Loading...
m20210126_Spec.pdf 1 January 26, 2021 CITY OF SANTA MONICA CITY COUNCIL MINUTES JANUARY 26, 2021 A special meeting of the Santa Monica City Council was called to order by Mayor Himmelrich at 4:00 p.m., on Tuesday, January 26, 2021, via teleconference pursuant to the Governor’s Executive Order N-29-20 at https://primetime.bluejeans.com/a2m/live-event/tzszchdr Roll Call: Present: Mayor Sue Himmelrich Mayor Pro Tem Kristin McCowan Councilmember Phil Brock Councilmember Gleam Davis Councilmember Oscar de la Torre (arrived at 4:04 p.m.) Councilmember Kevin McKeown Councilmember Christine Parra Also Present: Interim City Manager Lane Dilg Interim City Attorney George Cardona City Clerk Denise Anderson-Warren CONVENE On order of the Mayor, the City Council convened at 4:00 p.m., with all members present except Councilmember De la Torre. STAFF ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS: Councilmember De la Torre arrived at 4:04 p.m. 8.A. Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica – Determination Regarding Common Law Conflict of Interest of Councilmember de la Torre, was presented. Recommended Action With respect to the pending litigation in Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica, Los Angeles Superior Court, Case No. BC 616804, Second District Court of Appeal, Case No. B295935, California Supreme Court, Case No. S263972, in which one plaintiff is an association for which Councilmember de la Torre was, until November 2020, a board member, and the other plaintiff is Councilmember de la Torre’s wife, staff recommends that Council determine that, in accordance with the principles set out in AG Opinion 07-807 (Jan. 14, 2009), Councilmember de la Torre has a common law conflict of interest and is therefore disqualified from participating in or attempting to influence discussions or decisions relating to this litigation. Questions asked and answered of staff included, was there any preliminary opinion from the FPPC; is there a timeframe that we can expect a final DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CFF2B6F-B437-42A7-BDC0-D5E46157FB47 2 January 26, 2021 determination; could Council temporarily disqualify Councilmember De la Torre pending a decision from an outside agency; even if the FPPC rules on the financial conflict issues, there still won’t be a decision on the common law issue; is it accurate, any decision from the FPPC won’t address the common law issue that is being raised tonight; is it correct that this decision is being determined by the City Council, not the City Attorney; if this were a financial conflict, then the FPPC would be the higher power for resolution, but because this is not a financial issue, who is the higher power on this type of matter; what are the penalties if a Councilmember is found to have a conflict; what determines when Attorney-Client privilege is broken, and who decides when it’s broken; what is the penalty of privilege being broken; is that correct that the FPPC has not given a determination; who advised the Interim City Attorney to seek a decision from the State Attorney General; has anyone on the dais had conversations about the recusal issues with Attorney Shenkman, who is the legal representative for the CVRA lawsuit; how long would it take to receive a court action from this; and, is there a way to proceed with the prior direction, without addressing issues that would cause Councilmember De la Torre to have to recuse. Members of the public Stan Epstein, Ann Thanawalla, Denise Barton, Tricia Crane, Bob Selden, and, Olga Zurawska spoke to the recommended action. Councilmember De la Torre responded to a comment made by a member of the public that he was advocating for the Pico Neighborhood Association to drop the CVRA case, and that is not true. He said, he would prefer that the city drop its appeal. Considerable discussion ensued on topics including, but not limited to: reasons this is viewed as a conflict of interest because this is about litigation, not a discussion about public policy; it was obvious that Councilmember De la Torre was involved from the beginning of this litigation as the opposition; this is not about the merits of whether or not the city should have district elections, this is about allowing a spouse of a litigant be allowed in the room for a private discussion; Council needs to air on the side of caution and integrity; closed session is a sacred space, so it’s better to air on the side of caution and consider this a conflict of interest; and, everybody brings their own bias or opinion, but that is not a conflict of interest, because Councilmember De la Torre is married to the person who brought about the lawsuit against the city, therefore he should not be allowed to sit in on the closed session discussion. Councilmember De la Torre shared why he should be able to participate, and provided statements to support his opinion, and why he is not planning to recuse. DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CFF2B6F-B437-42A7-BDC0-D5E46157FB47 3 January 26, 2021 Motion by Councilmember McKeown, seconded by Councilmember Davis, that the City Council respectfully request Councilmember De la Torre to recuse himself on all matters involving Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya versus the City of Santa Monica, and that should he decline that respectful request, that Council determine that a conflict of interest exists, and he is therefore disqualified from participating in any discussion related to the litigation. After considerable discussion, as part of the original motion, Councilmember McKeown respectfully requested that Councilmember De la Torre voluntarily recuse himself. Councilmember De la Torre stated that he would not recuse himself. Since Councilmember De la Torre refused to recuse himself. The Mayor restated the new motion for clarification that the City Council will determine that Councilmember De la Torre is disqualified because he has a common law conflict of interest, and therefore would be disqualfied from participating in, voting, or attempting to influence discussion or decisions relating to this litigation Pico Neighborhood Association and Maria Loya v. City of Santa Monica. The motion was approved by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers Davis, McKeown, Mayor Pro Tem McCowan, Mayor Himmelrich NOES: Councilmembers Parra, De la Torre ABSTAIN: Councilmember Brock ADJOURNMENT On order of the Mayor, the City Council meeting adjourned at 5:44 p.m. ATTEST: APPROVED: Denise Anderson-Warren Sue Himmelrich City Clerk Mayor DocuSign Envelope ID: 5CFF2B6F-B437-42A7-BDC0-D5E46157FB47