Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2025-12-17 BOE Agenda Package Date:Wednesday, December 17, 2025 Time:5:15 p.m. Location:City Hall, Bldg. A, Executive Conference Room #103 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA Board of Ethics Regular Meeting ______________________________________________________________________________ In-Person Public Comments: Join us for the Board of Ethics meeting at the time and location specified on this agenda to make your comments. Each person will be allotted three minutes to address the Commission. Electronic Public Comments: At  www.chulavistaca.gov/boardmeetings, locate this meeting and click on the comment bubble icon. Select the item and click on "Leave Comment." The deadline to submit e- comments or any comments emailed to BOE@chulavistaca.gov will be noon on the day of the meeting. Accessibility: Individuals with disabilities are invited to request modifications or accommodations in order to access and/or participate in a Board of Ethics meeting by contacting the board staff at BOE@chulavistaca.gov (California Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired by dialing 711) at least forty-eight hours in advance of the meeting. Pages 1.CALL TO ORDER 2.ROLL CALL Board Members: Barragan, Gersten, Padilla, Torres, Velissaropoulos, Vice-Chair Hurst, and Chair Salas 3.PUBLIC COMMENTS The public may address the Commission on any subject matter within the Commission’s jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the agenda. State law generally prohibits the Committee from discussing or taking action on any issue not included on the agenda. The Committee may schedule the topic for future discussion or refer the matter to staff. 4.ACTION ITEMS Action items are considered individually by the Commission and are expected to elicit discussion and deliberation. 4.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes 4 Recommended Action: Board to approve the minutes dated October 15, 2025. 4.2 Discussion and Potential Action to Refer Draft Ex Parte Communication Policy 7 Board to review proposed draft of the Ex Parte Communication Policy. Then determine potential action. Board to refer back to Ad Hoc Sub-Committee for further review;1. Board to refer back to City Staff for further review;2. Board to forward to Council for review and approval.3. 4.3 Discussion on Board of Ethics Priorities for 2026 To discuss and identify key focus areas and priorities for the Board of Ethics for the upcoming year. 5.PRESENTATION The following item(s) will be presentations given to the Commission. Action on these item(s) is typically limited to the Commission receiving the presentation and providing direction or feedback to staff, as appropriate. 5.1 Discuss Process for Review of Ethics Complaints Review and discussion of CVMC 2.28.090 5.2 Update from Amendments to Code of Ethics Ad Hoc Sub-Committee Consists of Vice Chair Leslie Hurst and Member Alexia Velissaropoulos. 6.STAFF COMMENTS City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda Page 2 of 12 7.CHAIR'S COMMENTS 8.BOARD MEMBERS' COMMENTS 9.ADJOURNMENT to the regular meeting on Wednesday, January 21, 2025, at 5:15 p.m. Materials provided to the Board of Ethics related to any open-session item on this agenda are available for public review by contacting the City Attorney's Office at BOE@chulavistaca.gov. City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda Page 3 of 12 1 City of Chula Vista Regular Board of Ethics Meeting MINUTES October 15, 2025, 5:15 p.m. City Hall, Bldg. A, Executive Conference Room #103 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA Present:Member Barragan, Member Gersten, Member Torres, Member Velissaropoulos, Vice Chair Hurst, Chair Salas Also Present:Board Secretary Montalvo, City Attorney Verdugo Minutes are prepared and ordered to correspond to the agenda. _____________________________________________________________________ 1. CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the Board of Ethics of the City of Chula Vista was called to order at 5:16 p.m. Vice Chair Hurst arrived at 5:17 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL Secretary Montalvo called the roll. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS Robert spoke in support of various topics. 4. ACTION ITEMS 4.1 Approval of Meeting Minutes Moved by Vice Chair Hurst Seconded by Member Barragan Board to approve the minutes dated September 17, 2025. The motion was carried by the following vote: Yes (6): Member Barragan, Member Gersten, Member Torres, Member Velissaropoulos, Vice Chair Hurst, and Chair Salas Page 4 of 12 City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda 2025-10-15 Board of Ethics Regular Meeting Minutes 2 Result: Carried (6 to 0) 4.2 Written Communications Moved by Vice Chair Hurst Seconded by Chair Salas Communication from Board Member Gersten requesting an excused absence from the September 17, 2025, Board of Ethics meeting. The motion was carried by the following vote: Yes (6): Member Barragan, Member Gersten, Member Torres, Member Velissaropoulos, Vice Chair Hurst, and Chair Salas Result: Carried (6 to 0) 4.3 Discussion and Potential Action to Refer Lobbying Ordinance to City Staff for Review. Vice Chair Hurst shared it was time for new eyes to review. Moved by Vice Chair Hurst Seconded by Chair Salas To Refer Draft Lobbying Ordinance to City Staff for Review. The motion was carried by the following vote: Yes (6): Member Barragan, Member Gersten, Member Torres, Member Velissaropoulos, Vice Chair Hurst, and Chair Salas Result: Carried (6 to 0) 5. PRESENTATION 5.1 Update from Ex Parte Communication Ad Hoc Sub-Committee Secretary Montalvo shared that the item is under review by the City Attorney's Office. 5.2 Update from Amendments to Code of Ethics Ad Hoc Sub-Committee Committee shared they are still working on it. They will provide an update at the next meeting. Page 5 of 12 City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda 2025-10-15 Board of Ethics Regular Meeting Minutes 3 5.3 Update from Campaign Contribution Enforcement Authority Selection Process Ad Hoc Sub-Committee Secretary Montalvo shared that there are three applicants, and we will work to get the interviews scheduled. 5.4 Update from Board of Ethics Interview Panel Vice Chair Hurst shared that we are adding someone to the team that can hit the ground running. All three candidates were really good. 5.5 Discuss Process for Review of Ethics Complaints Chair Salas shared that he would like to review the process of complaints. Secretary Montalvo shared that the last time the Board of Ethics complaint form was amended was in 2016. The City Attorney's Office is working to update it to be more user-friendly and current. Member Barragan shared that he would like to see it modernized online. Chair Salas would like the City Attorney to bring back this item and provide details on the process. Specifically, how they are received, how they are tracked, and who confirms if they can be confidential. 6. STAFF COMMENTS Secretary Montalvo thanked Vice Chair Hurst for his assistance on the interview panel. 7. CHAIR'S COMMENTS Chair Salas thanked everyone for being here. Vice Chair Hurst thanked everyone for the experience of being on the interview panel. 8. BOARD MEMBERS' COMMENTS Member Barragan thanked Vice Chair Hurst for putting in the time. 9. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 5:54 p.m. Minutes prepared by: Sydnie Montalvo, Board Secretary _________________________ Sydnie Montalvo, Board Secretary Page 6 of 12 City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda 1 rev. 12.17.25 Draft Ex Parte Communication Purpose Principles of fundamental fairness and due process of law require that City decision- makers conduct quasi-judicial proceedings in an open, objective, and impartial manner, free from undue influence and the abuse of power and authority. Communications with parties outside of an official proceeding can lead to doubts about the fairness of the proceeding and the impartiality of the decision-makers. Establishing a policy that provides guidance and clear procedures regarding such communications promotes impartial, fair, and transparent decision-making. Statement of Policy 1. This policy applies to quasi-judicial proceedings. A quasi-judicial proceeding is a proceeding in which the decision affects the specific rights or interests of an individual or entity based on the decision makers' application of the governing law to specific facts. Quasi-judicial hearings are subject to federal and state due process, the fair hearing requirement of California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5, and additional requirements applicable to particular hearings. Quasi-judicial proceedings may involve land use permits, license revocations, nuisance abatements, and certain evidentiary proceedings. 2. This policy does not apply to legislative acts. A legislative act establishes a regulation or policy to be applied in all future cases and the ways and means of accomplishing it. Legislative acts include the adoption of ordinances or land use plans, such as general plans or specific plans. 3. Parties appearing before the City of Chula Vista (City) for a quasi-judicial proceeding deserve to have their issues heard in an open, transparent, and fair process. 4. Ex parte communications are substantive oral or written communications between an interested party and the decision-maker regarding a quasi-judicial proceeding which take place outside of a noticed hearing on the matter and without all the parties to that Page 7 of 12 City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda 2 rev. 12.17.25 proceeding present. Ex parte communications can be written communications received by a decision-maker, conversations with a decision-maker, or independent fact­finding by a decision-maker, including site visits. 5. Ex parte communications should be avoided because they can bring into question the impartiality and fairness of the hearing process. This is especially true of ex parte communications that suggest a decision-maker has assisted project proponents or opponents in formulating and advocating their positions. 6. For quasi-judicial proceedings involving land use decisions, independent site visits by a decision-maker may be useful for the decision-making process. In such cases, the site visit must be disclosed at the public hearing and indicate who was present and what was discussed. Site visits should not occur while a project proponent, opponent, or any other interested party is present. When an ex parte communication occurs, information regarding the communication should be fully disclosed so that all interested parties are aware of their communication and have an opportunity to explain or rebut the information as necessary. Procedure 1. This policy shall apply to City decision-makers in any quasi-judicial proceeding including, without limitation, City Council Members and members of all boards and commissions. 2. The City Clerk in conjunction with the City Manager and the City Attorney will identify agenda items involving quasi-judicial decisions on the agenda by prominently marking the item as such. Failure to identify an item shall not be cause for a continuance. 3. The presiding officer at a public hearing involving a quasi-judicial decision will ask each member of the decision-making body to disclose any ex parte communications prior to the time for receipt of public comment. 4. Disclosure of ex parte communications may be made verbally and should include the following information as applicable: a. The type of communication, including whether any written or other materials were provided to the decision-maker; Page 8 of 12 City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda 3 rev. 12.17.25 b. When and where the communication took place; c. Who was involved in the communication with the decision-maker; and d. The substance of the information was disclosed to the decision-maker. 5. If a decision-maker received any written or other materials as part of an ex parte communication, those materials should be provided to the City Clerk's office and included in the record of the proceedings. If the materials are no longer available at the time of the hearing, the decision-maker should provide the City Clerk's office with a description of the materials received and an explanation of why they are no longer available to include in the record of the proceedings. 6. The record in a quasi-judicial proceeding may only include evidence presented during the hearing and on the record at the hearing. Ex parte contacts occurring after a public hearing is closed and before a final decision is rendered are prohibited because there is no opportunity for rebuttal. Page 9 of 12 City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda 1 rev. 12.17.25 Draft Ex Parte Communication Purpose Principles of fundamental fairness and due process of law require that Ccity decision- makers conduct quasi-judicial proceedings in an open, objective, and impartial manner, free fromof undue influence and the abuse of power and authority. Communications with parties outside of an official proceeding can lead to doubts about the fairness of the proceeding and the impartiality of the decision -makers. Establishing a policy that disfavoring such communications and provides ing for guidance and clear procedures regarding such communications when they do occur promotes impartial, fair, and transparent decision- making. Statement of Policy 1. This policy applies to quasi-judicial proceedings. A quasi-judicial proceeding is a proceeding in which the decision affects the specific rights or interests of an individual or entity based on the decision makers' application of the governing law to specific facts. Quasi-judicial hearings are subject to federal and state due process, the fair hearing requirement of California Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5, and additional requirements applicable to particular hearings. The existence of a statute or ordinance mandating notice and a hearing is an indication that the proceeding is quasi-judicial. Quasi-judicial proceedings generally involve a determination of the rights, duties, or obligations of specific individuals based on the application of existing legal standards or policy considerations to past or present facts developed at a hearing conducted for the purpose of resolving the interests in question. Quasi-judicial proceedings are like judicial proceedings due to the adjudicatory function exercised necessary for resolution. Quasi- judicial proceedings may involve Examples are proceedings involving land use permits, license revocations,. nuisance abatements, and certain evidentiary proceedings before city boards and commissions. 2. This policy does not apply to legislative acts. A legislative act involves the establishes ment of a regulation or policy to be applied in all future cases and the ways and means of Page 10 of 12 City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda 2 rev. 12.17.25 accomplishing it. Legislative acts include the adoption of ordinances or land use plans, such as general plans or specific plans. 3. Parties appearing before the Ccity of Chula Vista (City) for a quasi-judicial proceeding deserve to have their issues heard in an open, transparent, and fair process. 4. Ex parte communications are substantive oral or written communications between an interested party and with the decision- maker regarding a quasi-judicial proceeding which takes place outside of a noticed hearing on the matter and without all the parties to that proceeding present. Ex parte communications can be written communications received by a decision- maker, substantive conversations with a decision- maker, or independent fact­finding by a decision- maker, including site visits. Ex parte communications may be received from a developer, a project proponent or opponent, or any other interested party to a quasi-judicial proceeding. 5. Ex parte communications are disfavored and should be avoided whenever possiblebecause they can bring into question the impartiality and fairness of the hearing process. This is especially true of ex parte communications that suggest a decision- maker has assisted project proponents or opponents in formulating and advocating their positions. 6. For quasi-judicial proceedings involving land use decisions, independent site visits by a decision -maker may be useful for the decision-making process. In such cases, the site visit must should be disclosed at the public hearing and indicate who was present and what was discussed. , when possible Site visits should not occur while a project proponent, opponent, or any other interested party is present. If a project proponent, opponent or other interested party is present during the site visit, the substance of any communications with the party during the site visit should also be disclosed at the public hearing. 7.6. When an ex parte communication does occurs, information regarding the communication should be fully disclosed so that all interested parties are aware of their communication and have an opportunity to explain or rebut the information as necessary. Procedure Commented [A1]: Language for consideration: Ex- parte communications lead to a deprivation of a fair hearing when an administrative body uses evidence outside the record to reach a conclusion. Commented [A2]: Suggest deleting this language. It vests discretion in the decision-maker and provides no guidance as to what we mean by "whenever possible." Commented [A3]: Suggest prohibiting ex parte communications. The language as written vests discretion in the recipient of information and provides no guidance. Commented [A4]: Same comment. In all situations, a participant who was not party to the ex parte communication can argue that the process was unfair. The best practice is to prohibit ex parte communications. Commented [A5]: What is meant by an "independent site visit." Some jurisdictions have policies for requesting a site visit instead of having decision - makers doing their own thing. From a land use law firm: "If a decision-maker acquires new information by independently visiting the site, they are obligated to disclose that information on the record during the hearing and allow all parties to dispute it. To avoid such issues, all parties should follow the formal request process. " Commented [A6]: In the land use context, site visits are generally permitted prior to hearing provided that personal investigation by the administrative body is disclosed at the outset of the hearing so that other parties can contest the observations of the administrative body. Flagstad v. San Mateo (1957) 156 Cal.App.2d 138, 141. Commented [A7]: Same concern about not defining what is meant by "when possible." Commented [A8]: This is language the City of Berkeley uses: “Where information of a specific nature is gathered by a member of the City Council or a board or commission, though contacts outside the record, and the information is not already in the record, the member shall, to the extent feasible, keep contemporaneous notes of the substance of the contact and shall disclose the contact and its substance on the record prior to the commencement of the hearing to which such contact relates. Where the information is received during the pendency of a hearing the matter shall be disclosed prior to completion of the hearing and the parties and public shall have an opportunity to respond if the matter is substantially new information.” Page 11 of 12 City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda 3 rev. 12.17.25 1. This policy shall apply to the mayor, City Council members, and members of all boards and commissions when serving asCity decision -makers in any quasi-judicial proceeding including, without limitation, City Council Members and members of all boards and commissions. 2. The Ccity Cclerk in conjunction with the Ccity Mmanager and the Ccity Aattorney will identify agenda items involving quasi-judicial decisions on the agenda by prominently marking the item as suchfor the City Council or any board of Commission. Failure to identify an item shall not be cause for a continuance. 3. The presiding officer at a public hearing involving a quasi-judicial decision will ask each member of the decision-making body to disclose any ex parte communications prior to the time for receipt of public comment. 4. Disclosure of ex parte communications may be made verbally and should include the following information as applicable: a. The type of communication, including whether any written or other materials were provided to the decision-maker; b. When and where the communication took place; c. Who was involved in the communication with the decision- maker; and d. The substance of the information was disclosed to the decision-maker. 5. If a decision -maker received any written or other materials as part of an ex parte communication, those materials should be provided to the Ccity Cclerk's office and included in the record of the proceedings. If the materials are no longer available at the time of the hearing, the decision -maker should provide the Ccity Cclerk's office with a description of the materials received and an explanation of why they are no longer available to include in the record of the proceedings. 6. Ex parte contacts occurring after a public hearing is closed and before a final decision is rendered are prohibited because there is no opportunity for rebuttal. The record in a quasi-judicial proceeding may only include evidence presented during the hearing and on the record at the hearing. Ex parte contacts occurring after a public hearing is closed and before a final decision is rendered are prohibited because there is no opportunity for rebuttal. Commented [A9]: Note that some jurisdictions require the information recipient to create contemporaneous notes. Page 12 of 12 City of Chula Vista Board of Ethics December 17, 2025 Agenda