More Harkey Recall Kerfuffle
Posted by: Jubal | 09/06/2007 9:33 PM
Yesterday, I got this from Diane Harkey consultant Scott Hart. It's a "resolution" opposing the attempt to recall Dana Point Mayor Diane Harkey and is signed by four of the five Dana Point councilmembers (including Diane Harkey, which looks silly).
The three other councilmembers are Harkey allies, so no real surprise there.
Today, an e-mail comes over the transom from giest of the Harkey recall, former DP Councilman Jim Lacy:
Attached is Harkey recall proponents response to Harkey's latest ethically challenged action. The City will receive this letter on Saturday. It has 30 days to "cure or correct" the defect, by either setting aside the Resolution, agendizing the Resolution opposing the Recall at a future meeting, and allowing public comment and debate before a vote, or just dropping it. If it fails to do so, recall proponents will sue the city within 15 days thereafter to declare the Resolution that appears on Total Buzz and OC Blog as "null and void."
Lacy's contention is the resolution is a violation of the Brown Act because is it signed by a majority of the DP councilmembers and there are five signature lines.
You're gonna have to color me underwhelmed on this one. There's nothing to indicate this is an official city resolution -- not even the councilmembers' names and titles are printed underneath their signatures. If these four councilmembers signed a card agreeing that the recipient should have a happy birthday, is that a violation of the Brown Act, too?
Other than the officious use of whereases, there's nothing official about this resolution. I'm interested to see if Lacy gets anywhere with this maneuver, but if this is the stuff of which the recall proponents hope victory is made, my prediction is they'll be disappointed.
Martin Wisckol and Art Pedroza posted their respective reactions.
I don't see this as an official act either -there is no resolution number no titles, no nothing - unless it was meant to be preliminary to an official city resolution in which case a Brown Act violation has already occurred. If it was't ever meant to become official, the appearance (to me at least) is an attempt to create a document that seems official for PR purposes. In fact, that's what happened - Harkey's campaign consultant aired the document - calling it both a letter and a resolution.
Four private citizens hardly ever get together to create something called a resolution. Why would they?
Again, circle the wagons.
Last time, when Harkey stumbled, the OCBLOG spin machine said that the Dana Point Today mailer was nothing and no big deal and not anything violating any issue and a made up claim by the protagonists and a red herring and a cry wolf over nothing and sour grapes and not a violation of anything and a weak attempt to bolster their claims and and and…
And, yet, the city sent a cease and desist letter to Dana Point Today to stop using the seal.
The sad part of all of this is the blind hypocrisy that is clearly apparent.
So, this ‘resolution’ is just a mindless piece of paper with 4 random signatures with no significance (just like a birthday card) and has no meaning and no value and no expectation that it could be perceived as a resolution from the City Council and clearly could never be a brown act etc…
Riiiiiigggggghhhhhhhhttt, wink, wink.
The question for Mr. Hart is when and where was the "Resolution" circulated and signed?
I love it. "Ready, fire aim."
Hello out there. Mars to Earth.
This Resolution is nothing more than any Petition that you or I can sign in front of supermarkets on almost every week, such as the RECALL of CUSD School Board members.Anyone can sign it. In fact it has zero legal powers.
It does not bear the Dana Point city seal or address, nor does it have a city council Agenda Item number or cover page nor signature of the city clerk.
Sorry Jim, but in my humble opinion this is not a Brown Act violation, just as attending the League of Cities meetings that are just concluding in Sacramento.
I have a hard copy of the four page Sept 4th Dana Point Council Meeting Agenda and do not find a RESOLUTION in defense of Diane Harkey listed. In fact there are NO resolutions to be found. I just contacted the city to verify same. Nor is it listed on the Sept 4th meeting CLOSED SESSION where the only issue dealt with a public employee performance evaluation.
Brother Jim. While you successfully defended Mission Viejo city councilman John Paul Ledesma, where I was a back-up witness, to a Brown Act violation against him in CLOSED SESSION, this allegation is way out in left field. At best it's grey.
Take a close look at it. It's a letterhead free piece of paper, reflecting an opinion with five lines and four signatures. It reads in part that "the undersigned individuals," not council members, opposing the Recall. In fact, as it's a copy I will not guarantee that the original has five lines which is a mute point anyway. It does not contain any official titles, address or telephone numbers. Therefore it was not city business.
It has nothing to do with any vendor, contracts, developers or any third party wishing to do business with the city of Dana Point. I find it humorous that Dana Points city attorney Patrick Munoz specializes in "solid waste matters."
That's what this document is all about.
For the record. Jim Lacy and I have been friends for over a dozen years. At the same time I will go on record stating that I endorsed Diane in her campaign for CA Senate against Tom Harman and remain one of her friends.
Terry Franke of Cal Aware stood by you and me, Larry, and said what happened in Mission Viejo was a Brown Act violation, and we won the case. He is an neutral, independent expert - he helped write the Brown Act. Why don't you call him and see what he has to say about the facts in this Harkey matter, and ask his opinion?
Jim, this is your show. YOU call the expert and report! You have the "burden of proof".
Larry,
Why don't YOU call up your FRIEND Diane and get the circumstances behind when and where the document was signed.
When this is all over, win, lose or draw, I doubt Lacy will ever have his political career back. He lost his assembly race, lost his school board race, was not relected in what could have been a slam dunk after his high vote count four years earlier and failed Prop D campaing just to win fire union support. I doubt he could go back to Yorba Linda. Maybe Santa Barbara will take him. But then that's just me.
I doubt Lacy will ever have his political career back. He lost his assembly race, lost his school board race, was not relected in what could have been a slam dunk
You forgot Lacy also lost his run for Congress.