The San Miguel Community Services District (CSD) board withdrew plans to censure board member Rod Smiley after he threatened legal action that could have cost the district more than $100,000, according to district staff.
Both board President Ashley Sangster and board member John Green filed complaints accusing Smiley of disrespectful and disruptive behavior in May, and the censure was slated for discussion during the CSD board’s September meeting.
“The allegations set forth in this resolution are an attack on my character,” Smiley said during that September meeting. “They’re not true. They’re taken out of context. If I have a counterargument to theirs, that’s considered arguing and being disrespectful. I completely reject this.”
Sangster and Green filed formal complaints in May, alleging personal attacks, “hateful remarks,” and behavior from Smiley they said is “unbecoming of a representative” and “serves to further divide the board.”
The conflict between board members came amid broader debates over the CSD’s future, including discussions about potentially dissolving the district and transferring its services to San Luis Obispo County.
Smiley said that he had already hired legal counsel and was prepared to sue the district, Sangster, and Green if the censure went forward.
During the September board meeting, both Sangster and Green withdrew their complaints, citing concerns about the potential cost of litigation and a planned revision of the district’s board handbook that could render the censure unnecessary.
Green proposed tabling the item until November to allow the board to change a chapter in the board’s conduct policy, which sets standards for board member conduct and outlines expected behavior and decorum during meetings. The board added a section to that chapter last October, creating an “Officials’ Disciplinary Procedure” that outlined steps for admonishment, reprimand, or censure of a board member.
During the meeting, Green told community members that the revision would bring it “back to its original language so there’s no violation, to save the district $100,000 minimum cost out of your bucket.”
Sangster followed, voicing frustration over the potential toll a lawsuit could take on the district’s finances.
“I don’t feel that a $100,000-plus lawsuit is in the interest of the public,” he said. “I think that’s asinine, and I think it’s rude and contemptuous for him to even insinuate that he would take $100,000 of your public money. So, with that said, I repeal my complaint against Mr. Smiley.”
The public meeting, punctuated by interruptions and tense exchanges between board members, reflected the board’s ongoing struggle to maintain decorum. At one point, a community member approached the podium and pleaded, “Please move on.”
One of the most serious claims—that Smiley verbally attacked Green during a closed-session meeting in April—could not be independently verified because, according to the district, such meetings are not recorded and no minutes were taken.
“Just to clarify to the public, the incident took place in closed session,” Sangster said during the September meeting. “There is no video.”
But some of San Miguel’s residents questioned the validity of the allegations.
At the May 22 meeting, former board member Raynette Gregory told the board during public comment that she had reviewed months of video recordings from prior meetings and saw no evidence of Smiley behaving inappropriately.
“I couldn’t see anything you guys were talking about,” she told the board. “What I did see is Director Green being very aggressive to Director Smiley. … I don’t see any of it. So this is a really egregious amount of insult to our director.”
Another resident echoed those concerns in a letter sent to the board before its September meeting.
“There is no evidence of Rod doing anything against John Green,” the letter said. “But John Green is on video shouting and getting in Rod’s face.”
Former board member and past President Anthony Kalvans said the situation reflects deeper issues within the district.
The censure effort, Kalvans said, “is just another sign of the dysfunction of the new board majority at this point.”
It’s not the first time the board has dealt with internal turmoil, Kalvans explained.
In October 2024, board member Owen Davis was formally censured following alleged threats against Kalvans, an incident that ultimately led Kalvans to resign. The district has also been divided over its leadership and operations, particularly involving the Fire Department and district management. In September, the board voted to renew both the fire chief’s and the district general manager’s contracts.
Kalvans said he believes that some of the board’s current members have worked to undermine the district’s stability.
“You’ll see a consistent theme between these board members, either trying to drag out the fire chief’s contract, drag out a general manager’s contract, dissolve and shut down the CSD and the Fire Department,” Kalvans said. “I just want the best, you know, I just want my town, for people, to be focused on the issues … the big issues.”
In July, resident Gregory Campbell petitioned the board to dissolve the district and transfer its services to the county.
While some board members, including Green and Davis, supported revisiting the issue, others, like Smiley, opposed it, arguing the public did not want to dissolve the district.
“I don’t believe the public wants to do away with our district,” Smiley said at the July 24 board meeting.
Ultimately, no action was taken. ∆
Reach New Times contributor Chloë Hodge at chodge@newtimesslo.com.
This article appears in Oct 16-26, 2025.