Let me preface this by saying this is ONLY a question. NO Accusations or anything mean-spirited by my asking simply using this forum as designed for information gathering..
Does anyone know why Councilmembers Coffey and Luporini recused themselves from the OatHill Discussion at the September 1 meeting?
I heard they had made arrangements with the developer to have Luporini sell properties and have extensive (expensive) advertising in Post. That is if the project IS approved. Isn't Coffey on that committee as well?
Any truth to this?
Just looking for clarification and information.
Help?!
A question- Oat Hill Project
Moderator: Issa
Forum rules
Please follow the terms of use as illustrated on the main page of the forum. Only registered users may post in this forum. Classified posts and events must be posted in the Classifieds and Events forum. Thank you.
Please follow the terms of use as illustrated on the main page of the forum. Only registered users may post in this forum. Classified posts and events must be posted in the Classifieds and Events forum. Thank you.
-
CouncilmemberCoffey
Question Answered
You can call me anytime for questions at 647-7678.
Nobody offered me expensive advertising if so maybe I would make a profit for a change. I recused myself because of the fact that I sublease a small office in Canyon Plaza from another person who has a lease with one of the developers. It is not a financial conflict as confirmed by the FPPC. It is merely the appearance.
Luporini recused herself at the time because she was representing a homeowner selling land. That deal has since gone by the wayside and therefore she is free from potential conflict.
That is why she replaced me for the time being.
I will be back on the committee when I relocate my office at the end of the year.
I am still looking for some advertisers thought especially those really big expensive ones. So please send the tips my way. Thanks-
Nobody offered me expensive advertising if so maybe I would make a profit for a change. I recused myself because of the fact that I sublease a small office in Canyon Plaza from another person who has a lease with one of the developers. It is not a financial conflict as confirmed by the FPPC. It is merely the appearance.
Luporini recused herself at the time because she was representing a homeowner selling land. That deal has since gone by the wayside and therefore she is free from potential conflict.
That is why she replaced me for the time being.
I will be back on the committee when I relocate my office at the end of the year.
I am still looking for some advertisers thought especially those really big expensive ones. So please send the tips my way. Thanks-
-
I have a ?
Coffey/Luporini
I watched last night's council meeting.
What is with all the note passing between the two lady council members? Isn't the communication in a public forum supposed to be that? Public?
Can Councilperson Coffey answer that for this person?
What is with all the note passing between the two lady council members? Isn't the communication in a public forum supposed to be that? Public?
Can Councilperson Coffey answer that for this person?
-
Paul Maguire
- V.I.P.
- Posts: 266
- Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:46 pm
- Location: American Canyon
- Contact:
This is not right
Well Council member Coffey, since you brought it up- lets talk about this "apparent conflict" a bit more.
You were elected by the residents of this city, in an election you won against 9 other candidates, me included.
Now here comes one of the largest, complex, and probably the most important development projects of your first term, and you have to recuse yourself because you lease space from Rick Hess, one of the land owners, in Canyon Plaza.
The concern is the "apparence" of a conflict, a "potential" violation if you are involved of political ethics law, Brown Act, etc.
I presume you were advised in this direction. With a concern then, you even contacted the Election Board to get an opinion on it, and that opinion was it is NOT a financial conflict, as you stated.
It clearly was not the intention of the legislature to paralyze elected officials from their duties simply because they rent space- (which in actual fact you sublease from a third party who directly rents the space from Rick Hess)within the city that they are a council member of from a developer who just happens to own property at the site. There is quid pro quo here- no favors- nothing.
Next it will be I own a home on a street in American Canyon so I have a conflict of interest in talking about 'basketball courts' 'parking'
'property taxes' or 'street sweepers'. Are you not allowed to promote jobs in the city, because you are an employer here? Is it a conflict to discuss the water issues because you pay a water bill here? Potentially, by fixing the water problem, by negotiating a better deal, you could save money off your water bill. Where does it end Council Member Coffey?
With all due respect to those that advise the council about such matters, this is WAY over-reaching, and in my view, interferring with your elected position and ability to exercise your influence on the matter, which is what the residents elected you to do.
You have NO conflict. You receive NO special consideration as a renter of the property.
Certainly I am not an attorney. But I am voter, a candidate whom you ran against, and a resident and business owner in American Canyon. And as such, I object to this action, I do not think it is in the cities best interest, and I believe the basis for which it seems to have occured is flat out wrong. There is NO conflict here, not even the apparency of one.
I know good and well that you would never want to do anything that would jepordize your integrity or have the appearance of you getting some personal gain out of a situation. Thus your decision. You have worked hard and done great things, and I am a supporter. But come on, at some point, enough already with every little thing in this city being a conflict of interest-for some council member-This broad interpretation is simply interferring with democracy and the will of the people.
That is unacceptable.
I hope you will reconsider your position.
You were elected by the residents of this city, in an election you won against 9 other candidates, me included.
Now here comes one of the largest, complex, and probably the most important development projects of your first term, and you have to recuse yourself because you lease space from Rick Hess, one of the land owners, in Canyon Plaza.
The concern is the "apparence" of a conflict, a "potential" violation if you are involved of political ethics law, Brown Act, etc.
I presume you were advised in this direction. With a concern then, you even contacted the Election Board to get an opinion on it, and that opinion was it is NOT a financial conflict, as you stated.
It clearly was not the intention of the legislature to paralyze elected officials from their duties simply because they rent space- (which in actual fact you sublease from a third party who directly rents the space from Rick Hess)within the city that they are a council member of from a developer who just happens to own property at the site. There is quid pro quo here- no favors- nothing.
Next it will be I own a home on a street in American Canyon so I have a conflict of interest in talking about 'basketball courts' 'parking'
'property taxes' or 'street sweepers'. Are you not allowed to promote jobs in the city, because you are an employer here? Is it a conflict to discuss the water issues because you pay a water bill here? Potentially, by fixing the water problem, by negotiating a better deal, you could save money off your water bill. Where does it end Council Member Coffey?
With all due respect to those that advise the council about such matters, this is WAY over-reaching, and in my view, interferring with your elected position and ability to exercise your influence on the matter, which is what the residents elected you to do.
You have NO conflict. You receive NO special consideration as a renter of the property.
Certainly I am not an attorney. But I am voter, a candidate whom you ran against, and a resident and business owner in American Canyon. And as such, I object to this action, I do not think it is in the cities best interest, and I believe the basis for which it seems to have occured is flat out wrong. There is NO conflict here, not even the apparency of one.
I know good and well that you would never want to do anything that would jepordize your integrity or have the appearance of you getting some personal gain out of a situation. Thus your decision. You have worked hard and done great things, and I am a supporter. But come on, at some point, enough already with every little thing in this city being a conflict of interest-for some council member-This broad interpretation is simply interferring with democracy and the will of the people.
That is unacceptable.
I hope you will reconsider your position.
-
CouncilmemberCoffey
Answers
The note that was passed was nothing to do with any particular issue. In fact oftentimes I am unable to get the information I need from other councilmembers and have to rely upon those willing to explain issues. I simply asked as I always do about prior regulations regarding specific issues or possibly about the history of an issue if it occurred prior to me taking office. I usually try to do most of my question asking during the preceeding few days but sometimes staff is unavailable to answer these questions.
I find that Leon is still learning as well and not quite up to speed yet even as a 3 year member. Cecil gets too technical or hung up on other things unrelated, plus he needs to run the meeting. Ben is good before and after meetings as his schedule is booked. So that leaves Lori. Yesterday and the day before she was unavailable up until a few minutes into the closed session.
Therefore we had no time to discuss some questions I had about a specific issue that even the city manager can't answer. I get all of the information especially history of the situation about an issue within the community from her. If I am not satisfied, then I will of course ask council or staff directly on the spot. We are however discouraged from putting staff on the spot without previous notice in an effort to make them not look bad or unprepared. It can also sometimes be misleading on the issue being discussed and create confusion with attendees.
As I have clearly demonstrated I don't "vote" with the flow just because it's easier.
Mr. Maguire, although your request is reasonable, when asked by city attorney it is expected that you comply. I believe this to be in the regulations. But fear not, my departure is only temporary and definitely missed by my fellow committee members which is rewarding and appreciated.
Thanks for asking.
I find that Leon is still learning as well and not quite up to speed yet even as a 3 year member. Cecil gets too technical or hung up on other things unrelated, plus he needs to run the meeting. Ben is good before and after meetings as his schedule is booked. So that leaves Lori. Yesterday and the day before she was unavailable up until a few minutes into the closed session.
Therefore we had no time to discuss some questions I had about a specific issue that even the city manager can't answer. I get all of the information especially history of the situation about an issue within the community from her. If I am not satisfied, then I will of course ask council or staff directly on the spot. We are however discouraged from putting staff on the spot without previous notice in an effort to make them not look bad or unprepared. It can also sometimes be misleading on the issue being discussed and create confusion with attendees.
As I have clearly demonstrated I don't "vote" with the flow just because it's easier.
Mr. Maguire, although your request is reasonable, when asked by city attorney it is expected that you comply. I believe this to be in the regulations. But fear not, my departure is only temporary and definitely missed by my fellow committee members which is rewarding and appreciated.
Thanks for asking.
-
Paul Maguire
- V.I.P.
- Posts: 266
- Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:46 pm
- Location: American Canyon
- Contact:
Thank you for your response Councilmember Coffey.
You are just got in the cross hair of what is a bigger issue.
Is it in the best interest of the city and is it even democratic, to have a city manager's overly broad interpretation(in my opinion) keep council members from exercises thier duties as elected to do?
Clearly the City Attorney should and does keep council out of hot water on a number of matters, and protects the cities interest as he is hired to do. In the majority of the matters I think he is correct, but in THIS matter, I don't.
Where is the conflict? Where is the apparency of a conflict? And if there is an apparency of conflict, or potential, what damage is done? What harm is there? What influence do you have more than any other council member because you sublease space in a building owned by one of the land owners on Oathill? Its a BIG stretch.
My concern is that the city attorney can circumvent the voters when he and he alone, has some view, which arguable may not be fully supported in law, or here, is controversial.
With all due respect to the city attorney, I think the concern is unwarranted, and his view detrimental to both your ability to exercise your duties, and to the voters who elected you to do so.
You are just got in the cross hair of what is a bigger issue.
Is it in the best interest of the city and is it even democratic, to have a city manager's overly broad interpretation(in my opinion) keep council members from exercises thier duties as elected to do?
Clearly the City Attorney should and does keep council out of hot water on a number of matters, and protects the cities interest as he is hired to do. In the majority of the matters I think he is correct, but in THIS matter, I don't.
Where is the conflict? Where is the apparency of a conflict? And if there is an apparency of conflict, or potential, what damage is done? What harm is there? What influence do you have more than any other council member because you sublease space in a building owned by one of the land owners on Oathill? Its a BIG stretch.
My concern is that the city attorney can circumvent the voters when he and he alone, has some view, which arguable may not be fully supported in law, or here, is controversial.
With all due respect to the city attorney, I think the concern is unwarranted, and his view detrimental to both your ability to exercise your duties, and to the voters who elected you to do so.
-
Guest
Oat Hill
Re: Cindy
I wonder how much we paid for that advise! Do these guys just sit around and think up ways to keep Cindy from participating in any issue? It is starting to appear so...
Cindy, your strength to continue to serve this community, with such adversaries in tow, is to be commended.
I wonder how much we paid for that advise! Do these guys just sit around and think up ways to keep Cindy from participating in any issue? It is starting to appear so...
Cindy, your strength to continue to serve this community, with such adversaries in tow, is to be commended.
-
Guest
obastacles?
I don't really believe there's any type 'conspiracy' trying to be an obstacle for Ms. Coffey or any of the other members of the council.
Overall, they seem to be working well together and have been accomplishing much and making important decisions.
The next election will be crucial for the city.
I think that Anderson may not seek re-election, due to his wife's medical issues.
Shaver has an uphill fight.
Garcia will be re-elected.
We need to be very careful who we elect. The days of popularity contests are over. We need serious people with the correct skills to take our town to the next level.
Overall, they seem to be working well together and have been accomplishing much and making important decisions.
The next election will be crucial for the city.
I think that Anderson may not seek re-election, due to his wife's medical issues.
Shaver has an uphill fight.
Garcia will be re-elected.
We need to be very careful who we elect. The days of popularity contests are over. We need serious people with the correct skills to take our town to the next level.
-
guest
Garcia is unlikely to be re elected, his useless banter at council meetings is annoying.
As for a conspiracy, anything is possible in AC.
But Cindy should be allowed to participate in all meetings, and from what is posted, it doesn't seem like she should have any conflicts in participating in the Oat hill development.
This is a valid point being brought up here. I dont want the city run by the city attorney either.
Of course, at least someone would be running it, because the mayor sure as hell isn't!
As for a conspiracy, anything is possible in AC.
But Cindy should be allowed to participate in all meetings, and from what is posted, it doesn't seem like she should have any conflicts in participating in the Oat hill development.
This is a valid point being brought up here. I dont want the city run by the city attorney either.
Of course, at least someone would be running it, because the mayor sure as hell isn't!
-
guest
Next elections
The thing I find most interesting is that watching the council meetings you can determine how each of the member's thought process works.
In some cases, it can be argued there isn't an actual thought process, they just spout off the first thing that pops in their head. This seems to be Luporini's modus operandi.
Coffey is inquisitive and had to understand 100% before she moves forward. Sometimes homework and fact-finding should be done Before a meeting.
Garcia elaborates on his pros/cons and attempts to explain the "whys" behind his thought process. This may seem mundane, but if you listen carefully you can see he's thought it out carefully.
Shaver definitely speaks his mind, despite his postion-which I respect. No problem for someone supporting their belief system.
Anderson is a caring man and makes decisions based on emotion. However, his background is lacking in qualifications for the next step on moving the city forward.
All my un-scientific, humble opinion. Thoughts?
In some cases, it can be argued there isn't an actual thought process, they just spout off the first thing that pops in their head. This seems to be Luporini's modus operandi.
Coffey is inquisitive and had to understand 100% before she moves forward. Sometimes homework and fact-finding should be done Before a meeting.
Garcia elaborates on his pros/cons and attempts to explain the "whys" behind his thought process. This may seem mundane, but if you listen carefully you can see he's thought it out carefully.
Shaver definitely speaks his mind, despite his postion-which I respect. No problem for someone supporting their belief system.
Anderson is a caring man and makes decisions based on emotion. However, his background is lacking in qualifications for the next step on moving the city forward.
All my un-scientific, humble opinion. Thoughts?
-
guest
The thing I find most interesting is that watching the council meetings you can determine how each of the member's thought process works.
In some cases, it can be argued there isn't an actual thought process, they just spout off the first thing that pops in their head. This seems to be Luporini's modus operandi.
Coffey is inquisitive and had to understand 100% before she moves forward. Sometimes homework and fact-finding should be done Before a meeting.
Garcia elaborates on his pros/cons and attempts to explain the "whys" behind his thought process. This may seem mundane, but if you listen carefully you can see he's thought it out carefully.
Shaver definitely speaks his mind, despite his postion-which I respect. No problem for someone supporting their belief system.
Anderson is a caring man and makes decisions based on emotion. However, his background is lacking in qualifications for the next step on moving the city forward.
All my un-scientific, humble opinion. Thoughts?
In some cases, it can be argued there isn't an actual thought process, they just spout off the first thing that pops in their head. This seems to be Luporini's modus operandi.
Coffey is inquisitive and had to understand 100% before she moves forward. Sometimes homework and fact-finding should be done Before a meeting.
Garcia elaborates on his pros/cons and attempts to explain the "whys" behind his thought process. This may seem mundane, but if you listen carefully you can see he's thought it out carefully.
Shaver definitely speaks his mind, despite his postion-which I respect. No problem for someone supporting their belief system.
Anderson is a caring man and makes decisions based on emotion. However, his background is lacking in qualifications for the next step on moving the city forward.
All my un-scientific, humble opinion. Thoughts?
-
guest
The most experienced is Anderson. Second is Luporini, although fiesty, definately is sharper than she lets on.
I have yet to see Garcia do much but self promote. He must be seeking higher office, and came down here to AC to get his feet wet.
Coffey is informed and so far has done a good job.
Shaver on the other hand, has let these meetings get completely out of control, and is the least effective.
Shaver and Garcia are up for re election, and should NOT be re elected.
Anderson will likely retire from council as he has served 12 full years.
I have yet to see Garcia do much but self promote. He must be seeking higher office, and came down here to AC to get his feet wet.
Coffey is informed and so far has done a good job.
Shaver on the other hand, has let these meetings get completely out of control, and is the least effective.
Shaver and Garcia are up for re election, and should NOT be re elected.
Anderson will likely retire from council as he has served 12 full years.
-
guest
fact-finding
You are assuming that all of the facts are presented to council accurately and reliably. That's a stretch. I get the agendas off of the internet and have called a couple of the councilmembers and asked them about certain issues.
I often find that they rely exclusively on those reports and when they are done in a bias fashion as it has been pointed out in the past you get bad decisions and undesireable development projects such as the much debated Theresa Lane Modular homes.
I would think that all of the councilmembers ask as many questions as possible on many issues of community concern. That is a record and protects the public even if it is only one person.
I often find that they rely exclusively on those reports and when they are done in a bias fashion as it has been pointed out in the past you get bad decisions and undesireable development projects such as the much debated Theresa Lane Modular homes.
I would think that all of the councilmembers ask as many questions as possible on many issues of community concern. That is a record and protects the public even if it is only one person.
-
POSITIVE STRATEGIST
POSITIVE POST #2
SO IS IT REALLY IMPORTANT IF THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE DOING? AT LEAST THEY SHOW UP FOR WORK.
-
Paul Maguire
- V.I.P.
- Posts: 266
- Joined: Mon Apr 25, 2005 9:46 pm
- Location: American Canyon
- Contact:
more on the same issue
Well, I certainly do not think that all the facts were presented to Council member Coffey, who took herself off the Oat Hill Committee-
I have heard a buzz about staff reports to council members like written memorandums and project reports written in ways to pursued the council one way or another. But I dont think that is so uncommon in many cities.
But what is a concern is if reports omit major information, or leave out important facts, especially if done so intentionally.
That would be totally unacceptable, and if a pattern persisted of that, grounds for suspension and or termination of the offending party.
I have heard a buzz about staff reports to council members like written memorandums and project reports written in ways to pursued the council one way or another. But I dont think that is so uncommon in many cities.
But what is a concern is if reports omit major information, or leave out important facts, especially if done so intentionally.
That would be totally unacceptable, and if a pattern persisted of that, grounds for suspension and or termination of the offending party.