In a suit filed on May 14, Modesto Irrigation District (MID) Board Member Janice Keating has accused the district and Board Member Robert Frobose of harassment based on her status as a woman. Keating claims that Frobose tried to intimidate her last year, during a January 17 visit to La Grange Dam:
“While on the La Grange Dam inspection, Defendant FROBOSE (sic), on at least three occasions, stood in very close proximity to Plaintiff and pressuring Plaintiff concerning the hiring of special counsel for the board. FROBOSE stood close enough so that Plaintiff could not walk away or avoid the conversation. It is clear from the repeated nature of Defendant FROBOSE’s close proximity and intense conversations with Plaintiff that Defendant FROBOSE was attempting to intimidate Plaintiff.”
The suit further alleges that MID Public Affairs Manager Melissa Williams and then General Counsel Wesley Miliband were witnesses to Frobose’s “overtly inappropriate” actions and later contacted Ms. Keating,
“to ask if she was okay and whether Plaintiff would like each of them to make a complaint on her behalf. Mr. Milliband (sic) and Ms. Williams ultimately did not file any complaints on Plaintiff’s behalf.”
In addition to charges relating to Frobose’s alleged behavior at the January 17 visit to La Grange Dam, Keating claims that,
“Defendant FROBOSE continued to create a hostile working environment for Plaintiff by being inappropriately rude, disrespectful and combative toward her. When Plaintiff would discuss matters in Board meetings, Defendant Frobose would snort, interrupt Plaintiff, and shake his head as if she was speaking nonsense and telling her on at least one occasion, ‘You don’t know what you’re talking about.’”
The suit further claims that,
“FROBOSE did not act in this demeaning and combative manner with any of the male Board members. By this time it had become clear that Defendant FROBOSE’s hostile treatment of Plaintiff was substantially motivated by the fact that she is a woman and that she had previously complained about his inappropriate actions.”
Keating is including MID employees in the lawsuit because she alleges management and others at the irrigation district did not respond appropriately to her harassment claims.
She alleges,
“Defendant MID and its agents made no attempt to curb Defendant FROBOSE’s inappropriate actions. Clearly, it is well known by defendant MID that Plaintiff was working in a hostile work environment and that the hostility is substantially motivated by her gender and because of her complaints regarding Defendant FROBOSE’s inappropriate behavior.”
In a statement to The Valley Citizen, Robert Frobose said,
“The public is entitled to the truth. All our board meetings are videotaped. People can see for themselves whether I’ve been rude and combative. Melissa Williams and Wes Miliband never contacted me about any of this. I got on the board to represent the public and protect our water. People can go online and see any board meeting they want to. They’re all in order.”
Frobose added that disagreements among board members are part of elected officials’ duty to represent their constituents as best they can and said that he has voted with Keating more often than against her.
Based on allegations made in the lawsuit, this is one case where the public can weigh in as witnesses. It’s true the MID Board meetings are videotaped. It’s also true that there were enough witnesses at the MID gathering at La Grange Dam to either corroborate or dispute Keating’s claims of intimidation. You be the judge.
Why is Keating on the board?
Has the public not spoken clearly enough?
The public spoke clearly – She was elected to the Board by her Division. It appears she is looking out for her Division which is central Modesto not ag land. She is the only one not following along behind the Larry cult on the board.
Janice Keating won her election. So did Robert Frobose. In fact, Frobose received considerably more votes than Keating, so the public was just as clear. Keating told her voters she would scour the budget and cut the fat. I am not aware that she has proposed any cuts to date. But I do know this, she filed a lawsuit seeking “unlimited damages” that you and I will ultimately have to pay as the ratepayers. How much would you be happy to pay Director Keating because fellow Director Frobose “snorted, shook his head and said “you don’t know” on at least one occasion? And you should remember, Keating argued during a board meeting that MID should NOT rehire an attorney that had settled a similar harassment suit for $325,000. Would she hold herself to the same standard if she settles for a similar sum?
If there is a cult, it’s those who fail to see the projection of behavior cited in the lawsuit is that of Keating’s regular demeanor, and the hypocrisy of a self professed budget hawk seeking “unlimited damages” against a public utility.
How has Modesto’s very own Janice ‘Prickly Pear’ Keating benefitted anyone besides herself? She was as or more ignorant than most newly elected officials without any experience in water or electricity coming to the Board and after Stu that’s saying something. At least Stu didn’t try to pick arguments.
She was elected in an unfortunate ending. Her opponent did not have a familiar name like Janice does.
Her opponent’s father has a building named after him in Downtown Modesto and is a famous local lawyer and retired judge. I don’t think Keating had that. Her opponent got the same MID union backing as did Frobose and Boer.
[…] Story continues […]
So, an elected official of MID doesn’t agree with anther elected official and she files a lawsuit? Did she consider bringing this up to the Board first. I wonder if this was ever an agenda item and discussed at a Board meeting? I reviewed the Board Agenda for each meeting since January to the present- this item was not on the agenda, unless it was in a closed session. I am not convinced Ms. Keating’s motivation is to solve this problem, I don’t have time to review all the board videos… nor can I look up what award she is looking for……while asking Mr. Google, it appears Ms. Keating is a pro at lawsuits too.
The article prompted me to visit the MID website and review the recorded meetings. There were a few meetings where I observed Ms. Keating as the aggressor toward Mr. Frobose and other members of the board. During one of the most recent meetings, held on January 9th, she did not appear uncomfortable around Mr. Frobose. You could see her leaning in and reaching her hand out to talk with him halfway through the meeting. Generally speaking, if I were being harassed, I would refrain from speaking to the aggressor. About 44 minutes into the meeting, when you get to the directors’ comments, is when Mr. Frobose, who was nothing but respectful to Ms. Keating throughout the meeting asked a question to the General Counsel to his right, and Ms. Keating became clearly agitated. Mr. Frobose did not appear upset or out of control with Ms. Keating. Upon viewing Ms. Keating’s reaction to Mr. Frobose, you can see her shaking her head in disapproval and visibly angry with his question and the woman in public. As I watched meetings from January to March, I did not observe the harassment she claims occurred. I do plan on going back to older meetings to see if anything happened there.
In the court documents it seems most of the claims come from Closed Session. No cameras, no recorders, no minutes. He said – she said, but lots of witnesses.
WHY? ARE CLOSED SESSION MEETINGS NOT RECORDED? THOSE ARE THE MOST APT TO PRODUCE SOME CONTROVERSY.
IT WOULD HELP IN TIMES SUCH AS THIS. CLOSED TO THE PUBLIC, YET, RECORDED FOR APPROPRIATE NEEDS.
I FIND IT ALL TOO CONVENIENT AS A WAY TO TAR AND FEATHER AN INNOCENT PARTY IN A CONSPIRACY.
WE ARE TALKING OF WATER WARS ARE WE NOT?
Closed session includes 5 directors, the GM and general counsel. That is not “he said-she said” when five witnesses can corroborate first hand. Consider this, the attorney has interviewed staff and witnesses identified by Keating. The fact that MID elected not to settle should indicate what kind of case the company thinks it has (Strong).
You missed the point of he said-she said but you answered it well. Don’t forget appropriate confidential staff regarding the matter to be discussed. Sounds like you have some inside knowledge about what has already taken place. That is very odd for a legal matter of this nature – most places clam up as soon as the lawyers get involved. You know – only lawyers talking to lawyers. And this case only became public a few weeks ago. The MID Board has not met since then so what do you know that the rest of us don’t?
I don’t have inside knowledge. But I have an understanding how a public organization or large employer operates when harassment lawsuits are threatened. HR Director and Legal convene to assess their exposure to and limit damages. The decision to litigate rather than settle is not made in the dark. They have interviewed staff and reviewed emails and video to confirm or dispel allegations.
Stanislaus Counties Elected Officials should have to submit to sobriety tests before the start of every official Board of Directors or City Council meetings.
Any Objections Directors 👀
WHISKEY IS FOR DRINKING, WATER IS FOR FIGHTING.
MARK TWAIN
IF I MAY SUGGEST A REVISION: LAND IS ALSO FOR FIGHTING, WHEN IT COMES TO LAND FOR OUR HOMELESS TO DWELL UPON.
WE CAN DO WITHOUT A PARK, OR, EVEN TWO, ESPECIALLY, SINCE SOME NIMBY SNOBS ONLY SEE THE USE OF PARKS AS THINGS TO LOOK UPON MORE THAN MAKE USE OF. TO THEM IT IS MORE ABOUT PROPERTY VALUE THAN TWENTY FOUR HOUR SAFE SLEEPING AND RESTING DURING A HUMANITARIAN CRISIS.
DOES HOME AWAY FROM HOME RING A BELL?