District Attorney John Sarsfield closed his investigation into
whether the San Juan City Council violated the Brown Act after
members came clean about a trip to Seattle to check on the status
of a water grant, saying the city solved an problems by approving
the trip retroactively.
Hollister – District Attorney John Sarsfield closed his investigation into whether the San Juan City Council violated the Brown Act after members came clean about a trip to Seattle to check on the status of a water grant, saying the city solved an problems by approving the trip retroactively.
Peter Sporel, the city’s interim attorney, believes Sarsfield’s decision to terminate the investigation vindicates the council of any wrongdoing.
“Our office has determined that no violations occurred,” he said. “And the district attorney’s dismissal suggests that he agrees with that.”
At issue was whether the City Council violated the Brown Act – California’s open meeting law – by sending a delegation of council members and city staff to Seattle to met with representatives from the Economic Development Administration to discuss the status of a $3.8 million federal grant intended to repair the Mission City’s outdated water collection system.
Sarsfield said that because the City Council retroactively approved the trip and expenditures during a council meeting last week, continuing to investigate the matter would have been moot and a waste of taxpayer’s money.
“The Brown Act allows for any violations to be cured,” Sarsfield said. “They cured any possible violations, so it’s over.”
After hearing rumors about the secret trip taken by Council members Priscilla Hill and Arturo Medina, as well as Mark Davis, a hired consultant to the city of San Juan who attended at his own expense, City Councilman Chuck Geiger brought it to the attention of the district attorney. The Brown Act dictates that all California government bodies must conduct their business in view of the public.
San Juan Bautista resident and political activist Rebecca McGovern was not assuaged by Sarsfield’s investigation.
“I don’t think he should have dropped it,” she said. “If people keep violating a law, then what use is that law? They need to be taught that they can’t do things like that. They haven’t learned their lesson.”
McGovern suggested that using the ballot box would be one way resident’s could make sure the City Council didn’t break the law in the future.
All five members of the city council did not return phone calls Wednesday.
The episode cost the city thousands of dollars to pay for the trip and subsequent attorney’s fees due to the district attorney’s investigation.
“I estimate that it cost the city $3,000 to handle the investigation of the allegation, which I would have preferred to spend on potholes or support to local businesses,” out-going City Manger Jennifer Coile said via e-mail on Wednesday.
The federal grant to overhaul the water system was awarded to the city and the San Benito County Water District, but is currently suspended due to disagreements between the two parties.
At last week’s City Council meeting, Davis revealed that his meeting with EDA representatives led him to believe it would be possible for San Juan to move forward with the project alone. In the past, the EDA has said the city and the water district are co-grantees and San Juan could lose the money should it fail to reach an agreement with the water district and begin construction before February of 2008. A letter from the EDA providing further details on the matter is expected to be available in the next couple of weeks.
The project to completely revamp the city’s water and sewer system will cost upwards of $8 million, and the water district would contribute approximately $3.1 million in grants and loans if the two parties work together.
Brett Rowland covers public safety for the Free Lance. He can be reached at 831-637-5566 ext. 330 or [email protected].
