The San Juan Bautista City Council attempted to clear itself of
any wrongdoing regarding alleged Brown Act violations at Tuesday
night’s City Council meeting, but the citizens present were not
satisfied and by the end of the evening were left with more
questions than answers.
San Juan Bautista- The San Juan Bautista City Council attempted to clear itself of any wrongdoing regarding alleged Brown Act violations at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting, but the citizens present were not satisfied and by the end of the evening were left with more questions than answers.
“I haven’t heard a good explanation for why this was going on,” said resident Chris Brigantino, addressing the City Council toward the end of the meeting, which spanned more than three hours. “You guys are like a football team that gets to the last championship game and then starts bickering.”
The major issue addressed Tuesday was a retroactive measure to disclose the purpose and expenses of a trip to Seattle, 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. The delegation 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Development Administration to discuss the status of a $3.8 million federal grant intended to repair the Mission City’s outdated water and sewer systems. It was awarded to the city and the San Benito County Water District, but is currently suspended due to disagreements between the two parties.
The City Council voted unanimously to approve the motion, including Councilman Chuck Geiger, who initially brought the council’s actions to the attention of District Attorney John Sarsfield three weeks ago. The estimated cost to the city is approximately $3,000, after the trip itself and subsequent attorney’s fees due to the District Attorney’s investigation are accounted for.
The trip was never formally voted on, prompting Geiger to approach the district attorney on the belief that such a move was a Brown Act violation. The Brown Act dictates that all California government bodies must conduct their business in view of the public.
In order to avoid trouble with the District Attorney’s Office, the City Council was required to “cure” the violation by formally approving the trip’s expenditures at the Tuesday meeting, according to California state law.
“I don’t understand this ‘curing’ of the Brown Act,” said Rebecca McGovern, a longtime San Juan resident and a fixture at City Council meetings. “It’s like if you shoot someone and then say sorry, you didn’t mean to… You violated the Brown Act. You can’t just cure it.”
Most citizens attending the meeting seemed to share McGovern’s sentiment. At times, the crowd would become angry and disruptive, forcing the council members to wait until they quieted for the meeting to continue. At others, they vigorously applauded the words of the council or their fellow citizens, even responding with a vigorous “Amen.”
And at the behest of a speaker addressing the council, Mayor Dan Reed publicly apologized for the delegation’s trip to Seattle and the events surrounding it.
“I made a mistake, I’m new at this,” he said. “But this water grant is so important. When I found out there was an opportunity to go directly to the EDA, I jumped on it.”
But not everyone felt wronged by the City Council’s actions.
“I’m not sure why people are upset,” said Robert Quaid, a former city councilman. “They took time away from their families and work, for no personal gain.”
While discussing the Seattle trip, 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, despite the fact that San Juan and the Water District are co-grantees and the EDA has made it clear in the past that San Juan could stand to lose the money should it fail to reach an agreement with the water district and begin construction before Feb. 2008. The project to completely revamp the city’s water and sewer system will total upwards of $8 million, and the water district would contribute approximately $3.1 million in grants and loans if the two parties work together.
Following Davis’ statement, Reed asserted that a letter from the EDA should be available in a few weeks that would provide further details on the matter.
As of Wednesday, John Tobias, President of the Water Board, said he did not believe this to be the case.
“I have no control over the City Council, they’ll operate how they will,” he said. “But unless there’s a letter on the way, we’re operating with the understanding that we’re co-grantees, and we’re going to work together.”
Other council members are equally skeptical.
“I was really surprised when he (Davis) said that,” Geiger said Wednesday. “I’ll believe it when I see it in writing.”
Neither City Manager Jennifer Coile or other city council members could be reached for comment Wednesday.
Danielle Smith covers education for the Free Lance. Reach her at 637-5566, ext. 336 or [email protected]
