Mayor John Anderson’s Ethics Ordinance is an incomplete and gerrymandered policy that should never have gone to the ballot.
This ordinance and measure was rushed to ballot by a council majority-voting block comprised of Mayor John Anderson, Councilwoman Nancy Rikel and Council member Schwing for political purposes to benefit Mayor Anderson’s re-election campaign.
Full Text of Measure Y (PDF) - Ethics Staff Report (PDF)
Two key components of the measure, Sec. 2.44.050. Adoption of a code of conduct for elected and appointed officials and Sec. 2.44.060. Adoption of a “whistleblower” procedure, were not completed in time and are to be added later by the council as a resolution and ordinance. Now we will have to trust the politicians to fill in the blanks after we voted. No thanks, I want to see all of it before I vote on it. My wife raised objections to this from the beginning.
The most troubling aspect of this measure is that it only targets contributions to council members from someone who is the applicant, the contractor or the direct recipient of the approval involving a license, permit, contract or other land use entitlement.
Measure Y does not prohibit or disqualify a council member from voting who received a contribution $250 or more from neighbors or other parties who oppose an approval involving a license, permit, contract or other land use entitlement. This seems unfair, wrong and unethical on so many levels.
Ironically this actually did happen. Mayor John Anderson and Councilwoman Nancy Rikel accepted $1,000.00 campaign contributions each in 2008 from an individual who opposed a project near his home and succeeded in stopping the project. And guess what? Under Mayor John Anderson’s Ethics Measure this will continue to be perfectly legal. So much for being “honest and ethical”. A yes vote limits you to a $249 contribution, vote no and you can get a $1,000.00 or more. How will this law promote ethical behavior in the future?
Measure Y does not prohibit or disqualify political action committees such as Yorba Linda Residents for Responsible Representation (YLRRR) who are independently controlled from taking contributions of $250 or more and giving them directly to council members. This loophole allows political action committees to launder contributions and circumvent Measure Y.
Measure Y can only be amended by a majority vote. Any modifications to correct its deficiencies or inconsistencies will require another election costing thousands of dollars at the taxpayer’s expense. At the very least, the public should have been given a complete measure that does not contain loopholes that benefit Mayor John Anderson, his council majority or the political action committees that support them.
The bottom line is that Measure Y is about politics, not ethics. Real ethics reform must be complete and not be riddled with political loopholes. It should have been good enough to be supported by the whole council, not just ramrodded through by Mayor John Anderson and his voting block. It should have been implemented as a workable solution that was proven to hold up to the test of time before going to the public for a vote.
I will not be voting for this flawed and incomplete measure.
Click here for Councilwoman Horton’s Comment about Measure Y on her campaign website.
{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }
Thanks for the review of Measure Y. Your arguments all sounds very reasonable to me. I don’t know all of the politics of getting it through the council – but it sure smells like a political move to get it on the ballot. Is an ethics ordinance really going to make our city officials act in an ethical manner? I don’t think so.
It seems as if that’s what the voters are for. We keep them in check. Your argument about the YLRRR or other PACs from getting around the contribution limit makes perfect sense. They have a free hand to funnel money to the candidate of their choice. I’m also curious about legal challenges based on free speech arguments.
By the way…don’t we already have “whistle blower” protections from Federal labor laws? Measure Y seems redundant – this provision makes it appear all the more like a political stunt to gather votes – and to make opponents to it appear to be “anti ethics”. “What?! You don’t support Measure Y? Are you against ethical behavior of Council Members?” What a sham.
I believe it will pass – But I’m voting against Measure Y too. Dennis Equitz
Excellent and thorough analysis of Measure Y. It is 100% a political ploy. We already have the same ordinance on the books (as of January 19, 2010) and it has not stopped the Measure Y author from behaving unethically. No ordinance will ever guarantee unethical behavior. Unfortunately, Measure Y contains huge loopholes that will allow for increased contribution laundering through groups such as YLRRR. I will definitely be voting NO on this measure. Hope everyone will read this one carefully and vote NO as well. It is NOT what its proponents claim it to be. If you are in favor of ethics reform, you must vote NO on Measure Y.
Incomplete and gerrymandered …eloquently and accurately stated. Please also check out my review at http://www.brendaforyorbalinda.blogspot.com
We must do all we can to get the word out on this or we will be fighting the effects of this flawed law for years to come.