Special counsel investigation sustains allegations against two Yorba Linda City Council members

 

A special counsel investigation into allegations that two Yorba Linda City Council members violated provisions of the city's 13-year-old ethics ordinance when they were candidates in the Nov. 8 election has resulted in four of the six being "sustained" and passed on for further investigation.

Three of five allegations against Councilmember Carlos Rodriguez and one allegation against Councilmember Janice Lim were that sustained -- meaning "more likely than not" would be considered a violation -- will be forwarded to the Orange County District Attorney for investigation and potential enforcement. The investigation was conducted by the city's special counsel Hanson Bridgett and reported out at the March 7 council meeting by partner Steven Miller.

The allegations were brought by Ryan Bent, who ran third to Rodriguez and Lim for two council positions in the November election. Bent is an elected trustee in the North Orange County Community College District and a council-appointed member of the city Library Commission.

At the council meeting, Mayor Gene Hernandez said the city and council take complaints of ethics violations "very seriously" and with the completion of the special counsel report, "the city considers the matter concluded."

Miller said, "The City Council has reviewed and accepted (the) findings of this investigation." 

One of the sustained allegations against Rodriguez involved a failure "to disqualify himself from acting on a land use entitlement matter when he had received a campaign contribution of $250 or more from the land use beneficiary within 12 months prior to the council action," according to the letter sent to Bent with the investigation's results that he shared.

The letter said Rodriguez "received a $250 contribution from Shea Homes on June 4, 2021" and "did not disqualify himself from voting on the matter" on July 20, 2021.

Another involved "accepting a campaign contribution from an existing city contractor," namely $250 from LSA Associates, which provides "on-call services to the city related to traffic and transportation engineering."

The third involved "soliciting a political endorsement from a labor association affiliated with city contractors – specifically from the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs," which asked Rodriguez to fill out a questionnaire on his positions as part of its process and subsequently endorsed him.

Not considered sustained were allegations related to another contribution from Shea Homes and soliciting an endorsement from the county's firefighters union. The Fire Authority is not considered a city contractor under the ordinance; it is paid through property taxes.

Rodriguez returned the Shea Homes and LSA contributions.

The allegation against Lim involved "soliciting a political endorsement from a labor association affiliated with city contractors – specifically from the Association of Orange County Deputy Sheriffs," which subsequently endorsed her.

At the March council meeting, Hernandez asked Rodriguez and Lim if they wanted "to make a comment or no" on Miller's oral report on the findings, and they didn't respond. When reached by phone, Lim said she had no comment, and Rodriguez has yet to respond.

Controversial proposal to hire research firm to help revise Yorba Linda housing plan dropped from City Council agenda

 

A controversial proposal to hire a research firm to help revise Yorba Linda's housing plan in an effort to gain voter approval for sufficient rezoning to meet a state mandate to provide opportunities for 2,415 housing units was dropped from a recent City Council agenda.

A previous plan to meet the state's requirement failed in November 2022 balloting by a wide margin, with 21,937 voters opposed and 7,221 in favor on Measure Z. The city aims to pre-sent a revised plan to voters in the March 2024 primary or November 2024 general election.

The city's current housing plan – or “housing element” in bureaucratic jargon – is now state-certified, but certification might be withdrawn, if voters again turn down a rezoning measure. Lack of certification could result in a loss of local control for zoning and building.

The dropped agenda item proposed hiring Los Angeles-based FM3 Research Associates to provide “public opinion research assistance related to the 2021-2029 General Plan Housing Element.” It was on a “consent calendar,” consisting of nine items bundled for a single vote.

FM3 was cited for guiding Costa Mesa on a 2022 ballot measure that resulted in a favorable vote for a rezoning plan, which passed on a slim 22-vote margin, 16,483 yes and 16,461 no.

In 2016, Costa Mesa voters approved an ordinance similar to Yorba Linda's Measure B, which since 2006 has required a public vote on major changes to city zoning documents. The Costa Mesa vote was 26,132 in favor and 12,081 opposed.

The 2022 Costa Mesa rezoning measure carried the lengthy ballot title “Ordinance to Revitalize Commercial and Industrial Areas and Protect Residential Neighborhoods.”

Interestingly, FM3's 15-page proposal presented to Yorba Linda stated the firm helped Costa Mesa “draft the final 75-word title and ballot summary in a way that was palatable to voters....”

The FM3 plan had called for two 10-person focus groups to probe participants' “thoughts and opinions about a rezoning measure that would enable the development of affordable housing” and “reasons why people may have not voted to pass” Measure Z.

A survey would involve 400 participants to gauge support for a land-use measure, evaluate “informational messages that could help voters understand the value of the ballot measure” and test “vulnerability to common opposition themes.”

A follow-up survey would test an updated version of a 75-word ballot measure title and summary, evaluate impacts of city outreach efforts and check any potential changes in voter opinions and attitudes toward the city and/or tolerance of a potential ballot measure.

In a report to council, Community Development Director Dave Brantley said FM3 would “gather valuable community input to guide the next steps in the city's housing element process,” noting “a deeper understanding of the community's concerns is important to any effort to revise the housing plan in a meaningful way.”

Placentia-Yorba Linda Unified School District trustees examine booster club, security cameras policies; superintendent 'disappointed' with delay in discussion of 'safe and environment'

 

Policies dealing with parent-led booster clubs and campus security cameras were two notable items examined by Placentia-Yorba Linda school district trustees at their most recent meeting.

First reading of a new policy that addresses school-connected organizations won a 4-0 vote of support by trustees, with a final second reading scheduled at the board's April 11 meeting.

The policy specifically applies to booster clubs supporting educational and extracurricular programs and doesn't impact the district's foundation or PTA groups at individual schools.

District officials will be meeting with the parent leaders of the clubs, as well as the coaches, teachers and other personnel who are involved in the organizations, for further input on the details of the policy before the April session.

One reason for the new policy is to formalize the district's interest in ensuring that a club's request for donations from parents is reasonable and does not prevent a student from participating in a class, team or any after-school activity.

Requirements included in the policy: a list of fundraising projects, an explanation of donations to be requested from the families of each participant and a draft of the donation request letter.

And as noted in the state education code, “Any participation in fundraising activities by students and their parents/guardians and/or any donation of funds or property shall be voluntary.”

In addition, teachers and coaches may have advisory roles in the clubs, but neither they nor family members may hold offices, and the district has the right to audit club financial records.

The security camera policy calls for camera placement in “appropriate locations” and not “in areas where students, staff or community members have a reasonable expectation of privacy.”

Also, sounds will not be recorded, school entrance signs will inform of video monitoring and “matters captured by the cameras may be referred to local law enforcement, as appropriate.”

* * *

Interim Superintendent Michael Matthews told trustees he was “disappointed” by a decision to delay discussion regarding the board focus area entitled “Safe and Respectful Environment.”

The focus area reads: “A safe and respectful environment is essential to student success. We foster a culture that promotes the emotional health, safety and well-being of students, staff and parents.”

At a January meeting, Matthews noted recent challenges with student behavior that is non-inclusive, and he said he would bring the matter back to the board for additional discussion.

The board tabled the discussion until April 11 on a 3-1 vote (Leandra Blades, Todd Frazier and Shawn Youngblood in favor and Marilyn Anderson opposed; Carrie Buck was absent).

Youngblood said the time was not right because of the superintendent search, and Blades called the matter “divisive politics” and said the topics have been addressed by resolutions.