After the El Paso County Clerk and Recorderís Office approved petitions submitted by the committee to recall Woodmen Hills Metropolitan District board members Jan Pizzi and Bryan Mendiola, Pizzi submitted a formal protest. Ron Pace had submitted the petition on behalf of committee members Amy Schmidt, Nicole Dillon and Christine Jenkins, according to the CRO.Bryan Mendiola has since resigned his position on the board. At the July 24 meeting of the WHMD board, the directors unanimously approved the appointment of Frank Gonzalez to Mendiolaís vacated seat.The CRO had initially issued a notice of insufficiency to the recall committee members, indicating they did not have enough valid signatures on the petition. The members resubmitted and the signatures were deemed valid by the CRO, which issued a rule of sufficiency June 25, said Ryan Parsell, CRO public information officer.On July 17, the CRO held a hearing to allow Wayne Williams, EPC clerk and recorder, to hear the formal protest Pizzi submitted. ìIím not trying to be a hero or anything about this, but Iím fighting this because they are accusing me of stuff I didnít do,î Pizzi said.During the protest hearing, Parsell said members of the recall committee admitted the petitionís ìReasons for Recallî list they presented to residents when asking for their signatures contained items excluded from the official recall petition.On the website http://woodmenhillsrecall.wordpress.com, the ìReasons for Recallî list includes wrongful terminations of employees, including Eddie Avedikian, former park and recreation director, along with denying them unemployment compensation; failing to give the YMCA autonomy to run the recreation program; increased park and recreation fees; $9,000 a year for one employee to take a district vehicle home on a daily basis; hiring a public relations firm to sell residents on new water rate increases; raises and bonuses for employees; purchase of a $38,000 truck for the director; spending thousands of dollars on events that had low attendance ó and more.Pizzi said that during the hearing, she had only been prepared to present documentation to counter the reasons on the official petition, which is why Williams granted a continuance for the hearing. ìI have documentation to prove all of the items I didnít do,î she said.Pizzi said she had until July 23 to submit those documents; the recall committee had to respond by July 25. The hearing continuation was scheduled for July 31.Parsell said there are two possible outcomes to the hearing once the proceedings have concluded: The recall petition could be upheld and the recall moves forward; or the protest that Pizzi filed could be upheld and the recall could be tossed out.ìIf the committee was presenting reasons for a recall that are false, then that could possibly lead to the petition not being upheld,î Parsell said.If the recall proceeds, the CRO has a short window of time to determine if the recall should take place at the regular election in November or during a special election, which is an added cost to taxpayers. Although the WHMD passed a resolution in June to include any recall measures on the regular election ballot, Parsell said the CRO ultimately determines the election schedule.ìWeíll be conscientious of the cost factors because we realize people have to pay for that, and weíll do everything we can to keep the cost for that low,î Parsell said. ìWayne is extremely good at reaching out to everybody and trying to determine what their opinion is, along with what the law requires.îWilliams will have 30 days from the close of the July 31 hearing to make a determination, Parsell said.Editorís note:The hearing continuation date was held July 31 – after the NFH publishing deadline.
