- Home
- News
- Opinion
- Letters
- Sports
- Prospecting
- Essentials
- Obituaries
- Real Estate
- Comics
- Gallery
- Classifieds
- Advertisers
- Coupons
- Contact Us
Share Article
438
987438987
The ongoing conflict between some members of the public and the Cameron Park Community Services District (CPCSD) board of directors and staff continues to be a sore spot with every meeting a fresh opportunity for re-opening the wound.
At the Oct. 17 meeting of the board, community critics complained about ongoing efforts to curb their comments.
Resident David Gelber noted that in August, General Manager Mary Cahill had a deputy sheriff at the meeting who spent the evening “playing on his cell phone while leaning against the wall.” At the September meeting, he said Dennis Timoney, who is the chief risk officer with the Special District Risk Management Authority, was there at Cahill’s invitation. ”There was no reason for him to be here according to Timoney’s boss,” said Gelber. “He was drawn into taking sides in a political squabble and is probably sorry he ever got involved. So what do you have for us tonight, Mary?”
Resident Bill Carey also questioned why a sheriff’s deputy was present at the August board meeting. “Didn’t you take your medication that night?” he asked Cahill. He also complained about Timoney being at the previous meeting.”He (Timoney) sat there and debated people in the audience. That’s wrong. There is no way he should have been here.”
Resident Barbara Rogers said Cahill was within her rights to bring in the deputy but called Timoney confrontational and said she planned to go to Timoney’s board and complain. “It was pure bullying,” she said, claiming that some of his statements were libelous. “I won’t be bullied. We deserve an apology from the general manager.”
Resident Paula Springer, on the other hand, asked why members of the audience were going back to an old topic. “Your job is to protect us,” she said to the board. “I’m glad the sheriff was here. I support Timoney being here. I thought he had some good points.”
Gerald Lillpop refuted Springer, claiming that Mr. Timoney’s presence at the meeting was out of line and “(Timoney’s) boss said so.” Stating that Cahill “owes us an apology,” he said he was disgusted the board allowed Timoney to chastise the board’s critics.
Cahill later responded to comments about the deputy by saying he was there to watch the meeting after feelings were expressed by staff, public and board members about safety. “It’s serious and we have to act on their concerns,” she said.
Shiva said she supported Cahill’s action but wasn’t certain what the deputy’s role was and didn’t know why he was there. Board members Greg Stanton and Scott McNeil said they supported the deputy being present for purposes of order. Cahill promised that in the future, the reason for such actions would be made clearer.
Adding fuel to the existing fire were proposals Wednesday night to make revisions to existing policies governing the public’s conduct at board meetings.
A short memo from Cahill outlined several items up for consideration including a ban on profanity at board meetings; defining what constitutes unacceptable language on signs; and a suggestion that “time periods allotted for public comments be moved to the end of the agenda during the next … board meeting whenever the Board has adjourned its previous meeting prior to fully considering all items on its entire agenda.” This would effectively require the public to wait until the wee hours of the night to comment on topics.
In addition the memo recommended that five minutes be allotted to each speaker and a maximum of 20 minutes be allowed for each subject matter.
Instead, board member Sean Tucker suggested adopting the county policy on public testimony which limits individual comments to three minutes with a maximum of 20 minutes allowed per topic.
In response to this proposal, several residents complained that there were too many items on the agenda. Carey noted that, “you talk for an hour about chickens but want to take two minutes away from us.”
After a discussion, members of the board directed staff to come back with a final draft of a policy in which public comments would be limited to three minutes per person per topic. The board vote on this action was 4-1 with President Shiva Frentzen voting no.
A majority of the board also voted to ban all profanity at meetings.
Contact Dawn Hodson at 530-344-5071 or dhodson@mtdemocrat.net. Follow @DHodsonMtDemo on Twitter.
The Mountain Democrat does not necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy
Evelyn VeerkampOctober 22, 2012 - 7:46 am
PROFANITY: a) List all "bad words" used to date. b) List all future proscribed "bad words". c) Things must be really rough at CPCSD! ********** MOVING PUBLIC COMMENT TO END OF AGENDA = Constituents as a Disposable Nuisance
Jim RiordanOctober 22, 2012 - 11:47 am
Evelyn. I believe Sean Tucker is correct in limiting 3 minutes per person for comments with 20 minutes total per subject. This is fairly common at many public and private board meetings as it allows a maximum of 6 people to present well-articulated, short yet poignant thoughts and constructive suggestions. My concerns are that the oft mentioned "group of citizens" are continually rebutted with pure nonsense from an, in my opinion, thoroughly incompetent manager. I have no problem with a Deputy reading, playing with his phone or whatever he chooses to do so long as he keeps peace if needed. I repeat if needed. I personally doubt that a Deputy was ever truly needed, but was instead used as a pawn by a manager trying to take the heat off her incompetence by suggesting she “feared” for their well-being. What a crock. If this “manager” actually had EVER provided articulate, accurate and intelligent answers with actual SOLUTIONS instead of lame BS excuses, perhaps she would not be deemed incompetent and arrogant to the “group of citizens” who are seeking straightforward answers that actually make business sense to those paying the bills. There is absolutely no viable excuse from that, in my opinion, loser Cahill for not having a marketing plan firmly in place by now. And, no excuse why the seated Board members have not called her on that by now. They are called a board of “directors” to provide , well, DIRECTION. In summary , from what I hear, have read and have seen, (until I could no longer sit through it), we have a Board of “directors” which have no idea of how to direct, being directed themselves by a manager who could not manage a two car funeral, spending every meeting fighting with citizens who are simply fed up with all of them, instead of actually doing the business of the CSD which is clearly failing under the watch of all of them. The best thing that the directors could do would be to GIVE THE MANAGER REAL DIRECTION and then a limited time in which to accomplish their goals. I do not believe Cahill is capable of that. A REAL GM would have had a basic marketing plan in place within a couple months of her date of hire. She would have realized the folly of running off the man who actually made the CSD money with Ribstock instead of trying to take his idea and think she could do better. She can’t. Her basic initial plan should have included renting out every available room and facility at the CSD. Instead, she ran off the renters and has not replaced them. So, the reason every meeting is a mess and accomplishes nothing is because the Directors are not DIRECTING and the manager is not managing. Period. Fix that and you will have no need for deputies at any meeting. Further, I have demanded several times now to see Mr. Biegler’s billing statements and have yet to see one. Are you listening CAHILL?? So if you want less angry citizens , start acting like a real board and start making YOUR “manager” actually manage. Remember “Fillin and Billin.” Start making actual progress and I believe you will see a more responsive and less hostile “group of citizens. “
Evelyn VeerkampOctober 22, 2012 - 12:03 pm
Hi Jim. I have no problem with the 3-minute time limit. You're right; it is common. But to put public comment AT THE END OF THE AGENDA is uncommon and sends a clear message.
ConcernedOctober 22, 2012 - 4:23 pm
Jim, I can not believe what Im about to say but I agree with about 90% of what you said. Leadership is indeed missing from the Board. The directors are supposed to direct. Unfortunately the 'group of citizens' have been labeled (by themselves) as malcontents. From what I have witnessed from the few meetings I have attended is that if anyone brought concerns to the GM or to the Board I am convinced that they would at least be considered. Unfortunately this group brings nothing but abstract anger. Now you may say they have reached this point. I would counter that if they truly have the betterment of the district at heart they would change their approach to allow their potential good ideas heard. I still can not believe I have agreed with you....it gives me hope!
Brenda MerschOctober 22, 2012 - 4:33 pm
The Mountain Heapofcrap has reached an all time low point. I can't believe what Dawn has passed off as journalism. Putting a malcontents dribble about the General Manager taking medications? Where has all the hate for CP come from Dawn? Is it from the direction of Editor Mike Rafferty? Is Rafferty so upset that just because he applied for the position of General Manager of CP and was told he didnt have enough experience he would go out of his way to constantly make or promote unfavorable news? Would he really hold a grudge against a community just because he didnt have the knowledge or ability to manage the community? I would like to know this answer. Dawn playing to a small handful of malcontents will not make your paper or your boss profitable, but of course Rafferty always appeared to me as a petty, small, spiteful individual.
ConcernedOctober 22, 2012 - 4:35 pm
I hear Mike R has small hands? Just sayin.
Debbie VollsOctober 22, 2012 - 7:53 pm
Evelyn, I can't blame them for wanting to ban profanity and leaving public comments to the end if citizens cannot be civil. Sure it sends a clear message - don't be so uncivil. Citizens absolutely have the right to speak, but when did it become okay in society to just be angry and mean? The story even mentions a citizen asking "are you off your meds?" That is just uncalled for. I understand why they wanted a deputy there to keep the peace. Brenda, didn't you know? Dawn wrote a series of serious articles about how wonderful the tea baggers are. I don't expect much different from her these days. So much for "journalism" being "fair and balanced."
Jim RiordanOctober 23, 2012 - 10:14 am
Thank you "Concerned". Thank you Evelyn. I fully agree that public comments should never be pushed to the end lest some valuable input that could effect the meeting be lost. I think a big part of the reason for the "harsh words, etc". are due to the feeling of utter rejection by this Board and Manager of logic and basic business principles . . however, I do not agree with the yelling of obscenities, threats et al. What I see is a total standoff which will resolve nothing. Darn Shame.