Modesto Irrigation District (MID) Board Member Janice Keating must pay MID’s attorneys’ fees for her failed complaint of gender bias against fellow board member Robert Frobose and the district said Judge John R Mayne in a tentative ruling on August 15. Now, time having elapsed for Keating to mount a successful defense against the decision, it appears Keating will have to pony up over $40,000 against the $53,864.50 total the judge tentatively awarded the district in August.
Keating’s attorneys argued that the fees claimed by MID attorneys were excessive for an anti-SLAPP case; they achieved a small reduction in the total bill after trying to reduce Keating’s share of the costs to a mere $5,000. Had Keating’s attorneys succeeded, MID ratepayers would have been stuck for the balance of a bill incurred by a suit with no discernible basis in fact. Absent a miraculous reversal of the judge’s decision, Keating must now pay her own attorneys’ fees and the major portion of the district’s in a case MID’s lawyers repeatedly referred to as “frivolous.”
Keating’s failure to establish a factual basis for her claims of gender bias proved to be a fatal flaw in a case that generated far less publicity than a similar case in 2019-20, when MID water attorney Ronda Lucas sued the district and won a $320,000 settlement. Lucas’s case featured alleged gender-based harassment from MID Board Member John Mensinger, while Keating claimed Frobose had tried to intimidate her regarding rehiring Lucas after she had been terminated.
Attorneys for Frobose and MID argued that the case required considerable time and effort because of the difficulty of investigating claims for which there was no proof. Without a material basis in the form of specific incidents of gender bias, Keating’s case fell apart. An inquiry into Keating’s motives for filing the suit became the inevitable consequence of her failure to provide supporting details for her claims. Attorneys for Frobose and the district argued that Keating’s intentions were to discourage Frobose from participating in controversial board issues.
Strategic Litigation Against Public Participation (SLAPP) suits are often brought forward to muffle debate on matters of public policy. The motive is to make expressing an opinion so costly that people refrain from speaking out. The litigation becomes a tactic in cases where threats of lawsuits become cudgels meant to silence opposition. Anti-SLAPP suits result when defendants mount successful counter-suits.
The dispute over rehiring Lucas reached a crescendo in January of last year, when the Modesto Bee Editorial Board asked,
“why someone who cost ratepayers $320,000 would be allowed anywhere near the agency she took to court, much less hired to represent its legal interests. The appearance of contradiction demands full explanation.”
No one knows what Janice Keating may have “cost ratepayers” had she won her suit against MID and Frobose, but her district’s voters will very likely have to reflect on the wisdom of keeping her in office after what appears to be an attempt to emulate Lucas’s successful pursuit of gender equality in a case where there was no evidence of bias of any kind.
Fortunately for MID ratepayers, Janice Keating will be paying most of the freight for her puzzling decision to mount a suit against the district and a fellow board member, a suit that looks more and more aptly described as “frivolous,” except that the potential consequences were very serious indeed.
I can’t believe that miserable person was elected by anyone to do anything after her chaotic waste of time on city council. Hopefully she’ll be tossed out on her ear when her term is up and never allowed near public office again.
the $320,000 settlement should come out of the water/land owner side of the operation.
The crescendo reached in the Modesto Bee in January last year about MID directors rehiring Rhonda Lucas is only surpassed by its deafening silence about Director Keating’s frivolous lawsuit against MID this year. In an opinion editorial ghost written for Keating, she expressed her repulsion at the agenda item to retain Lucas by the same directors who had witnessed John Mensinger’s verbal abuses of women on staff. Janice objected to undefined costs. Fast forward and we now find Keating manipulating harassment laws to stain the reputation of several while seeking unlimited damages (the definition of undefined costs). By most all accounts, Lucas is very competent attorney and the Bee editorial staff should acknowledge as much with a crescendo. And Janice is not as competent as the Bee Editorial Board suggested when it endorsed her. She has not been a budget reducing warrior rooting out waste.In fact, she sought to worsen the budget over eye rolling and snorts. The Bee is drowning in its own miserable disservice. Support independent journalism like this Valley Citizen. It’s our only hope.