The current investigation into possible corruption in local
government is not the first time the state’s Fair Political
Practices Commission has been in San Benito County.
The commission, which oversees the behavior of local and state
elected officials, has investigated several complaints concerning
local elections and politicians, according to state records.
The current investigation into possible corruption in local government is not the first time the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission has been in San Benito County.
The commission, which oversees the behavior of local and state elected officials, has investigated several complaints concerning local elections and politicians, according to state records.
However, most of the investigations have turned up little in the way of serious offenses, San Benito County Clerk John Hodges said.
Hodges, who oversees the county’s elections office among other duties, said the FPPC rarely has reason to investigate in San Benito County.
“Oh, they do an audit every once in a while,” he said. “The only time they contact us is to update us on new policies or paperwork.
Hodges, the county clerk since 1983, said that except for one instance, the few times the FPPC has actually ruled against someone or some agency locally has been for fairly minor violations.
In 1998, Granite Construction Company was fined $2,000 for forgetting to disclose loans made for the purpose of signature gathering for the Gaming Control Act of 1996 on a major donor campaign statement.
In 2002, Graniterock agreed to pay a $1,500 fine for not filing a donation disclosure form on time.
The most serious investigation came in 1994, when the FPPC accused then City Councilman Seth Irish of seven counts of conflict of interest.
It was alleged that during a two year period, Irish – who owned a surveying and engineering firm – reportedly appeared before the city Planning Commission to speak on behalf of his then clients, Kaufman and Broad a development company.
Irish, who later stepped down from his seat on the council, paid a fine assessed by the FPPC, according to state records. Irish was never charged with a crime or sent to go to jail.
Nearly 30 years ago, the state set up a legal barrier to prevent elected officials from using their position in government to benefit themselves financially. That barrier is the Political Reform Act of 1974.
The Act mandates that, “No public official at any level of state or local government shall make, participate in making or in any way attempt to use his official position to influence a governmental decision in which he knows or has reason to know he has a financial interest.”
According to the law, an official is considered to have a financial interest in something if it is “reasonably foreseeable” that the decision will have a financial effect on a business in which the public official is a director, officer, partner, manager, trustee or employee.
“The state Legislature updated the Act in 1993, so now it also prohibits public officials from attempting to influence their agency or an agency subject to their budgetary control in matters that could affect a client or customer of theirs,” said Richard Felton, a spokesman for Common Cause, a government watchdog group.
He said most of the 400 or 500 complaints against government officials each year are dismissed by the FPPC for lack of evidence or because they do not fit the criteria established in the Reform Act.
