YL Conflict Question unmasked:
It has been no secret that I have a potential conflict of interest issue because my residence borders the Town Center Redevelopment area and is with in 500 feet of some of the parcels, including Site 13 and Altrudy. The issue has been written about in the local paper prior to my election in 2006 and has been discussed numerous times over the years in public council meetings available on cable and the Internet.
The sole reason I entered the political arena was due to a high density housing project proposed in my “backyard” on the redevelopment site 13. My role as community activist, prior to my election, was to stop the 2006 high-density commercial and residential town center project and restore a reasonable development process.
The very people who are currently making a POLITICAL issue of my potential conflict were my supporters during my election.
Why are they fighting me now?
Since elected, I have taken my role as Councilwoman very seriously . My oath of office directs me to represent the entire community to the best of my ability.
Very soon after my election in 2006, the 9-10 member YLRRR board began directing me how I should vote on certain issues. Even though they put incredible pressure on me, I REFUSED to be TOLD how to VOTE which resulted in loss of their support.
Cost associated with my conflict:
Mr. Anderson and the YLRRR board member who filed the pubic records request a year ago, now allege that I owe the community $8400. Their assertions are based on a misrepresentation of the facts. These attorney bills are the result of City generated costs, not at my request.
These costs included:
• Meetings called by the City Manager including the City attorney to discuss and determine the extent of my conflict
• Calls to my attorney by the city attorney to provide information for filing my self-funded FPPC rulings
• Costs associated with the City attorney to interpret the FPPC rulings received and to direct staff on how to apply these rulings to projects coming to Council
• City staff generated FPPC requests on specific projects in the town center.
I promised the community to file these letters with the FPPC at my own cost and I have kept that promise. The FPPC is the only agency that can give a public official immunity and is the final word on conflict issues. To date, I have paid over $5000 in legal bills in order to obtain necessary FPPC rulings. With these rulings I have acquired permission to participate in many discussions regarding the town center development to date, with the exception of the sites within 500 feet of my home.
I never stated I would pay for City generated costs.
It is unprecedented for a Council person to pay for any FPPC rulings while performing duties as an elected official.
Recognizing my conflict of interest, I accepted financial responsibility as a sign of good faith on my part. Even though I have made every effort to be honest and fair, I am now being attacked and my integrity is being questioned.
On April 20th during a council meeting, Mr Anderson used Council Policy A-12 to impugn my integrity even though this policy does not state a Councilperson has to pay for their own FPPC rulings. The policy states, the City Attorney can work with the Councilmember to determine if a conflict exists. If the potential conflict is unclear, the policy states the FPPC will have to make the final determination. The policy does not outline who pays for the FPPC inquiry. To view this document, click on image below:
 |
 |
The bigger question is:
When will Mr. Anderson start begin acting as a Council Member instead of a Prosecutor?
Instead of trying to block my ability to participate in the town center project, when will he and the majority Council he controls take steps to determine the use of Site 13 and the Altrudy site?
By doing this they would ensure that the entire Council could participate in creating a viable Town Center.
Can this happen?
- Yes it can.
Why will this never happen?
Mr Anderson and I do not agree on the direction of the town center development. One example, he and the majority Council he controls appear to favor using taxpayer redevelopment funds to refurbish the older homes on Lakeview stating they are historic.
My position:
• Old does not mean historic.
• They are situated on valuable town center real estate that will not accomplish the goals of a viable town center project.
• It will cost 100’s of thousands of dollars to rehabilitate these homes.
• This is not a good use of our redevelopment funds.
Unfortunately, the 2010 campaign for the Yorba Linda City Council, has already turned ugly. Current councilmembers, Individuals or groups often will attempt to create issues without a full explanation and/or with misrepresentation of the facts. This is typical political strategy familiar to us all.
I would ask that you examine all sides of the issues before you believe a few peoples opinion. I encourage everyone to watch the Council meetings on cable or via the internet. It is important to view the entire discussion about topics of interest and the reasons for the decisions being made.
If you have a hard time navigating the Council meetings and the agendas, let me know and I will send you links to the topics you are interested in. In short, make your own informed decisions.
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
Jan;
As I write this I have not fully reviewed the other side of this issue. However, since your election I have observed an effort to communicate with the people of Yorba Linda in an open and factual manner, unlike your colleague’s. I tend to agree with your position on the town center. Addtionally I don’t expect taxpayer money to be spent on old home’s and don’t see any historical value as a tax payer. While I have not always agreed with your position’s I admire your honest approach to the issues and willingness to listen to others who disagree. For the record I do agree with you and Mr. Winder regarding the sewer; why pay for another vote if the council has not changed its position. Then again if the council has changed its position why do we need another vote? Sounds like more Government waste to me. Keep up the good work
As a subscriber of Time Warner, I used to have the privilege of following the council meetings live on Thursdays; however, having converted to AT&T, I no longer have that capability.
I’m sorry to plead ignorance to the issues you write about and appreciate your communicating by E-mail. I did not know I could follow by internet and am severely “technologically handicaped”…but I will try to keep better informed. When I DID watch the council meetings, I always envied your very soft-spoken, yet clear voice on the issues. Over the years, and especially in the last few, I have come to think “politics stink”..no matter WHAT setting…local or national. It will take a LOT for me to believe otherwise.
Thank you for your news letters.
Sincerely,
Patti Webb
Update: The policy the majority Council used to discredit me was never adopted by the Council in 1997. Not sure how it ended up in our Council Policy Book. To view the Council meeting where this took place in 1997, go to: http://www.youtube.com/horton4yl
This is an 18 minute video documenting the discussion that evening.