2012-12-12 Board of Ethics minutes

Home

commission or an appointed or an elected official, that there is someplace I can go that I can talk about it, because these things do happen. And the last thing I want to remind you is that yes, I am a living part of history, and that a long time ago my father asked of Jim Jones, why are you all calling him father and why are you putting him on the redevelopment commission? Two years later, 913 people are dead in a foreign country and nobody gave a damn. So don’t tell me that this is statute of limitations. This is ethics, the moral standard and fiber of this country. It’s up to you, and I don’t want you to pass this on because Fred’s not here. There’s a whole lot of other people. And let me tell you something, and I’ll say this to you and I don’t have to raise my hand. I am not done with Zendo Kern and that whole incident before the Planning Commission. Now that he is the committee chair of the Planning Commission, I believe that that appointment smacks of conflict of interest. It’s indecent, and I hope, and I swear hostility to it. So you all do your duty, because I’m telling you something. I got proof, and I don’t want to spend my whole 2013 looking like some kind of fool out there in the community only to come back here and be vindicated by you. So I thank you for the leniences that you gave me on this. The other thing that I want to say, that number b, please do your best to sort it all out. Please do your best to sort it all out. Thank you very much. 3. APPROVAL OF THE REGULAR SESSION MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 19, 2012 Motion and vote: Mr. Henricks moved to approve the minutes, Mr. Hisashima seconded the motion, and they and Mr. Balsis voted aye. 4. NEW BUSINESS a. Petition No. 2012-07: Initial review of petition alleging violation of Section 2- 83(a)(3) (under fair treatment) of the Code of Ethics where a County officer allegedly stated at a public hearing that the officer’s polling place did not open on time on the primary election day, that he saw cars turned away, and that when he asked what was going on, he was told by voters that the poll was closed and they could not vote. Petitioners contend that “the poll opened on time, all voters were able to vote, and there was no drive through of cars that were turned away.” MR. BALSIS: The petitioner, RJ, if you could come forward please. RJ, you had made some statements during the general discussion. Do you have anything you’d like to add at this point? MS. HAMPTON: Well, to be brief, I try to put all my points on one piece of paper, so – I believe that I did ask, what I am asking of you, is that you look into this. If for some reason intentional deception is exempt from the Ethics Code and/or rules governing the Council, it will be in our opinion—call into question the very credibility of the process. So I’m looking at—the reason we did this is because I actually believe that it was intentional, that even if it was a thing called—it’s a thing in psychology that we call, a thought process called misremembering. And misremembering, it’s a nice way of saying