaint alleging they should not participate in discussions about a development moratorium because of their involvement in circulating a petition urging the board to impose one.

“At least in my complaint, they were careful enough to say I was actively involved in it before I got on the board,” Merchant said.

Contacted after the October meeting, Keil confirmed he had filed the second FPPC complaint against Merchant and Butler. 

“They shouldn’t be allowed to vote on the moratorium because they have a bias that can’t be overcome,” he said.

The official response to Booth’s complaint arrived in a Nov. 21 email from Kendall Bonebrake, chief of the commission’s Enforcement Division: “After review of the complaint, the Enforcement Division will not pursue an enforcement action in this matter, as there is insufficient evidence that the Rancho Murieta Community Services District’s decision on September 17, 2025, to initiate a water moratorium, prior to implementation of a water moratorium, would have a reasonably foreseeable financial effect on Jenco’s real property.”

Asked for comment, Booth said, “I am satisfied with the determination of the FPPC. However, there remain questions of how, why and by whom the property was provided a water hookup, since it reportedly is excluded from the jurisdiction of CSD.”

Bonebrake also sent an official response to Keil on  the same date: “After review of the complaint and evidence provided, the Enforcement Division will not pursue an enforcement action in this matter, as there was insufficient evidence to establish either public official named had a financial interest in a governmental decision.”

Asked for comment, Keil said the FPPC only addressed whether Merchant or Butler had a financial conflict, acknowledging the commission does not make rulings on bias. 

“I still think they have a bias that won’t allow them to make an objective decision,” Keil said.

Keil added that, in his view, the district has forgotten its reason for existence and has become political. 

“We need people on the board who can complete the vision of the community founders, not punish developers,” he said. “Without developers, Rancho Murieta wouldn’t exist. People forget that.”

After Booth filed the complaint against Jenco, Jenco submitted a response to the commission explaining the circumstances involving his property.

Jenco said he and his wife purchased the property in 2017 after it became available, with the intention of building a home for their personal use. They obtained permits to construct a barn and to demolish the old house, and they have applied for a building permit for the new home. He said that, contrary to Booth’s complaint, easily attained public records show the property already had water service from the district. An existing septic system will handle sewage.

Jenco wrote that even if he wanted to develop the property – which he does not – it would not be feasible because the eastern and western portions lie in a floodplain, which is off-limits to construction. Access is also limited. 

“Passage of the moratorium issue (or not) referenced in the complaint will not affect me personally, one way or another,” Jenco wrote.

Jenco also addressed the Sept. 17 moratorium vote in his FPPC response. 

“My belief, which I have been very public about, is that the only result of a moratorium will be a rush to lawsuit by landowners that will see their property values decline due to this action,” he wrote. “The CSD ratepayers will end up paying the costs for defending the district and all damages incurred, due to this ill-advised act. That is why I voted against the motion.”