HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/06/17 Board of Ethics Minutes•
ACTION MINUTES OF
BOARD OF ETHICS AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
June 17. 2010 Executive Conference Room 4'06 P M
Chair Starr called the meeting to order.
1. Roll Call
MEMBERS PRESENT: Michael German, Felicia Starr, AI Sotoa.
ALSO PRESENT: Cheryl Ponds-Poole, Legal Assistant; and Simon Silva, Deputy City
Attorney and Staff to Board of Ethics.
2. Review of Chapter 2.28.
Silva advised he had set up a folder to keep track of documents provided to the Ad Hoc
Committee to maintain a record of items reviewed. Silva informed the committee that
these documents also include different versions of the various changes. Silva informed
the committee of changes to 2.28.010 Establishment of Code of Ethics: "The public
trust can best be preserved if City Officials adhere to a high standard of ethics that
transcend the standards prescribed by law." "Unethical behavior can develop in a
variety of situations, but it occur when the public interest is not the sole and paramount
interest in all actions conducted by all City Officials." "Accordingly the Code of Ethics as
stated in 2.28.0 is established. Silva advised that he had also combined Code of
Conduct and Prohibitions into 2.28.020 and called it Code of Ethics. Silva informed the
Committee within 2.28.020 was subdivision 1, Code of Conduct. Silva stated he had
additionally made grammatical, typographical, and consistency changes to this section
as suggested.
Silva further informed the board that he had added item 8, "City Officials must be aware
of all their financial interests thereby ensuring that their conduct or actions are not
influenced by such financial interests."
Under Prohibitions Section 7, Silva added the language: "City Officials should avoid an
appearance of a conflict of interest when possible. However, they should be mindful
that recusal or abstention shall be observed for actual conflicts." With regard to this
issue Silva provided a footnote, which referred to case People vs. Chacon. Silva also
referred to the ALRB case, which had been overruled on other grounds.
1
Silva next discussed the insertion of Section 2, Prohibition: Public Officials are
expected to abide by all local, state and federal laws involving Government ethics and
conflicts of interests. Public Officials shall be deemed to have engaged in unethical
conduct under this chapter and are prohibited from engaging in the following: (and
items 1 through 6). Silva advised he had removed item 7 as it had been inserted in
another section.
Silva informed the board that he had written a section that says another prohibition is to
violate any state or federal law involving ethics, including, but not limited to Government
Code Sections 1090, 87100 if the alleged violation involves a state or federal law, the
board of ethics may await action or notice of an action by state or federal agencies
having jurisdiction.
Silva then questioned whether or not the committee wanted to include all provisions of
87100. Silva stated 87100 had several components one mandatory reporting, Form
700 form, campaign financing, conflicts of interests based on economic interest in
Government decision, and many other miscellaneous sections. Silva advised that the
committee already had a requirement under the new code dealing with mandatory
reporting, campaign and financing disclosures was already covered under another
Municipal Code section, 2.52 Campaign Contributions. Silva provided the real issue
was whether or not the committee wanted the language written with limits to conflicts of
interests based on economic interests, which was the one remaining section that really
wasn't covered. German questioned where Silva would propose to include this section.
Silva advised this would be item 8.
The next part Silva covered was advisory opinions. Silva made nonsubstantive
changes, changing Councilmember or other official to Public Official, removed
redundant language, and cleaned up other language. Silva discussed that under the
City Charter the City Attorney advises on all boards and commissions. Silva advised
language had been inserted to read: The City Attorney's Office may assist in the
drafting of advisory opinions. Silva stated he used the word "may" as this would be due
to resources and Silva didn't want to commit the elected City Attorney as to what he
wants to do. Silva questioned whether these advisory opinions were confidential, if they
aren't how they could make them confidential, and whether the opinions should be kept
as City Attorney opinions for referral to in the future. Silva advised some opinions get
published, but most are informal or not an actual opinion called Memoranda of Law.
Further discussion ensued among the committee. Silva referred the committee to
Evidence Code Section 1040 which relates to governmental privilege which may apply
here, which Silva advised he would look at.
•
2
The committee then looked at 2.28.090 Powers of the Board. Silva advised he didn't
expect many changes to this section. Silva felt the committee may just want to break
this section down by paragraph, but didn't see any substantive changes. Silva also
suggested moving the purpose of the board up right after whom it applied to.
Silva then discussed board members making a statement on an issue in a public forum.
Silva asked if the committee wanted to discourage this behavior through the Code of
Conduct or by making it a prohibition. Silva advised his concern was ones freedom of
speech and the bottom line was if the member was conducting said behavior as a board
member it should be prohibited, but if as and individual the member could do whatever
they wanted. Silva suggested the committee drafting language that could be included in
the organization section with two components, one directory in nature, but not
mandatory, and the other advising that board members should be aware of their political
statements thereby ensuring down the line there is no conflict. Silva advised the
problem liability wise in kicking someone off a board or commission because they
exercised a first amendment right then the City could incur liability.
3. Public Comments.
There were none.
• 4. Member Comments.
German stated his 58t" birthday was two days ago, and that a bobcat was spotted in his
backyard in Bonita.
5. Staff Comments
There were none.
ADJOURNMENT AT 4:55 p.m. to the next scheduled Ad Hoc Committee meeting on
July 22, 2010, at 4:00 p.m.
Joyce a ve x
Recording ecretary
•
3