Kathy Otermat GDPUD Meeting Transcript

TRANSCRIPT1: Special Meeting August 21, 2012 Georgetown Divide Public Utility District
Griffiths 2
Call the meeting to order. Its about 2 minutes after 6. (Pledge of Allegiance) OK, start out, I guess, the #2 on the Agenda is the adoption of the Agenda. Entertain a motion to adopt the Agenda unless there is anyone has anything to add to it? (Moved by Krizl, seconded by Neeley) Moved and seconded to adopt the Agenda as submitted? Public comment? All in favor say Aye. AYE. Now since I have to read this Id better get my glasses on. Public Forum. This is a Special Meeting under Govt Code Sec 54956, and theres a 3 missing from there. Public comment is limited to items appearing on the Agenda, Under Section 54954.3 the public shall have the right to comment on either any items appearing on the Agenda prior to or during consideration of the items. Public comment on items not appearing on the Agenda should be made at the regular meeting of the District. So, would anybody in the public like to comment before we begin? (No comments.) Thats a first! Ok, moving along. ITEM 33 - BOARD MEMBER CONDUCT. Consideration of complaints found by Stationary Engineers Local 39 and district employees concerning removal of private and confidential information from the district office, letter from District Counsel and related issues. Theres a Section A and B basically having to do with this. I guess this came about initially . . . I got a letter via email from Bill Wright regarding Kathy as Treasurer requested some backup information for checks that she was to sign on August 8 th. And as a consequence there was allegations at least of copies or photographs made of personal personnel information, and then of course that left when Kathy left. So, there are several requests, both from the local Union and from our Counsel. Basically this had to do with removal of information, and I think the copy of the letter that Bill wrote is only the first page of that. Its on the back. So maybe the way to do this is just to read that into the record, and this was sent on August 14 th. And this is regarding the removal of confidential information from the GDPUD office, and the letter written by Bill to Kathy Otermat. LETTER: We have received several complaints from GDPUD employees who saw you on Wednesday, August 8, 2012, apparently copying and photographing personal employee information and confidential GDPUD information, which you had requested to review as backup information for checks you signed in your capacity as treasurer of the GDPUD Board of Directors. As you have no authority to remove confidential information from the GDPUD premises, we are extremely concerned about the security of our employees personal information and other confidential GDPUD information. Please provide a written explanation of your purpose in requesting access to the backup information and an explanation and description of what information you copied, transcribed or photographed. Please also provide a copy of every piece of information that you transcribed, either electronically or by hand, and provide copies of all photographs you took at the GDPUD office on August 8. In addition, please provide an explanation, description and copies of all employee information,
Transcript: GDPUD Special Meeting August 21, 2012
-1-
invoices, and other documentation you have requested as backup in your capacity as treasurer of the Board, which you have copied, transcribed or photographed in the GDPUD office at any time in the past. - This is written by Bill Wright. On the 13th there was apparently received a letter 4 - and I didnt get a copy until sometime later from Chuck Thiel from the Stationary Engineers Local 39 International Union of Operating Engineers AFL-CIO, and this is addressed to the Board of Directors. LETTER: It has been brought to our attention that on August 8, 2012, Ms. Kathy Ottermat (sic), in her capacity as Treasurer of the Georgetown Divide Public Utility District, took photographs with her personal camera, pictures of documents containing employee social security numbers and other sensitive data protected by State and Federal privacy laws. Now while within her capacity as Treasurer she may have access to that information, taking personal photographs of this data jeopardizes its security and exposes the District to immense liability. This action, while not illegal, was extremely foolhardy and thwarts the Districts attempts to protect such private information without negating the Districts liability and legal obligation to protect such information. If Ms. Ottermats (sic) camera, SD card or computer are lost, stolen or used by someone other than an authorized District employee (i.e. Photo processor, computer repair service) a data breach will occur and the law requires employer to take certain actions to minimize the possibility of identity theft. I would suggest that the Board of Supervisors5 (sic) consider taking steps to restrict such actions from happening in the future and that Ms. Ottermat (sic) be ordered to destroy all copies of private employee information in her possession immediately. Furthermore, due to this bizarre violation of normal business practices, we are asking the District to take proactive steps to protect employee information through the purchase of an identity theft protection service such as LifeLock. Industry professionals state that a persons identity should be monitored for at least 18 months due to a data beach and the District should purchase such a plan for at least that long. Thank you in advance for taking effective steps to prevent any reoccurrences of this type and taking appropriate action to prevent any harm caused by this data breach of private information. Please notify me of the District intentions no later than September 14, 2012. So as a consequence of this it seems like theres three actions the Board can consider, and how we do this I dont know. But, take steps to destroy or otherwise eliminate all copies of private and employee information. Since this exists in digital form I think thats basically impossible. Second, protect employees by purchasing LifeLock or something equivalent to that, for 18 months. And, then, three, prevent similar actions in the future. So, I guess the question is: What do we want to do with this? The action of purchasing LifeLock or some other thing for the employees to prevent this personal information from ever being released seems in my opinion a minimal thing, and also preventing similar actions in the future.
Neeley6
Could we ask Hank to describe what the employees have had to do or the impact upon them, once they realized that things were being photocopied? Sure. Can we also talk to see if the allegation is even true? Well, the issue is . . . we can go into that, but the issue being, if that was an issue, this is a week later. Its not a week later.
Griffiths Otermat7 Griffiths Otermat
-2-
Male Neeley Otermat Griffiths
Its a week from the time the letter was sent out. I would like us to present everything, and then Kathy rebut everything. Youd rather have the lynching and then the investigation? Yea, lets put this in terms of the most apt to get people throwing brickbats at us. That would certainly help things. (Speaking to Kathy) I didnt do this, you did this. Id like to hear whats happened with the employees. Have they had to make changes, take steps, etc? Can I add to that? Chucks letter talks a little bit about the procedural issues. Talk a little bit, if you would, about the liability concerns that the District has and why the District has to take certain steps to protect the employees in the event of a possible breach of their personal information and security. And the responsibility that the District has to take in order to minimize that, in order to protect the District, and the employees. I think Bill can speak to the legal requirements of the District protecting the employees. But if there is a security breach, the District is required to take certain steps. What has happened at this point is some employees have signed up for LifeLock coverage. Reports have come back to me of flagging their bank accounts or freezing their bank accounts or savings accounts, or other activities that they may have spoken to me, include contact with PERS to just get information about what could happen. I havent kept a log of everything every individual has done. We have met several times to discuss what their actions may be. And if the employees would like to comment on the different things they have done, that would be fine. Thats what I know at this point in time. When I was Treasurer and signed checks, similar to what Kathy is doing now, I never asked for the backup for the personal employee deduction stuff because I thought that was kind of their private . . . So the three particular checks that some of the employees told me concern them is, one to Aflac which handles the insurance separate from what the District provides. Employees are entitled to sign up for additional stuff if they pay for it. The checks in question were the District forwarding to the Union the insurance or PERS the employee deductions, so this was not the Districts money going out the door. This was our responsibility to pay for all the things that are deducted from the employees checks. When I came in to see what the invoices looked like to have some idea of what were talking about Is it a big thing, a little thing? for example, one of the invoices to the insurance showed each persons name, their social security number, the kind of insurance they wanted, and then the charge. And, so, I think the alarming part to employees, without knowing what, if or why, is that social security numbers and their name, once leaked, never really come back. They can be sold, people can do things. I mean, its scary, because with computers you dont know what can be done. Maybe nothing can be done. Maybe she just took it and took it home, but what if? And so, the biggest question is What if? What if somehow the information slipped out? because each of the forms showed exactly the person, the kind of insurance, even their accounts for additional retirement separate from PERS. Like we talked about in the past about people questioning bills, ICMA account, thats a separate retirement thing that he contributes to, but we forward his deduction. So one of the checks was to a company that handles these various additional retirement accounts. Again, social security number, name and the amount the person is contributing to these various kinds of things. So even if the information is never leaked, thats very private. People expect that information to be protected. I think half the employer laws require that we protect certain things. We certainly dont give out social security numbers and names and lists. I understand some of the employees are really nervous because some of them have been stuck in this situation before where an ex-wife or an exfriend or something gets mad at you, takes your information, messes with your credit. So its just the
Neeley Krizl8
White9
Neeley
-3-
possibility that makes everybody nervous, and having no insurance. And once something gets in the computer world, as I understand it, and Im not very good at it, I mean its there. So even if information is returned, what does that mean?
Podsedly10
Can we find out what happened? This is crazy. (Considerable audience disquiet about not knowing the charges.) She took pictures of the attachments to checks. Its alleged, but we dont know what actually happened. She should have been asked, at the time. This is stupid. Hang on. I would like to hear from our County Counsel, and then Kathy can . . . Does he (Counsel) represent her, or the Board? No, he represents the Board, and the organization, not HER. We heard his allegation, through the letter. Lets find out what happened. If it happened. Well, whats the big rush? (A lot of audience cross-talk, dissatisfaction about already having condemned Kathy.) This isnt a court of law, so I dont think its possible to determine that, but, could I hear the legal obligations of the District? We received three different complaints arising out of Ms. Otermats review of those records on Wednesday, August 8, 2012. And so, in looking at what the employees saw, it gave me concern, because of potential legal liability. The allegations were that she copied at least one document, possibly more, and that she was transcribing information from these documents. And when I talked to Hank about the kind of information thats included in these documents, theres social security numbers, theres health information. So we could possibility have issues. Theres personal information such as if someones account has a liens filed on it and things like that. Theres a lot of very personal information, some of the information of which were required by law to keep confidential, keep private. We have a duty to keep that information confidential because of the whole identity theft issue. California is one of the states that has specific laws that govern that and require us to keep that kind of information protected. So I wrote a letter. The allegations came in on Thursday. 13 I was out on Friday. On Monday I sent Ms. Otermat a letter asking for an explanation of what happened. What did she take? Send me a copy of what records you copied. Send me a copy of what you transcribed, so that we could try and assess the situation and how serious it was. Two days later I received a response saying Its going to take me a while to gather that information. I responded back saying This is very important information. We need to try and get it as quickly as possible. A whole week goes by and we still havent received any information. Then it was determined that we need to have a Special Meeting to try and address this, to consider the issue of providing LifeLock and some of these other things, because this is the kind of thing that you have to act quickly on. Unfortunately I never received a response back on what information was taken. I still have not received a response back on what information was taken. If we had received a response back on what information was taken, then we might have taken a different course of conduct, and it may have been that this Board action wasnt necessary. But not having received a response, we have to assume the worst, that there was some kind of breach. If she was transcribing information and taking pictures of information that has social security numbers, then we are duty bound under the Code to take appropriate action to try and prevent that breach, because even though obviously certain
Neeley Unk. male
Griffiths Miller 11 Griffiths Unk. male. Podsedley Griffiths
Wright12
-4-
confidential employees and members will have access to that information in performing their duties sometimes they have to see that information - that information should never leave the District office, and it certainly shouldnt be transcribed into a computer or something like that. So thats the concern. And not having received a response, not knowing how serious the breach was, we decided we needed to schedule a Special Meeting so that the Board could take appropriate action, and to provide the employees with LifeLock or some other protection. At this point you have to sort of assume the worst, that confidential information was taken. So thats part of what were trying to assess right now. The information that I asked for was: What information was taken? Please provide me with a copy. Provide me with a copy of what you transcribed. Provide me with a copy of what you photographed. Provide me with a copy of what you have ever transcribed or photographed in reviewing backup information as the District Treasurer, so that we can have some kind of a record of all the information thats ever been transcribed or copied in that capacity. I guess we can hear and get a response back as far as what information it was. I did not receive a response last week. And as it came into a new week we felt that time was important and something had to happen, and so we decided to schedule a Special Meeting to address the issue.
Griffiths Otermat
OK. Thanks. Kathy, take it away. (Passes out documents) Please share if theres not enough. On August 10 th I came in to sign a few checks as Treasurer of GDPUD. The previous day was a Board Meeting, and I understand Bonnie Neeley signed the book that day. So there was a very few amount of checks, Im guessing, five or six. I dont remember. I have never ever either copied, typed, written or photographed any confidential employee information, nor passed on or kept such information. Period. I have never asked for personnel backup. When I became Treasurer, Mary Pat provided me with backup for signing each check. And if there wasnt an invoice of something I would say Theres no backup and she would politely and quickly give me the invoice or the bill so that I could match the check amount with the invoice of the bill. On August 10 th Bill Wright is correct. I took ONE photograph. The photograph I took was of the notations of a PG&E bill that Mary Pat said was each PG&E bill. Why did I take a picture? Because I noticed that ALT is 3 times the amount of power at Walton Lake. And for future analysis I wanted to find out why, and especially because were building a new treatment plant, with possibly some power efficiency that we could look into. This is the one and only photo I took. I never know if the photograph Im going to take is going to be clearly written, so I quickly put some notes into my IPad. And these are the notes transcribed from my IPad. I welcome an investigation, because this is exactly what I put in my IPad. So I typed these totals for the PG&E bills for Walton Lake and Auburn Lake Trails. And as I was going through the stack of bills, one of the things I noticed is, in the past when Hank White has provided salary history for all employees, he provides it by name. And I have this on my website 14. And many people in this room have heard me say, not in the Board Room, it bothers me that theres names on here. I saw a place where there were names and their positions. So this is the next set of notes I took. For example, District Operator one Barbour. (Several words unclear) positions instead of their names. That was the reason for those notes. On Calpers theres more detail in the backup than there is in the Board packet. I should know at the back of my hand how many people are on which plan, which employees, and how much our annual total payments are from the District from the employees and be able to compare it. So thats why I took these notes. And then I just emailed them to me from my IPad. So those are those notes. When Mr. Wright sent me the first email and the last section is actually the historical timeline of what has happened. So on August 10 th I came in to sign (unclear) checks and it tells exactly the one photo I took and the notes I provided you. Correction: the 8 th. The next communication I received was from Bill Wright on August 14 th. I believe I may be the only Board Member with a full-time day job, and last week was very very busy, morning until late at night. So Bill sent me the letter, and as I tell you, I know I NEVER have taken any personal employee information from here, I wasnt concerned about that. I was more concerned about the process. Shouldnt it have come from the
-5-
Board President? Thats one of the reasons I ran. Theres a lack of policies and procedures here. So I get this email from Bill Wright saying that he received several employee complaints. There were two employees in the room, plus I believe a summer hire in the room when I was there. And I heard Mary Pats voice and I heard Hanks voice. I cant remember, but it was a pretty quick in and out. I dont recall ever seeing Hank or Mary Pat walking through. So when Bill sent this to me I thought Here is another glaring example of lack of procedures and policies, how to handle Board complaints. If you look at the Board Code of Ethics it doesnt really follow that. It doesnt follow the Union grievance procedures. So what kind of procedures are documented to handle something like this? And thats, having a busy work week, thats why I needed some time. I responded to Bill on the 16th saying I wanted to let you know I received your email. It raises several issues for me and I need to take the time to respond. The issues were lack of policies and procedures, including how to handle an employee complaint. On the next day I sent an email to Bill Wright asking him to please provide me a copy of each employee complaint so I can respond properly. I believe as an attorney he would believe it Due Process to fail to see what your allegations are before youre required to respond. And I have shown this to other attorneys that do represent other water districts. I received no response at all from Mr. Wright on my request for a copy of the complaints.
Wright Otermat
Yes, you did. 15 (resumes after puzzled response to Wright) On the 19 th Ray Griffiths sent an email to all Directors concerning a meeting on August 21 st somewhere between 9am and 5pm. Does anyone have conflicts on the day, and if so, when? Again, I believe Im the only Board Director that has a more than full-time day job. (interrupting Kathy) We dont care about your full-time job. (Appealed to President to please control.) I guess you dont want to. Kathy, dont put words in my mouth. Thank you. If you want to sit here and run the meeting you can if youre elected to do that, but otherwise youre a Board Member. And to say that Im guilty of not running the Board, well, guess what? Sometimes theres outbursts, and theres nothing I can do about it. Sorry, but youre going to have to live with it, just like I live with it. Sometimes the audience isnt completely under control. If you can figure out a way to do that, I would like to know. Im sure other Board Presidents would like to know - how to keep the audience from ever uttering something that is . . . Lets end it right there. Go ahead. Well usually when they . . . (cross talk) Alright, I got another email from Ray Griffiths saying to schedule between 10am and 12 on Tuesday today. Topic will be response to the Union letter regarding confidential security breakdown. I responded to Ray that during my time as a Board Member there has never been a Special Meeting held during the day. And he knew at that time that I had a full-time day job and would not be able to attend, should it be held during the day. I was actually very pleased to find out that yesterday that Hank White sent an email saying that the Special Meeting schedule had been changed to 6pm. When I got the Board packet for the meeting it was the very very first time I saw the Union letter, even though it was dated August 13 th. Someone could easily have forwarded that to me, but I received it in the Board packet like everyone else. (interruption) (Griffiths?) Lets get to the point. (Neeley) Its very difficult to hear when you are making comments. If everyone could speak it would make it easier. And it would be appropriate for the President to say something.
R. Beck16 Otermat Griffiths Griffiths
Otermat
Griffiths?
West17
-6-
Otermat
This matter, being private in nature, it should have been investigated before being distributed to the general public. If this had been an employee, do you think this letter would have been at the Georgetown Post Office posted by the Board of the Clerk, GM Hank White, or the Garden Valley Post Office, by the Board of the Clerk, Hank White? Which says: It has been brought to our attention that Ms. Otermat in her capacity TOOK photographs this isnt allegedly this is a FACT that they are mistakenly writing. The allegations against me are potentially serious, and even though I completely dispute these claims, it is impossible to unring the bell, as they say. In other words, once these allegations are made in public, even when proving them fails, as I know they will, restoring my reputation later is difficult, at best. To ensure the Board members have the right and obligation to investigate this, I absolutely encourage these investigations. I encourage a fact-finding information, not only on the allegations, but also on the PROCESS. Some employees made false allegations which they cannot prove. What happens to them? What happens to a Board President and a General Manager and Legal Counsel who choose to ignore the possibility that I am completely innocent of these allegations? That is another investigation I would like. I did my timeline. When were conversations started between employees? Employees to the General Manager? General Manager to the Legal Counsel and the Board President? Where is the process documented on this is how we handle a complaint against a Board member? We put it in public places, post offices, and then at the public meeting is the only time a that Board member is allowed to address these allegations. Is that the correct way it should be done? Kathy, we dont have a policy about correcting a board member about this kind of thing because weve never had a board member who created a security breach. And I dont think distracting us with your too much work or policy, or we dont have this or we dont have that, none of it changes the fact that employees claim they saw you do something which was serious and concerned them all. Can the employees prove that? I know they cant, because the one picture Mr. Wright said I took is the one of the PG&E notes. No one here is giving me the benefit of the doubt. Bonnie Neeley, I swear on my mothers grave, I have NEVER taken any confidential employee information from this building or any other place it could be. I have asked Whats the motivation for the employees involved in the complaint? Whats the motivation for the General Counsel and the General Manager for proceeding with these? Next month at our regular Board Meeting I do have agenda items on false statements made by the General Manager. But I have backup. I have backup for these. Could that be one reason why this was so rushed that I just got notice yesterday at 2:30 that there would be a public meeting today? What is the penalty for false accusations against a Director? Or how about harassment of a Director? Ive never stated these in public, but there have been false complaints about my property sent to the El Dorado County Planning Commission. I have had raw meat thrown into my car on hot summer days. All this started once the recall started. Is it a coincidence? Perhaps. What qualifies as a legitimate complaint? These are questions that I hope not only as Ive said, I welcome the investigation regarding these allegations, but I also request that the Board also do an investigation as to the whole process, how it got to the one day where I signed checks in my usual capacity, the same backup I never asked for anything special. I took the picture of the PG&E bill. I presume that perhaps some employees got together and said Ah, she took a picture! and they went back and said Oh look, theres social security numbers. I ignore social security numbers. As Ive said, I welcome the investigation. I welcome anyone looking at my IPhone, my IPad. They will find nothing. Thank you. OK, its kind of like (chuckle) proving a negative, which is pretty much impossible, and Im certain that this Board does not have the capacity to actually do an investigation. And in any case the law, if theres an issue with the law, I think its between the District, not with an individual Director. I think the liability is to the District. (Wright: Correct) Any individual has no liability, and you know I were probably not going to do an investigation cause the GDPUD Board does not have police
Neeley
Otermat
Griffiths
-7-
powers, so we cant break into someones house and search it. With this kind of information how would we search for it anyway? I dont know how to do it. I would feel incompetent doing it. So I guess the question is, Does the GDPUD Board have an obligation to take an action on the allegations?
Wright
I just want to say, first of all, that the allegations, Kathy, are in fact true. The allegations were that you were transcribing information from the backup data and photographing at least one photograph. Of the PG&E . . . Thats what the allegations were. The employees said that they didnt know what the information was. So it would have been very helpful if, when you first responded to me where you said, I want to let you know that Ive received your email. It raises several issues that I need to take time to respond to. I will respond in a few days, as this week has been extremely busy. It would have been very helpful if you had said, I did not take any personal confidential employee information. You did not say that. Your email to me raised a red flag. That, to me, was a problem. She didnt deny the allegations in my letter. The letter did not say . . . The letter said that you were allegedly, you know, that you may have taken, OK? We didnt KNOW what you took. We knew that you were transcribing information. We knew that there were social security numbers and other private confidential information contained within that data. We didnt know. So you didnt respond to that. You just said Its going to take me a while to get back to you. That to me says to me what? - this is complicated. There was some kind of information that was taken, and that information, we dont know exactly what it is. She is not denying that it was confidential information. So my response was then, its important that we get your response ASAP as the employees are very concerned. And then you asked me to forward you a copy of the employees complaint. Well the employees complaints were really irrelevant at that point in time. The employee complaints raised the issue that information was being transcribed. It was then up to the District to try and find out what information was transcribed, which they did by sending you a letter asking you to explain what that information was. We never got that. Then I sent another one that says, You need to respond to my letter and the issues raised in my letter and you need to do it immediately. As Counsel for the District Im asking you to respond to the allegations that you copied their personal information. The District needs to know what information you copied on the 8 th and what information you have copied in the past. So, that was the email chain. Now I agree, I dont think the District is going to launch a full big investigation. Its not worth the time and effort. Youre not going to hire an investigator. Frankly I wouldnt recommend that you go out and spend that kind of time and effort and money to do it. I do think that we should still, as part of the investigation - you welcome an investigation - well lets get your response to the issues raised in my letter in writing. I believe . . . Well, we still dont have the past information. Lets find out what all the information is that you transcribed then. If you could submit it and say that this is the information that I transcribed, you know, whatever information you transcribed in the past, or items youve copied in the past in that function. So if you would respond to my letter then thats a first step and we could address where to go from there. And then I think its up to the Board to consider what other actions you might want to take, if you feel the need to provide LifeLock or something. If I could just make a quick comment. When the Board considers the investigation, they should also know the copy of the PG&E invoice that was provided that day was not provided as a portion of the backup that was provided the day the checks were signed. This particular invoice was paid the day before18, on the Board meeting, so this check was already mailed, in the mail. What was provided
Otermat Wright
Otermat Wright
White
-8-
was documentation for a payment to American Family Life Insurance, the Calif. State Disbursement Unit, Franchise Tax Board, ICMA, Local 39, and PERS. So there was no information that would have been available for a picture on the 8 th when Director Otermat . . .
Otermat
How would I have got that picture, since I wasnt even here on the 7 th? How would I have taken that picture, Mr. Wright. Do you guys make copies of the checks before you mail them to see signature line on the checks? Can we see the copies of the PG&E bill? Im stating to the Board the fact that this was not provided to you on the 8 th when you were here signing checks. It was, because I took it. How else could I have gotten access to that picture that I took, Mr. Wright? This is a very important question. How could I have gotten access to this PG&E photo? There are two ways to prove it. Copy of the signature line from the bank, certified, is probably the best way. My signature will be on that check to PG&E. Otherwise, this isnt something I could have whipped out the air. This was here when I signed the checks. This check was written on . . . It may have been written, but it was signed by me on that date. It would be very easy to get a certified copy from the bank. Very very easy. And I encourage you to do that, please. Because that, again, is false information provided by the General Manager. It was there in front of me, its on my ICamera (with photos before and after), which I cannot change the time sequence. Kathy, youre smart enough to probably create anything you want. Of course! OK, we have another Board Member that wants to . . . Well get comments from everybody . . . Oh, I can see this lasting hours and hours . . . OK. Im saving my comments for later, but I think weve heard a little bit about the procedural aspects of this, some of the background of this. Weve heard Kathys story. I think we ought to give the employees that witnessed this an opportunity to say what they have to say so that we can clearly get both sides of this. They were the ones that saw it, so . . . If there is anyone that would like to comment that would be fine. Im Dolores Barron and Ive been working for the Water District for over 22 years. I do payroll, and Ive done payroll. I provide the backup for her. There was no PG&E bill in there. It was only payroll deduction checks. So where you got it, you had it from somewhere else, cause it wasnt from me. I cant even walk past the reception desk. How could I have gotten access to that? I dont know how you got it, but you didnt get it from me, and Im the one that called you to come in and sign those checks and gave you the backup. And I put it on the desk and had you sit right there. And I never moved from there. Then you took a picture of something else.
White
Otermat
White Otermat
Neeley Otermat Griffiths
Krizl
Griffiths Barron19
Otermat Barron
Otermat Barron
-9-
Beck
Kathy, youve come in and taken pictures of Verizon bills and all kinds of things on other days. You know, that could have been from any date you were in here. The documentation doesnt lie. That was not in the paperwork that day. The documentation will lie if you get a certified copy from the bank on the signature line of that check. OK. Great. This is getting more and more confusing to me, but . . . I wanted to follow up on my comment a minute ago. I dont know if theres . . . I know theres been some testimony put together by a handful of employees that witnessed this, and I dont know if somebody wants to read that into the record. I think thats important. I think we need to hear all of it and then well have some discussion, and then have the opportunity for the public to participate. This is what you gave Hank? The day that it happened and we talked to Hank and Mary Pat right away because we were concerned about the information that was in that paperwork, I didnt even know at first what the information was. We just knew that she was spending a lot of time. She wasnt in and out of here in five minutes like she usually is when she comes in and signs some checks. She spent approximately a half an hour in here transcribing into her computer and flipping pages as she went. Where I got really stressed is after she left and Dolly and I both looked at each other and I said What was all that stuff? And she said, That was all the employees private information. Things that Mary Pat, Hank and Dolly are only able to see that we keep in lock and key. Youve come in and signed checks many times before and have been in and out of here in five minutes. Why did you find it necessary to bring in a camera and your laptop and transcribe page after page into your laptop? I have personally kept (unclear). Hank, after it happened, asked all three of us to write a statement, separate from each other and to not talk to each other and get any opinions from each other. We each transcribed separately from each other what we saw that day. Who was the third person? I know you and Dolores . . . Kathy, let her make her statement. Maybe shes afraid to say who she is. STATEMENT21: Kathy Otermat came in today to sign checks and I am extremely concerned about what I witnessed. As she was signing checks she was taking pictures of invoices and typing information into her computer. She spent a considerable amount of time typing and taking pictures that had sensitive employee information on it. She is given support with the checks attached so why is it necessary to put that information on her computer and leave the building with it? I have personally been a witness to her leaving behind that very same computer and coming back much later on in the day looking for it! Because of her misplacing the laptop already, I question the security of the GDPUD employees information and I am upset that she would put our information at risk! I want to know if this is legal? From my years in banking, I know how devastating it can be if someone gets a hold of sensitive information like social security numbers financially and personally. Fraud can have horrific long lasting consequences to a persons life.
Otermat
Griffiths Krizl
Griffiths
Neeley Beck20
Otermat Griffiths Neeley Beck
- 10 -
As a Director of GDPUD I understand that she needs to see the information because she is signing the checks. But I am concerned that what she did today has the ability to compromise the employees of this District which could have long lasting consequences.
Beck
So my question goes back to you, Kathy, many times youve come in and signed those same checks. That day you spent over a half an hour typing stuff into your computer and taking pictures. How were we to know what information that you took out of here when all of that stuff is confidential employee information? You know, you say youre taking a picture of documentation that wasnt even there. So that is just crazy to me. But then you say its because you were wanting to ask the questions later about it. You have five employees at your fingertips. One being Dolores, who was right there, who gave you the support, and the checks to be able to ask that question, or you could demand to see Mary Pat or Hank and ask that information. You never once asked anybody information. Why is it necessary to take pictures of that? (Considerable intermittent audience disquiet) Youre correct about your statement that this is really serious. It is really serious. Its really serious to us. You affected our lives outside of this District by having to protect our personal information because you wouldnt come forward to tell anybody what you took. Is there is a penalty for a Director for lying and not telling the truth? Thats what I want to know. I need to respond to these questions. (Big sigh from chairman) I am providing honest answers. Stephanie, I sit in the middle and I sign checks. Dolores is here, Stephanie is here. If they had any concern while I was taking that one photograph or taking notes you could have also asked me, Excuse me. Do you mind if I ask for your transcribing? Any time. (Interjection) An employee doesnt challenge a Board member. (Continues) As I said, I never took any, and you cannot prove it. I would welcome it if they want to look on my camera for that one photo or on my computer. Please let me talk. I let you speak. You shut me off. (Interrupted throughout) Please let me talk. You also say computer. I did not come in with my computer. I came in with my IPad. An IPad is not a computer. Please let me finish. I let you finish, Stephanie, please. Please will you let me finish? Its really difficult to sit here and listen to you, Kathy, because . . . Its very difficult for me, but I let you speak. Thank you. An IPad, the keyboard is not a keyboard. Its like typing ugh ugh ugh Lets not get into the details, cause I dont care and I dont know. Typing on my IPad takes longer than usual and you could verify that with anyone who owns an IPad. (Significant disruption and shouting throughout Kathys input)
Otermat
Neeley Otermat
Beck Otermat
Griffiths Otermat
Miller
Can you take control of the employees and the audience, please? Tell everybody to shut up and let her be heard. (More chaotic frustration - back and forth.) Our private information that you took out of this building . . . I never took it . . . For the record, I have never taken it. You can never prove it, because I have never taken it. (More of the chaotic you did/I didnt) Im not that tech savvy that . . . Does anyone else on the Board have something that they would like to add to this? Cause this he
- 11 -
Beck Otermat
Griffiths
said/she said, whatever, is not working . . . We really dont know. We have no way of proving it.
Otermat Griffiths Otermat Griffiths Otermat Neeley
Mr. President, a certified copy of that Wells Fargo check, or whatever, could say . . . It wouldnt say anything to me. It would say that I . . . It will not prove anything to me. Does it not make logic that if I signed the check that I would have seen backup? Mr. President, I move that since we cant prove one way or another, or havent been able or wont, or whatever words you want to use, I move that at least for the short term we remove Kathy Otermat as Treasurer until we further have done whatever and that we remove her from any signature activity she may have as a Board member. Weve had a motion, we havent had a second. Ill second. Its been moved and seconded. Now, we can have discussion. Well start with Dale, then . . . Excuse me, I was called on. Thank you. Ive been waiting. The whole process here has been way out of whack. (Griffiths: Youre right about that.) You started off, and immediately the letters that Im seeing here arent allegations. They say TOOK photographs, pictures of documents containing employee security information, yada yada yada. Stephanie says that theres no way of knowing, so instead they assumed. This has been . . . youve got employees obviously that do not like Kathy. Youve got to take that into consideration. And youve got to take into consideration that Kathy probably does not like those . . . you know. And who had their hands on sensitive information? Did the employees, or did Kathy? So you take that into consideration. When youve had past incidents, because you have no policy on how to proceed with something like this. In past youve already got where youve had a General Manager caught taking equipment home and using . . . whatever. Youve had a Board member that was taking ditch water. All of this is personnel issues and was done behind closed doors to the satisfaction of the Board, and they made a decision, and they took care of their personnel. Why is this one incident being blown so far out of proportion? I understand security. But I also understand the process. If I were Kathy Id be scared shitless, and Id be talking with lawyers about what Im supposed to say, because with whats been going on, I dont think Im going to get a fair shake. I dont think Kathy feels shes going to get a fair shake. So you come in here. You knew Bonnie was going to say take Kathy off as Treasurer. You knew thats happening. So this was a foregone conclusion. Bill, you do your job. You do the best you can. But youre not the Board. When the Union goes to Bill for decisions that the Board should be making, and Im following what you gave us today - Oh I didnt find out until after Bill emailed us about this, is the time frame correct? Monday or something, way after, and decisions were being made to have these meetings, to have Kathy respond and so on. I dont disagree that a simple I didnt take any pictures of anything, social security or whatever would have helped a lot. But lacking that, if Im being accused of what theyre saying in here, Im going, Who the heck do I talk to? So there are times when a delay would be appropriate while I get my information about where I stand. This has been a foregone conclusion. Some of the Board I think knew from the get-go what they wanted to happen, what the outcome was.
Griffiths Krizl Griffiths Miller
Griffiths
Miller
- 12 -
I know that some of the employees, because the recall didnt go through, are looking for other issues. (background snickering) Theres assumptions here. Theres assumptions that because I spent so much time with the information I must be doing something wrong. And the Board is essentially agreeing to that and adding to that. So my question would be, following this, are you guys going to put any process together for future reference so that this doesnt happen again? And personnel issues are personnel issues. Even when Hank was being questioned on something several months ago I spoke up for him and said, This is personnel. This should be behind closed doors. You deal with your personnel and your employees . . . its not something that goes into the paper, just because, until we figure out whats going on.
Wright
If the Brown Act allowed us to address this in closed session we would of. It does not. A Board member is not an employee. Its very specific. You do not discuss something like this in closed session. What are you referencing on that, Bill? The Brown Act, Govt Code 900 and following. The Codes very clear. No questions. Could you give me the number please? I will. I dont have it. Do a search on the Brown Act and it will pull it up. What I wanted to say was that you asked for the employees statements and we have not heard the employees statements. Weve heard one employee statement. I thought that was important to do before community discussion, but I was rudely interrupted. So I would still like to hear the other employees. We still havent heard them, and I think that was important to hear before we even opened it up to the public speaking. Because Im here and you called on me, and Im afraid Im not going to have any other time to speak so Ill say what I wanted to say. What he has talked about is understandable. If I was her Id be scared. I wouldnt use the language he used, but I would be worried and scared about what was going on. That email to him, to Bill Wright, did not state any fear. What he read to us about what your comments were it didnt show fear, it didnt show the fact that maybe I want you know, Im feeling nervous, that youre trying to sabotage me, and I want to talk to an attorney before I make any comments. Those type of things would show fear. Thirteen days later, now, from today, from the 8 th to today is 13 days. So 13 days later theyre getting information. 13 days . . . They didnt ask me for information 13 days ago. What I am saying, from now or . . . fine. From the 12th . . . So maybe not the 13 th . The 14th Several days have gone by, and you have not provided any information, which is absolutely unacceptable. The other thing I want you to know is I had a sit down conversation with the District Attorney of El Dorado County today, and Vern stated to me that there is no way that any employee of the county or the state or the federal anybody that would do something like this would get away with it. No way. They would be fired immediately. They would be removed from the premises, and Im assuming which I dont know but Im assuming - Stephanie, you have said that theres three employees that have access to this information if those three employees were to have done what was done on the 8th - taking pictures, transcribe information - would they or would they not be
Unk male Wright Miller Wright Griffiths Bliss22
Otermat Bliss Otermat Bliss
- 13 -
removed from employment? Would there be an employment issue coming up? If these employees took information and left this building with private information, would they not be dismissed from their employment here? At least temporarily.
White Bliss
There would be a very serious employee issue. And yet this doesnt seem to be serious to some people. And I dont understand that at all. When we talk about our county, our state, our federal government those people would immediately call for something to be done. The other thing that was stated from Vern, our District Attorney, is no, it is not an illegal action as of yet; however, who knows what might happen? And as soon as something happens, it is going to go back to the fact that possible information was taken, and then there will be a criminal action done. If any of these employees information has gone out there, there will be a criminal action done. And I dont understand how you can come back several days later and then just say, Oh, this was it. And we all laughed at the fact that you could look at your IPod, or your IPad or your IPhone or whatever Ithing you might have and not know that you can delete anything off of there that you wanted to delete. That just does not make sense to me. And I had a question too. I wrote down the employees said computer, you said IPad. What was that? Which obviously, that went over. The other thing Ive written down is that I have personally, in Board meetings over the last 18 months that Ive been coming to, have seen lies from you, Director Otermat. I have seen it and I have called you on it. From the beginning of the meeting to the end of the meeting, theres discretion (sic) and theres things thats untrue. What you have said at the beginning of the meeting to what you have said at the end of the meeting, and I have stood up, and I have commented: Wait a minute, at the beginning of the meeting you said this, and now youre saying this? So I have seen untruths in a matter of a four-hour time period. And if thats the case in a Board Meeting, then how in the world should anybody trust what you have said? And I absolutely agree with Mr. Wright when he said, Its not an issue of what you took or when you took it or anything else. The fact of it is that you took a picture. You took information. I dont care what it was. I dont care about that at this point. You did it. And if anybody else were to have taken pictures or transcribed information they would be terminated. (Audience applause) And I still would like to hear from any other employees before any public comment. . . . Can I respond? Michelle, you said, If anyone had done those things. And I, for the record, started this meeting saying I have never taken any confidential employee information. And that is the truth. My response to that, because youre talking to me, is how in the world could we believe you on what you did and didnt take? You did take a picture. Period. That is not OK. That is against anything that any district, state, government, any government entity believes in. You took a picture. Period. It doesnt matter what you took a picture of. The fact of it is that you took a picture. You were looking at personal information. There was personal information on the table. You could have taken a picture of Stephanie, for crying out loud. But the fact that you had personal information on the desk and you took a picture I dont care what the picture was. Thats unacceptable. And its absolutely not OK for a Director to do that. Its not OK for an employee to do that. Now I can speak, OK? I took a picture. Mr. White has created a hostile environment for me when I come in here. (Audience uproar dismissive laughter) Isnt that true, that you are very good friends with Mr. White and his wife? That has NOTHING to do with it. Youre the only Board Member that has a full-time job. Those things dont matter, Kathy. They dont matter. Im good friends with Director McCleans son. I know who he is. We grew up together. Were friends. Just because I have a friend of hers doesnt mean that I might agree with everything. Just because I might know Bonnie Neeley doesnt mean
Otermat
Bliss
Otermat
Bliss
- 14 -
that I have to agree with everything she says. And just like, if Im friends with Hank, I dont have to agree with everything he tells me. I have my own brain, and I have my own education to figure things out.
Neeley Otermat Neeley Otermat Neeley Otermat Neeley Otermat Griffiths Podsedly
Kathy, if youre photographing us, have you informed us of that? Its part of the Brown Act. Its allowed. You should read the Brown Act. And you dont have the courtesy to say, Ill be photographing you? Ive done it since my first Board meeting, Bonnie. From Day One you never said, Folks, Id like to do this. Its part of the Brown Act. Its totally allowed. Any member of the public or of the Board . . . Im talking about the courtesy of informing . . . For 18 months I come in every Board meeting with a camera. OK, lets let the public continue then well take all this up. I hope new people are here that never been here before, because obviously we have two different sides, and theres an election coming up, so this is very interesting how this is playing out. You have all these allegations and things well, he said / she said. You know, if I had my important information sitting in front of somebody and theyre taking pictures, Id get up there if they were sitting there and say, What are you doing? Id say, What are you doing? And take that away if I was that concerned. But, no, none of that happened. I mean this is really normal for certain people in the room, so it doesnt surprise me, but new people here that may have come here to see what is going on need to see how slanted it is and how something can be made out of nothing. What I would recommend, that if these people couldnt have taken on their own initiative to stop her from doing what she was doing if they thought it was wrong at the time, just pay for that security thing. The District wastes lots of money. You know, $400 dinners, things like that (audience uproar and denial). Why not just spend the money and protect the employees and get it over with? Why not have Otermat pay? Youre not going to prove anything. New people, you have to see whats going on. I hope this isnt representative of the way things work around here, but . . . I thought we were going to hear from the employees. (continuing after sundry interruptions) So that would be my recommendation. And that way . . . I agree with you, as it so happens, but thats kind of neither here nor there. So new people, listen to whats going on. Yes, Maam. Hi, my name is Kayla. And, Kathy, though Im not officially an employee, I am the summer helper,
R. Beck Podsedly Griffiths Bliss Podsedly Griffiths Podsedly Griffiths Hand23
- 15 -
but the fact is I was there. I saw what happened, just like everybody else.
Otermat Hand
How many photos did I take? You took one photo. But what was that photo? I dont know. I do want to make a couple comments before I read my statement. One thing I want to know is youre coming into this office to sign checks. Why do you need a camera? Why do you need your laptop to record information if youre just coming in here to sign checks? So I can keep in touch with my business. Well that has never made sense to me to this day. Another thing is, you say when you come in here Mr. White makes it a hostile environment for you. OK, what I see when you come in here, you sit next to me, you have your own desk, your own chair, everything at that you request is very neatly put on the table for you, and everyone is nice to you when you come in. I do not see how that is hostile whatsoever. You dont recall when I came in I asked Dolores Were checks signed yesterday? Is that all the checks? I asked Dolores. You dont remember Stephanie Beck, who I did not ask the question, say They were signed yesterday, you know that. You dont remember that? (Considerable audience cross-talk) The speakers at the podium should be allowed to speak. They shouldnt be allowed to ask questions. And others shouldnt be allowed to ask them questions. I agree. So just stick to your statement and well go from there. STATEMENT24: Dear Mr. White, On Wednesday August 8th, 2012, Director Ms. Kathy Othermat (sic) came in to GDPUD to review papers and sign checks. She was here for about 30 mins-45 mins. In that peiod (sic) of time she was taking pictures of and writing down the confindential (sic) information of the business and its employees. After she was done with that she hurryed (sic) out of the office. I feel that what she did was wrong, that she took advantage of her postion (sic) to get personal information. i (sic) am very uneasy about her having everybodys (sic) personal information. There is no reason she would need to know this information on the employees. Her being on the board of directors, we should be able to trust her and not have to be conserned (sic) with whats (sic) shes (sic) going to do. If there is anything that can be done about this incident, please let me know. Thats my statement, and . . . Thank you. Anyone else in the public like to . . . ? STATEMENT25: Kathy Otermat came in to sign payroll checks today. She requires backup detail prior to signing any checks and I agree, but this time I noticed that she was inputting personal information from the back up detail into her laptop. (It wasnt this computer. It was a little black one. And it did have a keyboard. It didnt have touch . . . 26 ) As I watched her sign checks, she did not seem interested in the AFLAC Invoice, but after she signed a couple of checks I noticed that she had activated her phone and took a picture. Im not sure of what because she did pick up her phone from the table, but heard the phone take a picture while she was looking at the ICMA Statement. She then opened up her laptop and started typing a list of possibly the names of employees in the Union from the spreadsheet which also has the employees Social Security Numbers and then proceeded to type in the figures on the PERS Remittance Form into her computer. I feel that this is not necessary or professional behavior for a Director to take personal information
Otermat Hand
Otermat
Wright
Griffiths Hand
Griffiths Barron
- 16 -
that should not leave the premises due to the privacy of District personnel. If that information was put on her website it could be used to commit fraud in the wrong hands.
Griffiths Cooper27
Thank you. Mike, go ahead. This has been an interesting meeting. Theres a couple people I agreed with and a whole bunch of people I havent agreed with. I think this episode has been flawed from the beginning in the nature of the investigation that was conducted. Now Im not faulting Hank or any of the employees. I think what they did follows standard procedure for conducting an investigation. However, they do not have all the tools available to them that a professional investigator has. This should have been turned over to a professional investigator. This is a serious enough offense, if true, that should be looked at by a professional who knows all the ins and outs of how people do and dont keep information. People may THINK they erase information from their computer, but in fact there are ways to retrieve that information. Thats number one. The same is true of a camera. The chip that goes into a camera is very similar to the chip that goes into a computer. OK, the chip thats in an IPod is the same chip thats in that computer or in any other Apple computer. OK, those chips have a very long memory. So, yes, information can be extracted from them, even if people think theyve erased the information. However, what should have been done, and what I have done, with employees in similar situations is you sequester the computer, number one. You sequester the camera, number two, so that the person CANT erase data. That wasnt done. Theres been sufficient time elapsed, that computer could have gone to somebody who CAN erase any traces of data. That phone could have gone to somebody who can do the same thing. You simply replace the chip and you take the old chip out and you destroy it. Its a relatively simple process, but not everybody knows how to do it. Second of all, there should be two concurrent investigations going. One, conducted on a legal basis, because you have potentially a crime that has been committed. Has somebody talked to the DA? They jump all over this kind of stuff. However, their arena is the courtroom, which requires a certain level of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. The second prong of the investigation does not involve the legal authorities. Its conducted in-house, and it does NOT require a preponderance of evidence. Excuse me. It does require a preponderance of evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt. Preponderance of evidence is defined as anything more than 50%. So you now have before you a flawed situation. What do you do to remedy that? Well, you could go back to square one, but I dont think youre going to be very successful, because too much time has elapsed. What I have heard here tonight leaves little or no doubt in my mind what occurred. Now, what was the purpose of photographing any information? I have pondered this since yesterday, having sat in the Board, having been the Treasurer. I cannot think of one legitimate, rational or sane reason why you would want to or photograph any information on the checks that you sign. That information is readily available to you all the time. Theres no reason to take it home. And Im left with a final assumption of, its being taken for some other reason. And whatever that reason is, doesnt matter, youve got a problem, youve got a serious problem. Now I will leave you with this. You are either going to be part of the solution of that problem, or youre going to be part of the problem. Thats the only two choices youve got. Thank you. Yes, sir. My name is Paul West and I live in Greenwood. Sounds like were not going to reach a conclusion as to whether she did something correctly or incorrectly, for all the reasons the gentleman just stated. This business about breach, was the breach taking a picture, or was it taking a picture away from the building? What was the exact breach? Well, the breach would be taking the picture and removing it from the office. Any picture? (Kathy also trying to ask a question)
Griffiths West
Wright West
- 17 -
Wright West Wright West
A picture that involved confidential information. So were never going to know that. Correct (another male also says correct) Its pretty tough to come to a conclusion to convict somebody if were never going to know if anything was done wrong. I suggest that theres nothing you can do about it now. I think in future if you suspect someones doing something then you need to watch them more carefully. You need to take pictures of the person taking pictures. You have to have some kind of evidence to convict somebody. Thank you. In the back, and then . . . youre next. Hi, the names Pat Snelling, and Im quite concerned about this incident. So I talked to Ed, Ed Neff, the County Counsel. I said, If I was on the Board, what would I do? This is very frightening to me. And he said that he couldnt give me legal advice, but this is the procedures that should have been taken. What IS the procedure, thats what he told me, is to ask you, what is the procedure? If there is a question about something that you have to write a check for, and youre unsure, what is the procedure? What is it? Were not going to have questions and answers. Mr. Neff told me . . . Just give us your statement. OK, first of all, on this whole policy thing, youre going to sit down and write a policy that addresses a situation like this that hasnt occurred in 40 years? I think that to get through this meeting people need to make their comments and sit down. Its not a back and forth question and answer process. So just make your statement. What Im saying is, what should have happened? When the Board was established it should have had some kind of procedure, laid out by Mr. Wright to Mr. Hank. How, if she had any questions about the checks that she had to sign, that should be laid out. Theres nothing wrong with saying, Well if I have a question do I have the right to not sign it? And someone back there said the PG&E bill had to be signed right away. Im just saying that if we lay out the procedure and put it down, we wouldnt be having to be paying you 29 umpteen dollars to be here, and we wouldnt have to be having this meeting. Thats all Im saying. We got the cart before the horse here, guys. OK, well, there you are. Go ahead. One of the other things the District Attorney advised was that the next step that should be taken is reporting something to the Grand Jury that would be able to investigate something like this. And that was his advice, well not really his advice, because I just had a conversation with him. The other person that was in the room was (Rob Causeway???) who is the head investigator of the county, or lead investigator in the entire El Dorado County, and he too felt like something had to be done. Legally is what they are concerned of. It was not illegal unless the stuff was used. And as soon as it is used, yes, it becomes an illegal matter. But the process then would be the Grand Jury needs to hear what has gone on, and the Grand Jury needs to do an investigation. And I believe that that is done through the Grand Jury. It is nothing that we have to go out and hire an investigator to do it, which
Griffiths Snelling28
Neeley Snelling Neeley Wright
Snelling
Griffiths Bliss
- 18 -
you guys might know more than me about the Grand Jury. I dont know. But I feel like that was a huge issue. And the other thing that Vern has stated was that the big issue would be social security numbers, and in his point of view social security numbers are an absolute hot commodity on the black market. They get TONS of money for them. And the other important thing to know is that its public knowledge, weve seen it all go around, the tax liens that are against Director Otermat, the money that she owes. Obviously she is in a financial crunch, whereas I mean, people get charged for murder for stuff you know for financial gain. So Im just saying that was another thing that was stated by the District Attorney, the fact that social security numbers are a huge issue, and selling them is a huge issue, and the fact of the matter is, is that well never know. And what if one of theirs were sold, then obviously we can do that, but I cant imagine that at this point she would ever do that because she wouldnt want to be caught now.
Griffiths
Thank you. There was someone in the back. Maria? issue, (Griffiths agrees: No, we dont.) and the only thing you actually have is in the Union contract, and you had a letter from the Union about the complaint, and the complaint is a violation/misapplication of the MOU District rules and regulations governing personnel practices or working conditions. Thats what the grievance coming from the employee would be. It doesnt say what the employee grievance is about, just that they filed one. Once youve filed it they have up to 25 days of investigation to be done before any action is taken, and the General Manager will make the suggestion of what the action would be. But you had 25 days. You only allowed seven in this case. You said it was Tuesday you were notified?
M Capraun30 My question is on your policy, because you dont have a direct policy relating to how to handle this
Otermat Capraun
The 16th Thats the only policy you have, and you really need some policies here. And this is a perfect example. OK. Theres a fresh face. Yes. experiences Ive had since Ive lived up here to see this community torn apart. I read Letters to the Editor and I watch all the stuff thats happening, and . . .
Griffiths
Mendenhall31 This is the first time Ive attended this . . . Its really upsetting. Its really one of the most horrible
Neeley Mendenhall
Would you mind telling us who you are? My name is Kathleen Mendenhall, and I just see Kathy sitting there, and everybodys like its like, wow, youre a felon. And Id better watch out, because if youre behind me - its really this woman is just trying to do community work, and thats what everybody here wants to do. I think its for the community. Isnt it? I mean, is it? . . . I dont know. Is it not for the community? Is everybody here having a really good time sitting here? Its just really upsetting to see somebody accused before there is something . . . Yes, it is a concern. I am so panic-stricken by identity theft that I will not even let anybody know where I live. (laughter) Im terrified of identity theft, and I understand thats a real concern. I have LifeLock. I have everything. But I also know that its really important to get evidence, have hard core evidence. Maybe she made a mistake. Maybe she did a really really really stupid stupid stupid thing by taking a picture, and never never should do that ever again. But to have everybody saying God, Kathys got money problems, maybe shes selling those. Its really bothering me to see somebody sitting there, and youre accusing her of being a thief, right here in front of her face! Im sorry, but if youre going to accuse somebody at least do it behind their back! (more laughter)
- 19 -
West
One thing we put through, if I heard right, is that she signed something on the 8 th. Hank said she didnt. All you have to do is look at the check. Could we at least agree to that? I dont think its quite that simple. I have a copy of the check. It was signed by Kathy Otermat. The check cleared on July 30th. (Tries to speak. Spoken over) The check cleared on July 30th. You did not sign this check in August. This check was signed in July. The bank statement clearly shows the check clearing on July 30, 2012. Whats the amount? $20,497.53. The check cleared on July 30 th. The check was not signed, and the check information was not included in the information you reviewed on August 8 th. (More cross talk and dispute)
Griffiths White Otermat White
Otermat White
Griffiths
(Pounds gavel) This is going to go on and on and on. Does anyone have anything new to say? was found to have altered his ditch system water box to provide the Director with more water than he was paying for, the employees notified management. Management then addressed the issue, and it was resolved without public notice or Special Board Meeting. And Im saying that because I know. I fixed it. I just want to let you know the history of the way it was done and should be done.
B. Capraun32 Yes, I would like to speak. My name is Bill Capraun. I was a GDPUD employee. When a Director
Griffiths Neeley
Thank you. Anyone else? I think that one small difference, well, one big difference with this is that information can go out and that it affects people long term. If youve taken ditch water you dont affect other people. Youve affected the District by losing revenue. But in this case people are afraid that somehow the information will get out, and most of us dont know enough about computers or financial systems to even know whether thats a real or not real fear. But nevertheless fear, nonetheless, and the employees, many of them, have signed up for this LifeLock to protect just in case. But it has farreaching consequences. Thats why its become an issue. Did you have anything? Yea, Id like to say some things. Ive written down a bunch of different notes. Ive listened with great interest in what people have had to say. Ill try to do these in a manner that makes some sense, but Ive jotted them down over the last hour or so. This is not a jury trial. Weve not here to convict somebody. Were not here to send somebody off to jail, or to do any sort of nefarious thing like that. It is in fact very very serious. If I was an employee of the District and I had any concern that my private information had been taken out of the District office and potentially put on a website . . . If you look at Kathys website its filled with all sorts of junk. God only knows what stuff is in there. And the security of that is . . . Theres no way to predict how that stuff is going to get treated, whos going to use it, where its going to end up. If I was an employee Id be very very concerned about that, which is why the District took action to protect the employees. The District had to take action to protect the employees because of liability concerns. If the District did not take action to protect the employees and something does happen and it still could, we dont know thats a fact, we dont
Griffiths Krizl
- 20 -
know exactly what was taken. We do know that she was looking at private information, confidential information, and a photograph was taken, whether it was of that or this or something else, we dont know the answer to that. But if you have cause to be concerned for the protection of the employees resources and their bank accounts . . . as Bill mentioned, this isnt somebody taking water out of a ditch. This is putting peoples lives at risk, their financial lives in jeopardy. This is very serious. The District had to take action. And people keep talking about policy. Heres what the policy is. You dont do this. Thats the policy.
Otermat Krizl Otermat
I didnt do it. (continues) Well, weve got three witnesses that say you did. Three witnesses who were all involved in my recall, except for the young lady whos here for the summer. (continues) Doesnt matter. Theres three witnesses, and youre declining (sic) it. You did admit to taking a picture while you were perusing confidential information regarding District employees. We know that. Youve admitted to that. Youve taken a picture. (Cross-talk with audience)
Krizl
Krizl
(continues) This is a big deal. The District did the absolutely appropriate thing in trying to protect the employees. It notified the employees of the potential breach of security. It contacted our Counsel. He responded. Responded to Kathy. Let her know what was going on and what the questions were. I dont know why it took you seven days with no (stops Kathy from questioning : You can answer when Im done.) . . . I dont know why you didnt answer right away. If in fact you just took a picture and you were absolutely convinced that what the picture you took had no bearing on any confidential information, why wouldnt you reply with an email? You were on email (snaps fingers) lickety split on every other occasion. On this occasion you decided not to answer. You could have said, Look, I took one picture. Heres the picture. Send it over to Bill. Heres all I did. You didnt do that. Can I reply to that? No. Wait until Im done. You can reply when Im done. Somebody said the Board wanted this to happen, and that is absolutely not true. This is a horrific thing for the employees to go through. You know, whether something actually happens with this information breach, we dont know. That could still happen. It may have already happened. We dont know the answer to that. What we do know is something MIGHT have happened, and you have to assume the worst when youre responsible for the welfare of the employees. And thats exactly what Management and Counsel did. And I applaud them for doing that. I think that was absolutely the right thing to do. Somebody talked about . . . Ill wait with that one. To me, this is a matter of trust. Thats what this boils down to. We cannot sit here and nail down exactly what happened. Who did what? When they did what. But we know that something went awry, and its a matter of trust, and Kathy quite frankly, you have not very enthusiastically inspired this Board and this District with a lot of trust. I think you breached that in the past two years. So if people see you taking something out and theyre not sure what it is, they dont trust you. Thats the bottom line here. And thats why the motion and the second are in place. I dont personally trust you to sign these checks. I really dont. You have, in the past few months, as Treasurer, you have voted for the adoption of the Consent Calendar, and part of that Consent Calendar is all of the different invoices. One of those is Bills payment. You refused to sign his check.
Otermat Krizl
- 21 -
Otermat Krizl
Ill answer that. OK. Thats a dereliction of duty in my mind. Youre the Treasurer. You voted to approve that check, and then you refused to sign it as Treasurer, and thats your duty as Treasurer. (Kathy attempts to speak.) Im not done. Youll have a chance. This is a big deal. I applaud you and your friends out here for trying to turn you into the victim in this case. You are hardly the victim in this case. And I will say on behalf of the employees, Shame on you for what youve created here. Whether you took something, you created an air of concern for the employees. Theyve shut down their bank accounts. Theyve had to go and get LifeLock protection for their identity. This is effectively identity theft. Now whether it plays out or not, we dont know. But you have effectively stolen their identity as far as theyre concerned. They dont know that you havent. Can you convince them that you havent by just saying No, I didnt do it? I swear on my mothers grave that I didnt do it. Thats not enough. Youve created an air of concern with the employees. They have literally gone and shut down their bank accounts because of some picture you took that wasnt necessary to begin with. I for one, Im offended by that. These employees have been working here for a long long time, and theyve put a lot of energy into supporting this community, providing a crucial service to this community, and what do you do? You just spit on em. Thats it. Its just like, just to Hell with them, who cares about the employees? You call them names just because some of them were associated with the recall. (Kathy attempts to dissent.) This is wrong. This is not a way to treat employees. This is not a way to gain trust. Its not a way to gain respect, either here at the District or in the community. I would call for the question. Somebody in the back of the room mentioned a little while ago that he believed Kathy Otermat should pay for the LifeLock, and I believe thats absolutely true, that you should pay for all costs incurred with this confusion, but the motion is to remove Kathy Otermat as Treasurer. I dont trust you to be a signatory on financial documents associated with the District at this point. In terms of seriousness, the bank manager suggested . . . I thought I was going to be allowed . . . to Norm. Please let me respond. The bank manager suggested that employees close all accounts. Whether or not it was proved, they felt the possibility of release of information was important. The bank manager said that. Norm, just assume for a minute that everything I provided was actually true. That the notes I took were actually in trying to do my job as best I can as Treasurer and as a member of the Board. It was not a question for Dolores or Stephanie about the new treatment plant. Could they answer why one is three times more and how, in designing the new treatment plant, we could have some power efficiency? I dont think so. Regarding lack of trust and confidence, when I first became a Board Member we had webinars on ethics as well as the Brown Act, and then I also took additional classes through the League of Women Voters in Placerville with Terry Frank besides the onward training. So I had three classes on the Brown Act. I took the receipts to these classes. Director Neeley and yourself were participants in illegal luncheons quorums for multiple years. They were paid for by the business credit card with sometimes a business purpose. Theyre not illegal. Youve been spreading that lie for a year. Let me finish, please. And so immediately I had a lack of trust for both you, Director Neeley, the General Manager who paid for those with the sole Chase credit card that was paid for by the ratepayers. And also ultimately the General Counsel who participated in some. And these were all reviewed by each of the physical classes I took. So regarding lack of trust and confidence, thats when I first had lack of trust or confidence in the situation that I became involved in becoming an
Neeley Otermat Neeley
Otermat
Neeley Otermat
- 22 -
elected Director. You say I have no confidence in the community. I came here without knowing anyone. My husband was the only one that knew I was going to run. I had no support. Eventually people who supported Director Neeley called me up. She said she was going to look into excessive management salaries. She said she was going to look into other things. And so, you say I have no confidence in the community. I believe I have an outpouring of support in the community, done through trying to do the best job I can, trying to do it right, listening to them, responding to them quickly. I try to do my job as best I can. As I mentioned, theres a hostile environment. The recall failed, and do you think I would be stupid enough to try to pull this after recall when all eyes are on me? Absolutely not! Absolutely not. And for some that are out there that may be open minded, I would like them to know that I absolutely mean it. I have never taken any confidential employee information. It is a shame that the investigation was not done correctly, like Mr. Cooper stated. Because I would gladly have welcomed anyone to look at my camera - take it, because I have nothing to hide. The reason it took me not 13 days or whatever to respond to Mr. Wright is because I knew I did nothing wrong. So by seeing an email from Mr. Wright that stated that there were several complaints about me taking away public information . . . I did forward it to several people that I trust that have experience in this area, and they said, Kathy, youre being set up. Its a big red flag. (Neeley and others ridicule this)
Otermat
(continuing) And so that is one of the reasons why I didnt respond. And Mr. Wrights an attorney. You probably tell your clients Shut up. I didnt want to shut up. That is why today I spoke. Some people advised me that I come here and say, I will not speak. I wanted to speak, and for the record say I have never taken any confidential employee information. Theres absolutely no proof of it. Unfortunately, we cant prove it, because no matter what I say Bonnie will say, Oh youre smart enough you know how to erase things. Mr. Cooper is right. You can erase headers. You cannot erase data. If anyone wanted to take my IPad or my IPhone as a neutral party, Id gladly welcome it. So, having gone through this and I think everyone I would hope everyone in the audience who had something new and different has told us. So, bring it back to the Board, which it kind of already has, and so at this point theres been a motion and a second to remove Director Otermat as Treasurer and, at this point well take a vote. All in favor say Aye. Aye. Those opposed please say No. No. The Chair votes Aye. The motion carries. Whos going to be Treasurer? Thats the follow-up motion. Well . . . Do we need to have a Treasurer before our next meeting? You have an audit meeting coming up . . . I would like to put it on for the next regular meeting. September 11 th. The other issue I would encourage the Board to deal with is the possibility, regardless of what happened, I feel like the GDPUD still has an obligation to the employees to provide them some sort of protection from the potential of a security breach. So I would encourage the Board to spend the money to get LifeLock or its equivalent to protect the assets of the employees. For this letter from the Union suggests 18 months. (Background discussion, incl. Neeley: A counter offer?)
Griffiths
Krizl Griffiths Neeley Griffiths Griffiths
White
No, I think if thats the Boards wishes we could follow through with it. I think it would meet with the wishes the Union has, um, expressed to this point in time. It would be an appropriate action for
- 23 -
the Board.
Griffiths Unk. male White Krizl
OK. Anyone like to make a motion and then Ill . . . Can you have a reliable list of all the employees names might have been seen? We have the exact backup information that was provided on the day. Ill make a motion. I strongly believe this whole thing started with a photo. The reason were doing LifeLock for the employees and I believe very strongly the employees need to be protected. This is an affront to the employees and their financial security. I believe very strongly its a photo that started this, and that Director Otermat be responsible for the payments of the LifeLock. Thats my motion. Im not sure we can do that. Even though I, for the record, I said I didnt . . . I dont know if we can do that. (confused discussion) The reason Im saying that is because the LifeLock is an insurance policy against any identity theft. The reason were doing that is because of the events that transpired. Whatever you TOOK, we dont know. And Ill admit that we dont have the answer to that. But the fact that you took SOMETHING is driving us to get LifeLock. So youre driving us to get the LifeLock. Your actions are causing the District to spend money on LifeLock on the employees. And I think the fact that you chose to do that - theres consequences from your choices. I could have asked one of the employees to take a photocopy for me. Since Ive been here Im damned if I do and Im damned if I dont. And if I did that it would be, possibly, Dont you know how understaffed we are? (background ridicule) I tried to . . . And look what were spending time on because of you coming in and taking a photo and not responding to anybody about it. Not providing a simple answer. Look, I didnt do that. Heres the photo I took. It had nothing to do with any confidential information. Instead, you chose to wait, and now were having a Special Meeting. I could argue that you should pay for staff time and attorneys time. But I think you ought to pay for the LifeLock for those affected employees. I dont agree with that suggestion. Id like to suggest that we ban phones and photos and the check signing. But also that the Board approve paying for LifeLock for the employees. But I dont think we should ask . . . So, is that your motion? Yes. Well I made a motion . . . Yes, I know, but there wasnt a second. (Agreed) Died for lack of second So, your motion is to . . . repeat your motion.
Griffiths Otermat Griffiths Krizl
Otermat
Krizl
Neeley
Griffiths Neeley Krizl Griffiths
- 24 -
Neeley
I move that we pay for the Districts providing LifeLock for whichever names were on the potential invoices. The Unions 18 months sounds long, but I know nothing about any of this stuff. I suggest that we do it for three months and reconsider. I think it goes in six-month cycles. Is that right? We can purchase it monthly, but it is more expensive. We can get a discount if we buy it annually. I believe that more research should be done. So . . . I think we need to do it. Id go ahead, and if we can get a discount for annual then I would approve paying for it annually. So your motion is to get LifeLock or the equivalent (Neeley: for the affected employees . . . ) And you also said something about . . . I had said maybe three months and review, but if we can get . . . No, about taking photographs and . . . Oh. Is that part of the motion? No. One year of LifeLock for the affected employees. Assuming theres a discount. So, have a clean motion that . . . Can I read it back? Provide LifeLock for names on the invoices for one year.
White . . . Griffiths Neeley
Griffiths Griffiths Neeley Griffiths Neeley Griffiths Neeley Griffiths White
Wright
It doesnt address your three months issue, or whether or not there is . . . That starts to get a little vague. OK. I agree with that language. Its for up to one year and its only for those employees who request it. Correct. But you dont force it upon employees. It would be upon those affected employees that request it. Sometimes banks, you know, they send out the notice, and they offer it because there was a breach. But people wont take it. So . . . I dont want to make it so it sound like were forcing it on people who might not want it.
Neeley White
Griffiths
So the motion is anyone who would like LifeLock or its equivalent who chooses to take advantage of
- 25 -
it can do that.
Griffiths
Ill second the motion, even though its a little irregular for the President, because youre not supposed to . . . But anyway. Whatever. Public comment. Did that motion carry? Is that over? There was a motion and a second. We havent voted on it yet. This is public comment. It didnt sound a very good. So, coming in late . . . retirees? Are they affected by this? Only if their names were on the records. I dont think so. Their name wasnt on the payroll. So . . . Question? Yes So you have in your possession the actual documents that were put on that table that day? Yes. Yes, it has the employees that would be affected on the three . . . OK. So it just seems funny to me that we know exactly what was put on the desk that day and that PG&E bill was not one of them. So that seems a little bit . . . Were not even going into that. Were going to believe that those just those employees were there I mean were not potentially agreeing or believing that there was or there was not a PG&E bill there. Are we sure that other employees have not been affected? Thats my question. Were in dispute on what was on that table or not on that table. No, were not. The three invoices have the list of employees for which we forwarded deductions. And how many employees? Do we know? I dont know. Maybe two-thirds? So . . . the number of employees. We do know exactly what was on the table. We know that the PG&E bill was not on the table. There are probably Im going to guess here 15 employees whose private information was on the table that day.
Griffiths Unk. male Neeley Griffiths Unk. male Gau33 Neeley Griffiths Bliss Griffiths Bliss White Neeley Bliss
Griffiths Bliss
Griffiths Neeley Bliss Neeley White
- 26 -
Bliss
And the other thing that to go along with what you have stated, Norm - is that, like I said, Ive been here a long time, and we have talked about, time and time again, Director Otermat having access to information and how her access needs to be not just private. (Griffiths interjects that this is going off on a tangent.) It talks about the information that was taken. She does know that shes not supposed to take information. Because weve discussed the fact that she can cannot stand things on her own. Because she cannot take them out. She cant trust them. I feel like this is something she knew she shouldnt have done by taking a picture, and Norm is correct by stating that maybe she should have to pay for it instead of the District. Why does the District have to be responsible for something that we all know should have never happened? Thats my point about the motion. The District shouldnt have to be paying for something that she knows she shouldnt have done. Because it has come up time and time and time again. We understand what your point is. Im not extending my motion to incorporate any of that. The motion just had to do with the affected employees and a years worth of LifeLock. Yes. Im referencing the attached letter from the Union, which specifically mentions an 18-month period as being a recommendation from experts. Now I dont, if youll pardon my abruptness, I dont consider any of you experts in this particular field. We have people who reportedly ARE experts say 18 months, and youre deciding on your own you dont want to do that. I can tell you, having dealt with that Union for a long time, that if I were in their shoes, I would be in here at your next meeting saying, No, you need to go 18 months. We told you that. And at our next meeting we could do that. You could, but why put it off until then? If you want to earn some respect from your employees, because right now, as a Board, you have probably no credibility at all. With pretty good reason. And if you want to recap (sic) some of that, youd better start treating them like human beings. And youre dithering over I dont know what LifeLock costs but its a lot less than if you end up with lawsuits against you filed by your employees. Cant disagree with that. Anyone else? I dont think were precluding the 18 months, but its an annual contract, so we could do an annual contract with them and then re-up. I understand what youre saying, but it doesnt preclude us from going the 18 months or two years or whatever it might be. So, the motion is to provide LifeLock for the affected employees who choose . . . So thats the motion. All those in favor please say Aye. Aye. The Chair votes Aye. Its unanimous. At this point is there anything else having to do with this that we want to deal with? Well, since we have been accused of no policies at all, how about we start a new policy, and the first sentence is, no electronic gear when signing checks. (laughter) Why dont you bring that up at the next meeting? Go ahead, Mike. Referencing your attorneys letter, there is a third instance that we request information about. Its not been addressed, and clearly, according to your staffs records, there was a photograph taken of a document prior to August 8 th, and my question now becomes What other pieces of information have
Griffiths Neeley Griffiths Cooper
Griffiths Cooper
Griffiths Krizl
Griffiths
Neeley
Griffiths Cooper
- 27 -
been photographed?
Griffiths Cooper
I think thats relevant . . . . . . and its not just for employees. I would include all members of the Board, and all employees or all customers in the agency. Youre now talking 3,500 people. What records of theirs have been copied, photographed, transcribed or otherwise? And that has not yet been answered. No, it hasnt. Youre right. Anyone else in the public? Yes, sir.
Griffiths Male
I think under the circumstances of what she has created, whether she didnt do it or did do it, this should be brought up before the Grand Jury and let them investigate it. OK Actually, any citizen can request a . . . Can any citizen request a . . . ? I think you send them a letter and . . . How about the District requesting it? We probably need the direction of the Board to do that. Anybody else in the public have anything to say about this? If not . . . Yea, go ahead. My names Isaac Edelman. Im your maintenance lead for the District. Im going on 10 years here. Youve got a lot of great employees here. Ive heard a lot of good comments tonight. Ive heard some people that Im not really sure if theyre for the District or against the District, but Ill tell you what. Youve got a lot of guys here, and gals, that do a great job for you. I appreciate the Board coming together tonight and having this forum. I dont appreciate having to find out of course 20/20 vision hindsight is always one of those things, hey, I shouldnt have done something, but, Ill tell you what, we work hard, we work hard for this community, and its a pleasure for me to be working here as long as I have. Ive worked next to Bill Capraun. Ive learned a lot of things from him and John Simons and other people that work for this District. Dont take these people for granted. When it comes about and youre out of water, or your ditch is leaking or whatever else, were out there. Were fixing it. To think that Ms. Otermat has taken a picture of a PG&E bill, he y thats just one thing. But you know what? Your desk was sitting right next to a copy machine. And thats the thing that gets me. You say youre in a hostile environment. You can look to your right and say, You know what, I could use a copy of this. You could have said I need to talk to Stephanie or Mary Pat or Dolores whos been here for 20 plus years. I think its really short-sighted to think that youre going to get your phone out or your IPad or your mini-computer and just say, you know what, Im going to do this because Im going to do this. I think its wrong. And like I say, this is just one document. It may just be a PG&E bill. But it really does make the employees lose faith in what they have as Board members. You know, whether its the Kelsey ditch, the Pilot Hill ditch, the Upper ditch, the Main ditch were out there. Were fixing stuff. Were doing it. You know, um, its really frustrating to go out and do maintenance and then have the Board members supporting people against the District. You know, for perfectly good work that we need to do. My thing is, I want to keep my cool, do the job that needs to be done, all throughout this District, but it is frustrating to know that weve got people against us. And thats how we feel. Thats how weve been feeling for probably the last couple of years when we see all the negative stuff in the papers. You know, it pushes morale right down it flushes it right down the drain. Thats where it goes. You think youre
Griffiths Neeley Male Neeley Male Griffiths
Edelman34
- 28 -
flushing the waste? No, youre flushing the morale. So, Im just trying to tell you, youve got a lot of good people here. Start treating them well.
Griffiths West
Thank you. Anyone else? My morale was up when Kathy got elected to the Board. My morale was up, because, you guys were using monies inappropriately. We wanted somebody on the Board who would look into that. We got somebody. And now youve very conveniently just put her off the Board. (perhaps a 2 nd male.) But the public knows how to take care of this. Its called VOTES. The best thing theyve ever done. OK. Thank you. Anyone else? I dont know if I expressed myself well enough. The check cleared on the 30 th. There was no way you signed the check on the 8 th of August. Understand, we received a response to our attorneyrequested information and what did you take. I took this photo. This is the only photo I took. And here it is. Theres no way it was taken. This check cleared a week and a half prior to the date the picture was taken. And I just wanted to make sure that you all understood that and I communicated clearly that that is the case. OK. Thank you. Can I follow that up? Do we have to? I dont think its going to change anyones mind. Will it change your mind? Its not going to change anyones mind. (Multiple objections to letting Kathy speak) OK. Three minutes. I didnt even remember taking a photo. (Neeley interjects: Oh, come on!) So I went back and looked in my IPhone and found that photo. The only other thing I could possibly think of is maybe I took a photo with the IPad, and I will go back and look it up. I dont have it here at the moment - and see if there was a photo taken with the IPad. It has camera capabilities. So it could have been my mistake. So I just wanted to clear that up. Alright. Thank you. Either that theyve actually been lies or Kathy Otermat lies. One of the two. Lets not even go there. Thank you very much. Well see you on the 11 th of September.
Griffiths White
Griffiths Otermat Griffiths
Griffiths Otermat
Griffiths Male Griffiths
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Meeting Audio File: http://www.gd-pud.org/minutes/DS_08.21.12.WMA Ray Griffiths, GDPUD Director and Board President The Agenda shows this as Item 4 The letter from the Union is GDPUD office date-stamped RECEIVED 8/16/2012 The Union letter reads Board of Directors Bonnie Neeley, GDPUD Director The Accused: Kathy Otermat, GDPUD Director and Treasurer
- 29 -
8 9 10 11 12 13
Norm Krizl, GDPUD Director Hank White, GDPUD General Manager Jack Podsedly, resident Dale Miller, resident William Wright, GDPUD General Counsel Emailed complaints from employees Beck and Barron were sent (and received?) on the afternoon of Wednesday, the 8 th. Hands complaint was sent (and received?) on the morning of Thursday, the 9 th. Kathy Otermats website: http://flushthewaste.com/ As at the time of the 8/21/2012 Meeting Otermat had not received the three employee complaints. See endnotes 19, 21 & 22 Richard Beck, father-in-law of Stephanie Beck, GDPUD employee Paul West, resident Here the General Manager is stating that the check was paid on the day of the Board Meeting (August 7 th). Later (pgs. 20 & 29) he states that the check cleared the bank on July 30 th. Dolores Barron, GDPUD employee Stephanie Beck, GDPUD employee On 8/22/2012 at 2:04 PM GPDUDs General Counsel, William Wright, emailed Stephanie Becks August 8th Statement to Kathy Otermat Michelle Bliss, resident Kayla Hand, GDPUD summer employee On 8/22/2012 at 2:04 PM GPDUDs General Counsel, William Wright, emailed Kayla Hands August 9th Statement to Kathy Otermat. On 8/22/2012 at 2:04 PM GPDUDs General Counsel, William Wright, emailed Dolores Barrons August 8th Statement to Kathy Otermat. Additional to Barrons submitted written statement. Mike Cooper, former GDPUD Board member Pat Snelling, resident You = General Counsel, William Wright Maria Capraun, resident Kathleen Mendenhall, resident Bill Capraun, former GDPUD employee Steve Gau, retired GDPUD employee Isaac Edelman, GDPUD employee
14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21
22 23 24
25
26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34
- 30 -

Kathy Otermat GDPUD Meeting Transcript

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Kathy Otermat GDPUD Meeting Transcript

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

TRANSCRIPT1: Special Meeting August 21, 2012 Georgetown Divide Public Utility District

Griffiths Otermat7 Griffiths Otermat

Transcript: GDPUD Special Meeting August 21, 2012

Male Neeley Otermat Griffiths

Neeley Unk. male

Griffiths Miller 11 Griffiths Unk. male. Podsedley Griffiths

R. Beck16 Otermat Griffiths Griffiths

Neeley Otermat Griffiths

Transcript: GDPUD Special Meeting August 21, 2012

Otermat Griffiths Neeley Beck

Transcript: GDPUD Special Meeting August 21, 2012

Griffiths Krizl Griffiths Miller

Unk male Wright Miller Wright Griffiths Bliss22

Otermat Bliss Otermat Bliss

R. Beck Podsedly Griffiths Bliss Podsedly Griffiths Podsedly Griffiths Hand23

Wright West Wright West

Neeley Snelling Neeley Wright

Griffiths White Otermat White

Neeley Otermat Neeley

Krizl Griffiths Neeley Griffiths Griffiths

Griffiths Otermat Griffiths Krizl

Griffiths Neeley Krizl Griffiths

White . . . Griffiths Neeley

Griffiths Griffiths Neeley Griffiths Neeley Griffiths Neeley Griffiths White

Griffiths Neeley Bliss Neeley White

Griffiths Neeley Griffiths Cooper

Griffiths Neeley Male Neeley Male Griffiths

Griffiths Otermat Griffiths

Griffiths Male Griffiths

Transcript: GDPUD Special Meeting August 21, 2012

Você também pode gostar