RANCHO MURIETA, CA (MPG) - A dispute over who controls the Rancho Murieta Community Services District’s meeting agendas overshadowed the opening of the Aug. 4 Improvements Committee meeting, with directors, staff and several members of the public questioning whether important water-supply issues were being delayed by the agenda-setting process.

The discussion began after several speakers complained about repeated meeting rescheduling and last-minute agenda changes, then quickly shifted to a broader disagreement over why major water issues – including the proposed third water storage tank, groundwater development and Lake Clementia planning – had not appeared on recent agendas.

Rancho Murieta resident Tom Shewchuk first criticized the district’s handling of meeting schedules after the committee meeting was moved multiple times, forcing him to cut short his vacation to attend. He urged the district to adopt a more consistent policy for scheduling meetings and notifying the public of changes.

Committee Chairman Bill Gere agreed the district needed to do better but said Brown Act notice requirements govern agenda preparation and that agenda items need to be submitted well in advance.

Rancho Murieta Properties representative Jeff Pearson responded that, while he agreed with the need for an orderly process, the district’s actual practice had often differed from it.

“I’ve had to get in the habit of checking committee meetings or board meetings the night before because it’s frequent that there are changes to the agenda the day before and the night before,” Pearson said.

Pearson said he was disappointed that discussion of the third water storage tank had disappeared from the agenda after initially appearing in a draft version. Gere acknowledged that the item had been included briefly before being removed, saying it could not legally be added because the change was made less than 24 hours before the meeting.

The disagreement intensified when committee member Randy Jenco, the committee’s other board representative, said he had asked that discussion of the tank be added to the agenda after receiving the draft agenda. He said Gere later informed him that only Gere and Interim General Manager Amelia Wilder controlled the committee agenda and that his request would not be honored.

“It was absurd,” Jenco said, noting it was the first time in six years he had requested an agenda addition and been denied.

Developer Bob Kyle questioned why Lake Clementia, groundwater wells and the third water tank had not “shown up” on the agenda after Director Tim Maybee told him at the previous board meeting “to send a list to Amelia of things he wanted to be considered for the agenda.”

“Bob, these are huge issues,” Gere responded. “They all take a huge amount of work, and we’re very short-staffed. So, to think that we’re going to stop doing everything to attend to your list is a bit much.”

Former board member Mike Martel then questioned whether one committee member could prevent another from placing an item on the agenda. Wilder said her review of the district code indicated that directors may make suggestions, but she found no provision requiring that requested items be placed on an agenda.

The district’s 2016 Board Guidelines state that the general manager, in consultation with the board president, sets board meeting agendas. The guidelines also provide that committee recommendations and requests from individual directors are submitted to the general manager for consideration and allow directors to request future board or committee agenda items.
 However, the guidelines do not specify whether such requests must be granted or establish standards for when they must be scheduled.

Martel said he had asked a government agency to determine whether the district’s practice complies with state law and the Brown Act. 

“I think this is getting my hair on the back of my neck really concerned,” Martel said. “I don’t mind having a difference of opinion and not voting on stuff, but not to bring a topic up that concerns a board member ... I’m not sure that’s how America is supposed to work.”

The agenda dispute resurfaced later during discussion of the Water Vision Working Group’s proposed project matrix. Shewchuk said the group had completed a revised matrix assigning responsibility for water-supply projects and hoped it would be forwarded to the board.

Jenco argued the board had directed the committee to complete that work and send it back for approval, but said progress had repeatedly stalled because projects were not being added to committee agendas.

The committee took no action on the agenda-setting issue, leaving unresolved the differing interpretations of how directors may bring matters before the public for discussion.