1)   The Interim District Manager’s Report to the Board along with District Maintenance Records have identified critical issues with the Plant and Equipment stemming from the lack of maintenance over the past 6+ years.

At Thursday’s Board meeting, the Interim District Manager (Matt Gardner) gave the monthly Manager’s report. In response to a Board member’s question about problems with the membranes, he said that the membranes were replaced only 3 years ago. In response to a Board member question about the extent of the problems, he said that he would be working with the Engineer to get a more comprehensive view. There was also discussion about where the Report can be found on the District’s web site. It is linked here.

From the Interim District Manager’s report: (Click here for District Manager’s Report)

Last month, the previous District Manager (Phil Chick) resigned.

It is surprising that even after the Board has become aware of the previous District’s Manager’s failure to maintain plant equipment so that District rate payers are now at financial risk: 1) At Thursday’s meeting the Board contracted with the previous District Manager at a retainer of $400/month plus billable hours (Click here for Contract), and 2) the Board considered naming the Watershed after the previous District Manager (Click here for Naming Resolution).

2)  Board appoints a Forest Management Committee member – once again choosing nepotism over relevant experience

Several months ago in a secret ballot process, the Board selected Nadia Gardner’s domestic partner / household member for the Forest Management Committee.  At that time, the Community expressed concern about this appointment from the perspective of nepotism, lack of relevant expertise and secret balloting. After an executive session with the District’s lawyer, the Board redid the selection process transparently and selected Chris Mastrandrea. 

Since Chris has recently filled the open Board position, the Board had to appoint a new member to the Forest Management Committee.

During the past month, three previous applicants confirmed their continued interest in the position on the Forest Management Committee; 1) one person from the Community Interest Group has professional experience in communication, public relations and business, 2) one person from the Community Interest Group has professional experience in business and financial management, and 3) one person, who is the domestic partner / household member of a Board member, is a lawyer.

In previous meetings, a current Board Member expressed concern about the “perception of impropriety” if a Board member’s partner was appointed to the Committee. Also, when Chris resigned from the Committee, concern was expressed because Chris’s financial planning experience was key to developing the required Financial Plans for the Watershed. Yet at Thursday’s meeting, both of these concerns were brushed aside and Mike Manzulli, a Board member’s domestic partner and a lawyer who has no self-identified expertise with financial planning, was appointed to the Committee. Dan Seifert, Linda Murray and Debra Birkby voted for Mike Manzulli. Chris Mastrandrea abstained as he was not part of the executive session with the District lawyer when the previous appointment of Mike Manzulli was overturned. Nadia Gardner did not attend Thursday’s Board meeting.

Now the Committee is comprised of a forester and two lawyers, and is without professional experience in financial planning or community outreach and communication.

3)   Despite 5 resignations from Arch Cape community representatives and others, the Board continues the public access and recreation planning process with NCLC.

Several years ago, the Board and NCLC, with assistance from the National Parks Service and without community awareness, began working together towards a shared public access and recreation plan for the Arch Cape Watershed and Rainforest Reserve.

Over a year ago, in spite of interest expressed by the Arch Cape community in a separate planning process so that the watershed is not overshadowed by the rainforest reserve, an 11-person planning committee focused on developing a single plan was created. The Committee was comprised of 5 Arch Cape community representatives, 3 NCLC representatives, 2 Lewis and Clark Timber representative and 1 representative of Cannon View Park (which owns the land around the hug point entrance). 

At January’s Board meeting, the 2nd community sponsored survey about public access and recreation in the Watershed was dismissed by the Board and “forwarded” to this Committee for consideration, similar to the first survey that was conducted last spring.

At last week’s meeting of the Public Access Planning Committee, 3 Arch Cape community representatives resigned and 1 expressed that they are not sure they are the right person to continue.  Lewis & Clark Timber pulled out altogether.  Various reasons were given including, “waste of time”, “too much else to do”, “planning fatigue”, “frustration with the Committee trying to to bundle two different properties into one plan”. The 11-person committee has now shrunk to 6 (maybe 5) with 3 NCLC representatives, 1 cannon view park representative and 1, maybe 2, Arch Cape representatives.  (A zoom recording of that Committee Meeting is available).

At Thursday’s Board meeting the Board agreed to continue the combined planning process for access and recreation for the Arch Cape Watershed and the Rainforest Reserve, even though Arch Cape representation is now the definite minority and even though there is lack of clarity of what the going forward planning process will be, what the deliverable will be and how it will be used. In public comments at the end of the meeting, an NCLC representative expressed support for continuing the combined Arch Cape – NCLC planning process as it is. An Arch Cape representatives expressed interest in separating off an Arch Cape only process.