Tempers Flare as Zeanah Is Denied Air Time : Thousand Oaks: Council insists that televising citizens group meetings would let her campaign for reelection at taxpayer expense.

Bitter rivalries on the Thousand Oaks City Council surfaced in an angry 45-minute debate Tuesday night when three members rejected maverick Councilwoman Elois Zeanah’s request that the city’s cable television channel broadcast meetings of a citizens group she leads.

When it became clear that the council would reject her request 3 to 2, Zeanah withdrew her motion--but not before she had laid bare underlying tensions among the panel.

The council majority insisted that televising the meetings of Zeanah’s group would allow her to campaign for reelection at the taxpayers’ expense.

But Zeanah rejected that argument, noting that veteran Councilman Frank Schillo has hosted a show about city issues on the government channel since 1987.

“I don’t think individual council members should judge the others,” said Zeanah, a first-term councilwoman, as Schillo looked away. “What’s available for one council member should be available for all.”

But Alex Fiore, another longtime councilman, characterized Zeanah’s group, known as the Citizens Q of L Action Alliance, as a political party. He argued that the year-old organization should not enjoy taxpayer-supported publicity on TOTV Channel 10. The city pays $400,000 a year for air time.

Although they tried to avoid personal attacks, Schillo, Fiore and Zeanah clashed repeatedly during the lengthy debate. Clearly frustrated, Zeanah painted herself as an outsider trying to stimulate grass-roots activism by giving residents “both sides of an issue--something that is not done in this city right now.” And she blasted Schillo’s program as a bland rehash of city government’s “party line.”

Zeanah, who stands out on the Thousand Oaks council as much for her colorful clothes and Southern accent as for her vehement anti-growth stance, insisted that her citizens alliance is not a political action group. But even her offer to pay for filming the group’s meetings to defray the $500 broadcast cost failed to convince the council majority.

Fiore argued that “there is a difference like night and day” between Zeanah’s freewheeling public meetings and Schillo’s panel discussions with city staff.

“It’s true that Frank hosts those forums,” Fiore said, “but it’s just dissemination of information about what the city is doing.”

Turning to Zeanah, who stared stonily at the floor, Fiore added, “I’m sure your committee is going to continually discuss . . . politically sensitive issues that don’t belong on a government channel.”

Zeanah said her group would discuss timely policy issues such as an elevated rail link to Los Angeles. Schillo’s program examines cut-and-dried municipal functions such as water management.

Under city guidelines, programs on the government channel must provide either service information, news about legislative bodies or general safety tips. A separate public-access network, Channel 8, offers all citizens the chance to produce and air their own shows.

“We have to be very careful with the government channel so it doesn’t become a campaign forum,” City Atty. Mark Sellers said.

Councilwoman Jaime Zukowski--a consistent ally of Zeanah--then tried to turn that argument against Schillo.

“Any time a program is shown over and over with one person presenting it,” she said, “it becomes a forum for that person.”