While no official body has weighed in, it seems clear
Councilwoman Pauline Valdivia has a conflict of interest in the
discussion about whether the city should retain some or all of the
employees on the layoff list. Her daughter is a support services
assistant at City Hall and is on that list.
While no official body has weighed in, it seems clear Councilwoman Pauline Valdivia has a conflict of interest in the discussion about whether the city should retain some or all of the employees on the layoff list. Her daughter is a support services assistant at City Hall and is on that list.
If Valdivia were to vote on layoffs, she would have an impact on her daughter’s livelihood. The Fair Political Practices Commission ethics code in such cases is clear. It says elected officials have an economic interest in their own income as well as the income of their immediate family.
“If these are likely to go up or down as a result of the governmental decision, then it has a ‘personal financial effect’ on you,” the code states.
Valdivia should recuse herself from the discussion and any vote taken on the matter because the City Council could reduce the number of layoffs it planned for the end of the month.
The city is struggling to balance a $4 million budget shortfall and, late last year, the Council approved a list of 36 employees to lay off. Twenty-three of those already have left the city, leaving 13 who still could lose their jobs.
But an independent audit of the city books recently showed the city is not in quite as bad of shape as originally thought. Interim City Manager Clint Quilter, during Tuesday’s budget hearings, suggested the Council could keep all but one of those employees, including Valdivia’s daughter.
Valdivia says she can remain objective in casting her vote. Perhaps she can. But the situation also brings up the appearance of a conflict.
For instance, several Council members were skeptical about Quilter’s suggestion to keep employees, but Valdivia argued in favor of the idea. Her points may have been valid, but the fact that her daughter’s job is one of the positions she was arguing to keep could cast doubt on her motives.
Mayor Tony Bruscia stopped short of asking Valdivia to recuse herself Wednesday, but he had his doubts about the situation.
“If I was in her shoes, I would step aside,” he said.
The case is even more cut and dry for Peter Scheer, the executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition, a government watchdog group.
“It’s clearly a conflict of interest to be voting on whether your own family member gets to keep a job,” he said. “It’s ridiculous to think that she can possibly be objective in this interest when it comes to the question of whether (her daughter) is going to have a job.”
We think that for Valdivia to avoid a conflict of interest, perceived or otherwise, she must recuse herself from any future discussion and votes on city layoffs. The city has its hands full balancing its budget. It doesn’t need to have its attention drawn away by arguments about favoritism and conflicts of interest.
To respond to this editorial or comment on this issue, please send or bring letters to Editor, Hollister Free Lance, 350 Sixth St., Hollister, Calif. 95023 or fax to 637-4104 or e-mail to [email protected]
