HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010/05/19 Board of Ethics Minutes
ACTION MINUTES OF
BOARD OF ETHICS MEETING
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
May 19, 2010 Executive Conference Room 3'34 P M
Starr called the meeting to order.
Roll Call
MEMBERS PRESENT: Chris Schilling, Michael German, Felicia Starr, Norma
Toothman, and Todd Glanz.
MEMBERS ABSENT: AI Sotoa, and Anthony Jemison.
It was MSUC (German/Toothman) to excuse the absence of Sotoa and Jemison.
ALSO PRESENT: Simon Silva, Deputy City Attorney, and Joyce Malveaux, Legal
Assistant.
2. Approval of Minutes of March 18, 2009, June 17, 2009, September 16, 2009,
• October 21, 2009, February 17, 2010, March 17, 2010, Ad Hoc Committee
Minutes April 8, 2010, and April 21, 2010
It was MSUC (Toothman/German) to approve the minutes of the March 18, 2009
meeting.
It was MSUC (German/Toothman) to adopt the minutes of the June 17, 2009 meeting.
German asked for a correction on the September 16, 2009, minutes under section 3,
Continuation of Amendments to Ethics Code changing the word "Boar" to "Board" in the
first sentence. It was MSUC (German/Schilling) to adopt the September 16, 2009,
minutes as amended.
It was MSUC (Toothman/German) to defer the October 21, 2009, minutes to the next
regularly scheduled board meeting at such time when there is a quorum to approve the
minutes.
It was MSUC (Toothman/Schilling) to adopt the February 17, 2010 minutes.
German requested a change be made to the March 17, 2010, minutes on page two,
section 5, Member Comments, third paragraph to read: "German further advised that
he received the notice for the March 17, 2010, meeting on Monday, March 15, 2010,
rather than Friday, March 12, 2010. It was MSUC (Starr/Toothman) to adopt the March
• 17, 2010 minutes as amended.
It was MSUC (German/Starr) to approve the April 8, 2010, Ad Hoc Committee minutes.
Starr suggested a change be made to the April 21, 2010, minutes under section 1, Roll
Call, Members Present removing Norma Toothman, and AI Sotoa. It was MSUC
(German/Schilling) to adopt the April 21, 2010, minutes as amended.
3. Report from the Ad Hoc Committee on Chapter 2.28.
Silva stated the Committee is set to meet on May 21, 2010, at 4:00 p.m.
4. Letter to Fair Political Practices Commission re: Status of Castaneda Complaint.
German presented the board with the letter he drafted to the FPPC re: the Steven
Castaneda Complaint EC-2002, and moved that the letter be sent as drafted.
Glanz stated this business had already been done by the board, and the board
shouldn't be used as political leveraging to go after Castaneda. Glanz implored upon
board members to be careful before voting to follow up to go after Castaneda, as has
been done time and time again. Glanz was convinced this was a chase after
Castaneda. Glanz advised he felt this was political posturing aimed to target
Castaneda, and was an improper function of the board. Glanz reiterated he was
• opposed to following up before an election to place Castaneda in an unfavorable light.
Starr questioned Glanz as to if he had an opportunity to review the initial letter sent in
July 2007. Glanz stated yes. Starr informed Glanz that in the letter it stated that the
board was asking whether or not the FPPC was going to take on the issue, and if not
the issue was to come back to the board so that the board could complete the case.
Starr further advised that the board's case had been placed on hold until such time as
the board learns whether or not the FPPC is going to pursue the matter.
German stated that the board had received notice from the District Attorney advising
they would not be pursuing the matter. German then directed board members to the
minutes of June 14, 2006, when the board decided to send the original in which Glanz
was not on the board then. German further advised that in the vote board members
took on the after substantive hearing of the Complaint against Castaneda, the board
voted to not pursue further action on the board level, but to defer to the FPPC.
German addressed the board in rebuttal to Glanz's comments, and stated that Glanz's
statement that this was political posturing or a chase against Steve Castaneda was
without foundation. German stated this was not the fact, the fact was this was a neutral
letter on its face, not submitted for any sort of political purpose other than what the letter
says, to get the FPPC to get on this, and get something back to the board, so that the
board can close its file on the matter. German respectfully submitted that Glanz's
• 2
comments were irresponsible. German stated that anyone on the board, who sat in on
the meeting when the board deliberated on the Castaneda complaint, could easily say
that Glanz's position has been consistently protective of Mr. Castaneda, but no one has
said that. German advised if Glanz was going to dish it out he was going to hear it back
in kind. German cautioned Glanz that if he wanted more, he was ready, willing, and
able.
Glanz again stated the board had already deliberated on the issue, and there was no
point in this letter other than the reasons he had already stated.
German rebutted the letter was not directed to the public, only to the FPPC. German
stated the letter was neutral in tone, and simply encourages the FPPC to get on this and
get back to the board.
Starr agreed with German and advised that this matter is still an open case until the
board receives word one way or other.
German stated justice delayed is justice denied.
It was MSUC (German/Toothman) that the letter to the FPPC be sent as drafted. Glanz
was opposed, Schilling abstained, Starr, German, and Toothman ayes.
• It was MSUC (German/Toothman) that the letter to the FPPC would be placed on Board
of Ethics letterhead, signed by German on behalf of the board, and given to the
Secretary for mailing.
Toothman added that this letter was not for or against Castaneda, but only seeking
resolution of the matter.
5. Public Comments.
There were none.
6. Member Comments.
Schilling advised he had confusion on procedural issues concerning when a complaint
is filed and how and when board members are notified, and if currently there is a
complaint filed. Schilling stated at the City Council meeting two weeks ago a speaker
stated he filed a complaint with the board, and that he had also read this in the Union
Tribune and Star News.
Starr stated that board members are notified through the secretary.
Silva commented there was a complaint filed involving Council member Thompson, and
that he was going to ask the board to place it on the next agenda for discussion. Silva
• 3
• advised that when a complaint comes in the board will be advised at the meeting that it
has been received, and then put on the agenda for discussion. Silva informed board
members once the matter is placed on the agenda for discussion the board would
decide if there was jurisdiction, if the document was in proper format, and how to
proceed.
Silva asked Starr if it was okay to place the matter on the next agenda. Starr stated
yes.
Toothman questioned if there was just one complaint. Silva replied yes.
Toothman thanked Silva for explain the complaint procedure to the board.
German informed his colleagues on the board that although it remains to be
determined, he is yet eligible to serve another term on the board for which he as asked
to be reappointed.
Glanz stated he had the highest respect for German and would be glad to see him stay
on the board. Glanz stated German was a very knowledgeable leader and passionate
to his convictions.
7. Staff Comments
Staff comments are noted under Member Comments.
ADJOURNMENT AT 4:04 p.m. to the next regularly scheduled meeting at 3:30 p.m.
<_----
Jo ce v ux
Recording Secretary
4