Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 1970-5530RESOLUTION NO. 5530 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA OPPOSING THE DISCLOSURE OF ASSETS LAW The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista finds: That on September 4, 1969, the Legislature of the State of California passed Assembly Bill No. 325 (Chapter 1512) governing disclosure of assets by public officers. That said bill provides, in Section 3700, "that every public officer shall file, as a public record, a statement describing the nature and extent of his investments, including the ownership in shares of any corporation or the ownership of a financial interest in any business entity, which is subject to regulation by any state or local public agency, if such investment is in excess of ten-thousand dollars ($10,000.00) in value at the time of the statement." That apparently "Public Officer" includes all councilmen, department heads, planning, cultural and forest commissions, city clerk, city treasurer and many others involved in city government. Candidates for public office must also disclose their assets. That any person who fails to file said statement disclosing his assets, with knowledge that said failure is unlawful, is guilty of a felony. A felony can be punishable by imprisonment in the State prison, which suspends the civil rights of the person so sentenced, forfeiting private trusts, the right to vote and to hold public office. It also affects and jeopardizes military service and personal bonding. WHEREAS, said law is objectionable for the following reasons: 1. There are ample provisions under other and existing laws assuring the public of the impartiality and honesty of their officials, including numerous conflict of interest laws such as Section 1090 of the Government Code pro- hibiting public officers from acting on contracts in which they are beneficially interested. 2. This law requiring disclosure of assets will not accomplish any public purpose and will not affect the integrity, honesty and fairness of public officials. 3. The law will restrain citizen-officials from accepting, seeking or retaining public office. 4. The law is extremely ambiguous. No one is able to determine what the phrase "nature and. extent of invest- ments" means, nor can it be determined which investments are "regulated" by public agencies. Further, it is often impossible to accurately state the exact value of many types of investments. Failure to properly guess the meaning of this law or the value of an investment may subject the public officer to felony penalties. 5. The law is an abhorrent invasion of the personal right of privacy. A citizen's financial affairs should be private, and to require complete disclosure penalizes the office seeker and discourages public service. Generally, councilmen and commissioners devote untold hours and effort, at great personal out-of-pocket expense to serve their community, with no compensation. Citizens should be encouraged to seek public position, not discouraged.. Some of the most highly qualified citizens are, understand- ably, the most financially successful. To require the citizen to disclose his holdings would invite unwanted solicitation from numerous salesmen and intermeddlers, and invite unwarranted accusations of bias and partiality. The end result is to penalize those who by acumen and the intelligent management of their personal incomes have been able to invest in and support the economic and commercial well-being of their communities. 6. It will be extremely difficult to obtain candidates or appointees for public office when they are confronted with the legal requirement of disclosing their financial affairs to the newspapers and the general public. WHEREAS, most members of boards and commissions who have been polled indicate their strong opposition to subjecting their personal affairs to public scrutiny. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista that on behalf of themselves and those public officers subject to the provisions of the disclosure of assets law do hereby urge immediate legislative action to appropriately amend the law so as to eliminate its ambiguities and make it more relevant to the basic questions of ethical behavior and conflict of interest. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista be, and he is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this resolution to the League of California Cities, Assemblyman Wadie P. Deddeh, Senator James Mills, and all other members of the Legislative Delegation of San Diego County and all other municipalities within San Diego County. Presented by < <,,. _~ f ~' George D,'~ indberg,/City Attorf ~~;' Approved as to form by '~~' ~ a ~ ~ ~F George D. indberg, City Attorne~z-' ', <<~ ~~ ~,, ~~t .. -~"--x v ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the CITY COUDiCIL of the CITY OF CEULA VITA CALIFORNIA, this 3rd day of February ~ 1970 ~ by the follo~oine vote, to-wit: AYES: Councilmen Scott, Hamilton, Hyde, McAllister I`?AYES: Councilmen None ABSEPdT: Councilmen Sylvester C-~ ~-Q ~~ Mayor of the City of C u a Vl.sta ATTEST ~'_ a ~ City Clerk ~~~ STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COL'.~TY OF SAP~d DIEGO ) ss. CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) I, k'ENNETH P. CA~~'.PBFLL, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, Caliro~nia, DO HERB BY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a full, true and corre:~r c.m ~~1 and that the same has not been a~~.ended or revealed, DATE P City Cleric ~~, ~~ ~ U F'orr~ No. 301 UNANIMOUS CONSENT f~ORM IT IS HEREHY REQUESTED by the undersigned chat the fol.lowing item, with the unanimous consent of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, be considered and acted upon by the Coun~c~i pursuant to the provisions of Section 1.16 of the Chula Vista City Code. Resolution Opposing the Disclosure of Assets Law S.;.c~natut e ~~~~~ Unanimous Consent of trio City Council, as indicated b1l the iollawing