Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1995/04/24 Board of Ethics Minutes CORRECTED CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA MINUTES OF A BOARD OF ETHICS MEETING April 24, 1995 City Attorney's Conference Room 3:30 P.M. MEMBERS PRESENT: Harriet Acton, Susan Herney, Villegas, Jerry McNutt, Billy Kelley, Carson, and Richard Schulman Martha Joanne MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney The meeting was called to order by Chairman Acton at 3:45 p.m. Roll was called and all members were present. MSUC (McNutt/Carson) to approve the minutes of the March 20, 1995 meeting. Aqenda Item 3 - Report from Chairman Acton reqardinq Meetinq with Mavor Horton. Chairman Acton reported Mayor Horton was adamant about having the legal panel as part of the Ethics program. Bruce Boogaard reported he had met with Toni McKean and it was decided the legal panel would be at the end of the training especially since Michael Josephson had to leave early. Member McNutt inquired if any outsiders, such as the Port District, had been invited. All board and commission members are being invited. The secretary was requested to add a "Progress Report" to the next agenda for further discussion. Susan Herney wanted staff to know if any assistance was needed, the Board of Ethics would be willing to help. Since the Board will have two new members on July 1, Joanne Carson inquired if the new members could be invited to the training as well. Attorney Boogaard pointed out the Council cannot make an appointment until a vacancy occurs as of June 30. It was, therefore, suggested that all applicants for the Board of Ethics be invited. Aqenda Item 4 - Discussion of "Homework" Assiqnment on Suqqested Prohibitions for Inclusion in section 2.28.050. Discussion ensued regarding the appointment process for members of the Board of Ethics and the fact that Judge Cannon as presiding Judge of the Municipal did not wish to make a recommendation for appointment. Board of Ethics 4-24-95 Minutes Page 2 Susan Herney felt since the members of the b/c/c's are volunteers, who are not elected, and once they serve honorably, regardless of politics, they have earned the right to a second term. It was pointed out there has not been a problem with the appointment process contained in section 2.28.110 until Judge Cannon. Since there is a new Presiding Judge this year, it is hoped it may no longer be a problem. Attorney Boogaard sees three possible options (1) an 8-year term (2) two terms, the second of which is dependent upon honorable service or (3) more control by the Council so the second term is within the discretion of the Council and not automatic. Member Schulman felt a four-year term is long enough to make an impact and since there is no guaranteed tenure, he sees no reason to push the Council. Susan Herney asked that the procedure outlined in the Board/ Commission handbook be followed so that members of b/c/c's know what to expect. Harriet Acton pointed out the City Clerk's office keeps tabs on member's terms, applications received and forwards them on to Mayor Horton for an appointment when a vacancy occurs. Mayor Horton has been taking care of appointments immediately. The Board reviewed proposed changes to section 2.28.110A. Organization. 2.28.110 organization. A. The Board shall be composed of seven members appointed by the city Council for a term of four years, as prescribed by the provisions of the City Charter and the Municipal Code of the City of Chula vista. Prior to exercisinq their authoritv to appoint a person to membership. t~he City Council shall be rel!uircd te sUBmit refer for recommendation the list and qualifications of applicants oaRdidatcG to the Presiding Judge of the South Bay Municipal Court Judicial District or his or her desiqnee. who should review the list of applicants and their qualifications. and who should not less than 5 for the purpose of conductinq in-person interviews and who shall conduct such interviews. If said Judqe or desiqnee declines or fails to review such applicants. or conduct such interviews. or make such recommendations. than the Council shall interview such applicants themselves personallY. and may make an appointment iointlv passed with four affirmative Board of Ethics 4-24-95 Minutes Page 3 votes. aHa sccl, thc j ua"Jc' G recOInlllcHaatisH .;i th rcgard to appointlllel'ltG. No such person mav be appointed as a member. or shall be entitled to retain their membership, if he or she has been convicted of a crime involvinq moral turpitude. or has been found to have committed a violation of the Fair Political Practices Act. Member Schulman suggested adding the phrase "within the past _ years, prior to the date of appointment" at the end of the section. The Board generally discussed crimes involving moral turpitude, misdemeanors, felonies and violations of the Fair Political Practices Act. Various time frames were considered: (a) 5 to 7 years because of a rehabilitation aspect or (b) 10 years. MS (Carson/Herney) to accept the language in ~2.28.110 the way it is with no time limits. Discussion: Billy Kelley questioned if the wording dealing with a crime involving moral turpitude is the same requirement that applies to the City Council? Attorney Boogaard stated "not exactly" because the Charter states a "felony or other crime involving moral turpitude", but it could be made co-terminus wi th that language. Richard Schulman stated there are so many technical requirements of the Fair Political Practices Act, that it's not that uncommon for elected officials to violate its provisions. Attorney Boogaard mentioned the FPPC can levy a fine on a civil finding and you could add "committed a criminal violation of the Fair Political Practices Act". The motion was amended to include the attorney's recommendation. Motion passed 5- 1-I (Kelley opposed) (Schulman abstained). Attorney Boogaard noted Billy Kelley's concerns to consider a rehabilitative concept of time from 5 to 7 years. Member Schulman felt if we are not going to have a time limit, he would rather not have language relating to crime in the section. He could more easily vote for it without such provision as a time limit can be arbitrary and not relevant when a person may have been convicted of a crime many years previously. MS (Carson/villegas) Amendment passed by abstained) . to amend the motion to include 10 years. a vote of 6-1-1 (Kelley opposed) (Schulman MSUC (Schulman/Herney) to adjourn at 5:15 p.m. to their next meeting on Thursday, May 11, 1995 at 3:45 p.m. Board of Ethics 4-24-95 Minutes Page 4 '/;' ~... ... -- " " ~~ o-V1.<_1..-l. 'l'''-C- - ;- L<\. f;2t. -(/ Lorraine Kraker C:\ethics\.inutes\4.24-95