DA Absent from SEDC Embezzlement Case
May 9, 2011
by Will Carless
Voice of San Diego
We've been asked one question a lot in the days since former Southeastern Economic Development Corp. officials Carolyn Y. Smith and Dante Dayacap were charged with embezzlement and misappropriation of public funds: Why didn't San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis prosecute this case?
Back in 2008, when the SEDC scandal was first breaking, Mayor Jerry Sanders announced at a press conference that he had asked Dumanis to investigate the alleged wrongdoing at the agency. Sanders' move came after a city commissioned audit found SEDC's compensation practices had risen "to the level of fraud."
As I pointed out recently, Dumanis has a special Public Integrity Unit that she created back in 2007, before the SEDC scandal broke.
I put the question to Dumanis' spokesman, Steve Walker, in an email.
His response:
The Attorney General's Office is the appropriate agency to handle this prosecution. Since this is a pending case, the District Attorney's Office will have no further comment at this time.
The California Attorney General's Office does prosecute plenty of people accused of misusing public funds. The state AG investigated the wrongdoing at the city of Bell, for example.
Gary Schons, who heads up the local office of the attorney general, wouldn't go into the matter when I called him. He simply said that his office also has a specialty in prosecuting these sorts of cases.
But, while the AG is an appropriate agency to do the prosecution, it's unclear why Walker would categorize the AG as the appropriate agency. In other words, why is the AG more appropriate than the DA's Public Integrity Unit?
The case, which focuses on a clandestine system of bonuses we uncovered in this story back in 2008, fits the stated scope of the unit, which Dumanis created specifically to root out misuse of public funds and corruption by public and elected officials.
Smith and Dayacap were highly paid, high ranking public officials. (Both made far more than the mayor in 2007.)
Why the AG brought the case instead of Dumanis is unlikely to become public.
As a rule, prosecutors don't discuss pending cases because they don't want to give the impression that they're attempting to try the case in the media, said Professor Heidi Rummel, a former prosecutor and expert in criminal law at the University of Southern California.
Prosecutors want "to avoid any potential unfairness or prejudices to the defendant before he has his day in court," Rummel said.
That Dumanis' office isn't prosecuting the case is irrelevant because, as a public prosecutor, she represents the government as much as her colleagues at the Attorney General's Office, Rummel said. As such, she should be as wary of prejudicing the case by what she says publicly as she would be if her office was prosecuting it.
The precaution of not talking about a case extends not just to the case itself, but also to the reasons why a prosecutor did or didn't take the case on, Rummel said.
Complicating the SEDC matter is the fact that the original investigation wasn't done by the DA or the AG or even any state agency. It was done by the FBI, which usually teams with U.S. Attorney's Office to prosecute the subjects of its investigations.
I learned in court on Wednesday that Dayacap had received a "target letter" from the U.S. Attorney's Office more than a year ago. But at some point between then and now, the federal government decided not to prosecute and instead the case ended up at the state level.
(FBI spokesman Darryl Foxworth wouldn't comment on the case either.)
Certainly, the passing-around of the Smith/Dayacap prosecution has confused the two defendant's lawyers. Jerry Coughlan, who is defending Smith, and Marc Carlos, who's representing Dayacap, both told me on Wednesday that they had no idea the Attorney General's Office was involved in the case before their clients were served with arrest warrants.
If I find out any more about why Schons, not Dumanis, brought the case, I'll pass it along.
Showing posts with label SEDC. Show all posts
Showing posts with label SEDC. Show all posts
Monday, May 16, 2011
Monday, December 13, 2010
Mayor of Redevelopment No Longer?
Mayor of Redevelopment No Longer?
(Click on the link above to get all the links in the story.)
by Scott Lewis
Voice of San Diego
December 13, 2010
Redevelopment is the reason the city of San Diego can consider building a new Convention Center, football stadium and other enhancements downtown at a time when rec centers, libraries and swimming pools are in danger of closing elsewhere.
Cities all across the state use the mechanism for their blighted neighborhoods. But unlike most of them, San Diego does things differently. For one, it allows two nonprofits, fully funded by the city, to manage its redevelopment efforts downtown and in southeastern San Diego: CCDC and SEDC respectively.
And, also unlike other areas, San Diego made its elected mayor the executive director of the Redevelopment Agency -- the entity that oversees not only CCDC and SEDC but the other areas considered blighted in town.
Now, that may change. The City Council is considering ousting him as San Diego's redevelopment leader and hiring a professional manager wake of the mayor's efforts to extend the lifespan of downtown redevelopment without involving the public or City Council.
U-T: We Want Maas Redevelopment
The Union-Tribune made its case for downtown redevelopment this weekend featuring an editorial about, and a Q&A with, the outgoing chairman of CCDC, Fred Maas.
If that didn't give you enough Maas, the man himself penned an op-ed of his own with a now common claim that visionaries like him are only held back by shortsighted "small-town undertakers."
In the Q&A, Maas blasts the proposal supported now by five City Council members that the downtown redevelopment agency take over from the city's ailing general fund, the duty to pay back bonds on the last expansion of the Convention Center - a move that would free up $9.2 million a year.
"We run the risk of bankrupting ultimately over the next 20 years the redevelopment agency. This is not that different from underfunding pensions or from granting benefits without a way to pay for them by raiding our coffers to pay for things that were never contemplated."
Moral: If you don't like something that's happening in the city, compare it to the pension system! But question: Aren't redevelopment efforts eventually supposed to run out of money?
The new City Council president is considering your thoughts on those questions and others as he proposes a new ad hoc committee for redevelopment. And he has set up an email address to collect them: budgetandfinance@sandiego.gov.
Snow? Ha!
The U-T drew a direct line from the major snowfall and incredible collapse of the roof of the Metrodome in Minneapolis to the Chargers search for a new stadium (did you see the video of the roof collapse?). Presumably, this adds urgency to the stadium debate there - the Minnesota Vikings are often mentioned in the same breath as the Chargers as possible teams that could relocate to Los Angeles.
Back in San Diego, it was a pretty nice day at the stadium yesterday, as Sam Hodgson's photos prove...
Sulking in San Diego
» Last week, we mentioned a video provoking guffaws across San Diego's political twitterati the last few days. It portrays San Diego as an insecure teenage girl uncomfortable that "the boys" keep making fun of her big pension. It's clearly trying to chide the media for begin so negative while making the case that we shouldn't worry so much about the city's problems, and we should support a new stadium and other projects championed by downtown redevelopment officials and the mayor.
As the U-T summarized, nobody wants to take credit for the flick.
I actually agree with another anonymous commenter, though, who said that the city is better represented by the mother figure in the video - always trying to convince people who are worried here that everything is fantastic. And she does that, even though she regularly admits (even trumpets) how bad things are going to get if we don't deal with our big pension.
(Click on the link above to get all the links in the story.)
by Scott Lewis
Voice of San Diego
December 13, 2010
Redevelopment is the reason the city of San Diego can consider building a new Convention Center, football stadium and other enhancements downtown at a time when rec centers, libraries and swimming pools are in danger of closing elsewhere.
Cities all across the state use the mechanism for their blighted neighborhoods. But unlike most of them, San Diego does things differently. For one, it allows two nonprofits, fully funded by the city, to manage its redevelopment efforts downtown and in southeastern San Diego: CCDC and SEDC respectively.
And, also unlike other areas, San Diego made its elected mayor the executive director of the Redevelopment Agency -- the entity that oversees not only CCDC and SEDC but the other areas considered blighted in town.
Now, that may change. The City Council is considering ousting him as San Diego's redevelopment leader and hiring a professional manager wake of the mayor's efforts to extend the lifespan of downtown redevelopment without involving the public or City Council.
U-T: We Want Maas Redevelopment
The Union-Tribune made its case for downtown redevelopment this weekend featuring an editorial about, and a Q&A with, the outgoing chairman of CCDC, Fred Maas.
If that didn't give you enough Maas, the man himself penned an op-ed of his own with a now common claim that visionaries like him are only held back by shortsighted "small-town undertakers."
In the Q&A, Maas blasts the proposal supported now by five City Council members that the downtown redevelopment agency take over from the city's ailing general fund, the duty to pay back bonds on the last expansion of the Convention Center - a move that would free up $9.2 million a year.
"We run the risk of bankrupting ultimately over the next 20 years the redevelopment agency. This is not that different from underfunding pensions or from granting benefits without a way to pay for them by raiding our coffers to pay for things that were never contemplated."
Moral: If you don't like something that's happening in the city, compare it to the pension system! But question: Aren't redevelopment efforts eventually supposed to run out of money?
The new City Council president is considering your thoughts on those questions and others as he proposes a new ad hoc committee for redevelopment. And he has set up an email address to collect them: budgetandfinance@sandiego.gov.
Snow? Ha!
The U-T drew a direct line from the major snowfall and incredible collapse of the roof of the Metrodome in Minneapolis to the Chargers search for a new stadium (did you see the video of the roof collapse?). Presumably, this adds urgency to the stadium debate there - the Minnesota Vikings are often mentioned in the same breath as the Chargers as possible teams that could relocate to Los Angeles.
Back in San Diego, it was a pretty nice day at the stadium yesterday, as Sam Hodgson's photos prove...
Sulking in San Diego
» Last week, we mentioned a video provoking guffaws across San Diego's political twitterati the last few days. It portrays San Diego as an insecure teenage girl uncomfortable that "the boys" keep making fun of her big pension. It's clearly trying to chide the media for begin so negative while making the case that we shouldn't worry so much about the city's problems, and we should support a new stadium and other projects championed by downtown redevelopment officials and the mayor.
As the U-T summarized, nobody wants to take credit for the flick.
I actually agree with another anonymous commenter, though, who said that the city is better represented by the mother figure in the video - always trying to convince people who are worried here that everything is fantastic. And she does that, even though she regularly admits (even trumpets) how bad things are going to get if we don't deal with our big pension.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
SEDC's Regina Petty has written the best denial of a Public Records Act request I've ever seen
Regina Petty, attorney for the Southeast Economic Development Corporation, has written a heated, angry letter. I much prefer it to the cold, disinterested letters of refusal I have received from attorneys Daniel Shinoff and Diane Crosier when I was trying to get the invoices for Daniel Shinoff's bills to San Diego County Office of Education. (Yes, at one time Diane Crosier put Shinoff in charge of denying my requests for Shinoff's records!)
Here is Regina Petty's letter:
I Am Sorry, for You
Voice of San Diego
By Regina Petty
San Diego
Oct. 20, 2008
I am sorry when I must inform a person requesting records that the Public Records Act expressly exempts from disclosure privileged information.
[Blogger's note: You mean you wish you didn't have to come up with a bunch of bogus excuses when someone makes a legitimate public records request.]
I am sorry that voiceofsandiego.org was dissatisfied in July 2007 when it promptly received a summary of the amounts the Southeastern Economic Development paid to my firm for legal services in response to a Public Records Act request.
[Come on. You knew they'd be dissatisfied. You intentionally left out the information they wanted.]
I am sorry that I responded by agreeing to perform the task of redacting privileged and confidential information from multiple years of statements for legal services even though there is no legal authority requiring that I do so for this type of document.
[Right. You could have just copied the documents without redacting them.]
I am sorry that in 2007 no one from voiceofsandiego.org ever came to review the redacted statements for legal services which took some time to prepare.
[You say (below) that you couldn't find the documents recently. When did they get lost? Was there ever anything for VOSD to look at? How severe what the redactation job you did on the documents?]
I am sorry that voiceofsandiego.org's attention to its own Public Records Act requests unexpectedly vacillates from indifference to exclusive focus.
[What?!? You mean you thought they were going to let you off the hook, and then they didn't? Yes, I guess that would be a disappointment.]
I am sorry that when voiceofsandiego.org recently renewed its request for the records the SEDC staff was unable to immediately locate the documents from 2007 so that the redaction task had to be performed again.
[Yes. That's too bad.]
I am sorry that there were extra demands placed on my time in September due to the replacement of more than half of the board members of the SEDC.
[If you had given better legal advice, there wouldn't have been so many board members losing their positions.]
I am sorry that there were extra demands placed on my time in September because of the additional board and committee meetings that were held by the SEDC.
[See previous]
I am sorry my highest priority in September was attending to the needs of a Board of Directors managing a major organizational transition.
[Transition? You mean the people to whom you gave legal advice got caught carrying on questionable relationships with developers, and were forced out?]
I am sorry that my daughter's desire that I accompany her as she relocated to France was inconvenient for voiceofsandiego.org.
[I'm sure VOSD would have been perfectly happy if your secretary had simply copied all your invoices and turned them over while you were gone. But that would have been inconvenient for you, right?]
I am sorry that I shortchanged my daughter by delaying the trip to be present for the SEDC Board of Directors meeting on Sept. 24 and limiting the trip to return in time for another agency's board meeting on Oct.2...I am sorry that my presence was required at publicly noticed meetings of the SEDC and other agencies on Oct. 2, 9, 10, 13 and 14 so that Will Carless was unable to determine my whereabouts.
[Sorry, Ms. Petty. There's no way you will be able to make Will Carless the bad guy here. Your presence was required because of a scandal you helped create.]
I am sorry that Will Carless called me at my home on Oct. 9 while I was attending a publicly noticed meeting at the SEDC.
[See above.]
I am sorry that Will Carless has repeatedly falsely claimed that responses to Public Records Act requests were late.
[I'm a whole lot more likely to believe Will Carless than to believe Carolyn Smith's lawyer. He has no motivation to lie; you do.]
I am sorry that Will Carless is a bully.
[This sounds like blaming the victim. You wanted to violate the California Public Records Act, so you call Will Carless a bully for demanding that you obey the law! You sound just like Daniel Shinoff.]
I am sorry that Will Carless did not notice that his abusive conduct caused me to stop taking or returning his telephone calls in early August.
[Or did you stop taking his calls because you wanted to hide your billing records?]
I am sorry that Will Carless cannot discern any real news to use for his blog in light of the global financial, political and social issues of the day.
[The SEDC fell apart due to the efforts of individuals to enrich themself by abusing the system. Isn't it newsworthy to find out how much its lawyer was being paid? The global financial crisis seems to be the result of the efforts of individuals to enrich themself by abusing the system. Credit Default Swaps were invented because individual investors wanted to get rich faster, and the problem was that these instuments hid the identity of the seller. Why didn't the SEC jump on this problem? Probably for the same reason that you, Regina Petty, didn't jump on the problems at SEDC. My guess is that individual lawyers at the SEC thought they could help out their greedy investor friends and get away with it. Individual public entity lawyers at both the SEC and the SEDC are an appropriate subject of investigative journalists.]
(End of Regina Petty's letter and of my responses.]
VOSD Editor's Note: Will Carless has doggedly, yet professionally, pursued open records and answers from an agency that has been extremely reluctant to provide either. While this can sometimes be a tense effort, we stand behind his work.
Here is Regina Petty's letter:
I Am Sorry, for You
Voice of San Diego
By Regina Petty
San Diego
Oct. 20, 2008
I am sorry when I must inform a person requesting records that the Public Records Act expressly exempts from disclosure privileged information.
[Blogger's note: You mean you wish you didn't have to come up with a bunch of bogus excuses when someone makes a legitimate public records request.]
I am sorry that voiceofsandiego.org was dissatisfied in July 2007 when it promptly received a summary of the amounts the Southeastern Economic Development paid to my firm for legal services in response to a Public Records Act request.
[Come on. You knew they'd be dissatisfied. You intentionally left out the information they wanted.]
I am sorry that I responded by agreeing to perform the task of redacting privileged and confidential information from multiple years of statements for legal services even though there is no legal authority requiring that I do so for this type of document.
[Right. You could have just copied the documents without redacting them.]
I am sorry that in 2007 no one from voiceofsandiego.org ever came to review the redacted statements for legal services which took some time to prepare.
[You say (below) that you couldn't find the documents recently. When did they get lost? Was there ever anything for VOSD to look at? How severe what the redactation job you did on the documents?]
I am sorry that voiceofsandiego.org's attention to its own Public Records Act requests unexpectedly vacillates from indifference to exclusive focus.
[What?!? You mean you thought they were going to let you off the hook, and then they didn't? Yes, I guess that would be a disappointment.]
I am sorry that when voiceofsandiego.org recently renewed its request for the records the SEDC staff was unable to immediately locate the documents from 2007 so that the redaction task had to be performed again.
[Yes. That's too bad.]
I am sorry that there were extra demands placed on my time in September due to the replacement of more than half of the board members of the SEDC.
[If you had given better legal advice, there wouldn't have been so many board members losing their positions.]
I am sorry that there were extra demands placed on my time in September because of the additional board and committee meetings that were held by the SEDC.
[See previous]
I am sorry my highest priority in September was attending to the needs of a Board of Directors managing a major organizational transition.
[Transition? You mean the people to whom you gave legal advice got caught carrying on questionable relationships with developers, and were forced out?]
I am sorry that my daughter's desire that I accompany her as she relocated to France was inconvenient for voiceofsandiego.org.
[I'm sure VOSD would have been perfectly happy if your secretary had simply copied all your invoices and turned them over while you were gone. But that would have been inconvenient for you, right?]
I am sorry that I shortchanged my daughter by delaying the trip to be present for the SEDC Board of Directors meeting on Sept. 24 and limiting the trip to return in time for another agency's board meeting on Oct.2...I am sorry that my presence was required at publicly noticed meetings of the SEDC and other agencies on Oct. 2, 9, 10, 13 and 14 so that Will Carless was unable to determine my whereabouts.
[Sorry, Ms. Petty. There's no way you will be able to make Will Carless the bad guy here. Your presence was required because of a scandal you helped create.]
I am sorry that Will Carless called me at my home on Oct. 9 while I was attending a publicly noticed meeting at the SEDC.
[See above.]
I am sorry that Will Carless has repeatedly falsely claimed that responses to Public Records Act requests were late.
[I'm a whole lot more likely to believe Will Carless than to believe Carolyn Smith's lawyer. He has no motivation to lie; you do.]
I am sorry that Will Carless is a bully.
[This sounds like blaming the victim. You wanted to violate the California Public Records Act, so you call Will Carless a bully for demanding that you obey the law! You sound just like Daniel Shinoff.]
I am sorry that Will Carless did not notice that his abusive conduct caused me to stop taking or returning his telephone calls in early August.
[Or did you stop taking his calls because you wanted to hide your billing records?]
I am sorry that Will Carless cannot discern any real news to use for his blog in light of the global financial, political and social issues of the day.
[The SEDC fell apart due to the efforts of individuals to enrich themself by abusing the system. Isn't it newsworthy to find out how much its lawyer was being paid? The global financial crisis seems to be the result of the efforts of individuals to enrich themself by abusing the system. Credit Default Swaps were invented because individual investors wanted to get rich faster, and the problem was that these instuments hid the identity of the seller. Why didn't the SEC jump on this problem? Probably for the same reason that you, Regina Petty, didn't jump on the problems at SEDC. My guess is that individual lawyers at the SEC thought they could help out their greedy investor friends and get away with it. Individual public entity lawyers at both the SEC and the SEDC are an appropriate subject of investigative journalists.]
(End of Regina Petty's letter and of my responses.]
VOSD Editor's Note: Will Carless has doggedly, yet professionally, pursued open records and answers from an agency that has been extremely reluctant to provide either. While this can sometimes be a tense effort, we stand behind his work.
Friday, September 26, 2008
To Regina Petty, SEDC lawyer: Don't let the door hit you on the way out
Voice of San Diego
by WILL CARLESS
September 25, 2008
Regina Petty, corporate counsel of the Southeastern Economic Development Corp., will not seek to continue as the agency's lawyer, Petty told SEDC's board at last night's meeting.
Petty will stay at the agency while SEDC searches for new legal representation, said SEDC board Chairman Cruz Gonzalez. The board voted last night to issue a request for proposals to find a new attorney for the troubled agency, but Petty said she would not apply to be the agency's lawyer.
"It has been a privilege for me to be SEDC's attorney, and, although I continue to be well qualified to serve -- better qualified actually than when I started as counsel -- in order to have a proper attorney-client relationship, you have to have board members that are willing to reasonably listen to your advice, and care about complying with the law. It's not clear to me that that is currently the case with this board." Petty said.
Petty has been criticized by at least one member of the board. In July, Derryl Williams sent a letter to Mayor Jerry Sanders criticizing the culture of SEDC and the way board meetings have been run.
Williams wrote:
Using corporate counsel and Special Agency Counsel, the President of SEDC controlled questions and the flow of information so that board members could not obtain sufficient answers to assist in making good judgments.
Petty was also criticized by City Attorney Mike Aguirre at an SEDC Executive Committee meeting last week.
"I want to look Carolyn in the face and I want to say 'Regina, it's time for both of you to go,' in my opinion," Aguirre said. "I've listened to several of the meetings, I've listened to the legal advice and I have to say the legal advice is skewed in favor of the existing management."
And the author of a damning audit of the agency, released two weeks ago, also mentioned Petty's legal advice. The lead auditor said some board members her team interviewed felt that Petty "would convey info they didn't believe was quite accurate." ...
by WILL CARLESS
September 25, 2008
Regina Petty, corporate counsel of the Southeastern Economic Development Corp., will not seek to continue as the agency's lawyer, Petty told SEDC's board at last night's meeting.
Petty will stay at the agency while SEDC searches for new legal representation, said SEDC board Chairman Cruz Gonzalez. The board voted last night to issue a request for proposals to find a new attorney for the troubled agency, but Petty said she would not apply to be the agency's lawyer.
"It has been a privilege for me to be SEDC's attorney, and, although I continue to be well qualified to serve -- better qualified actually than when I started as counsel -- in order to have a proper attorney-client relationship, you have to have board members that are willing to reasonably listen to your advice, and care about complying with the law. It's not clear to me that that is currently the case with this board." Petty said.
Petty has been criticized by at least one member of the board. In July, Derryl Williams sent a letter to Mayor Jerry Sanders criticizing the culture of SEDC and the way board meetings have been run.
Williams wrote:
Using corporate counsel and Special Agency Counsel, the President of SEDC controlled questions and the flow of information so that board members could not obtain sufficient answers to assist in making good judgments.
Petty was also criticized by City Attorney Mike Aguirre at an SEDC Executive Committee meeting last week.
"I want to look Carolyn in the face and I want to say 'Regina, it's time for both of you to go,' in my opinion," Aguirre said. "I've listened to several of the meetings, I've listened to the legal advice and I have to say the legal advice is skewed in favor of the existing management."
And the author of a damning audit of the agency, released two weeks ago, also mentioned Petty's legal advice. The lead auditor said some board members her team interviewed felt that Petty "would convey info they didn't believe was quite accurate." ...
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Courts shouldn't have to depend on the memories and truthfulness of board members--Brown Act requires closed sessions be recorded
It appears to me that many, if not most, unlawful strategies are decided by public entities during closed sessions in board meetings.
Good for Briggs and Trowbridge, who are working to bring those discussions to light.
Lawyer to SEDC: Record Meeting
Cory Briggs, a local attorney who filed a lawsuit last week against the Southeastern Economic Development Corp., has written a letter to the agency's corporate counsel, Regina Petty, asking her to ensure that the closed session of SEDC's board meeting tomorrow is recorded.
Briggs' letter says his client, activist Ian Trowbridge, wants the meeting recorded because the closed session discussion could become evidence in his lawsuit against the agency. That lawsuit alleges that SEDC's board violated state open meetings law, known as the Brown Act, when it voted in closed session last month to pay outgoing SEDC President Carolyn Y. Smith a $100,350 severance payment.
The Brown Act forbids the board from discussing a termination payment in private... the open session discussion is preceded by a closed session item that's listed on the meeting agenda as "Public Employee PerformanceEvaluation/ Discipline/ Dismissal/ Release."
Briggs' letter reads:
"The need for a neutral, objective record of tomorrow’s closed-session discussions should be obvious at this point. The discussions are likely to be evidence in the above-referenced matter and may become evidence in other proceedings. The best protection for my client, your client, and especially the public is for there to be a clear record of what is discussed -- one that doesn’t rely on the memories or truthfulness of persons accused of breaking the law -- in the event that the discussions become relevant at a later date...
"[N]ot preserving a contemporaneous record of the discussions could constitute the spoliation of evidence and subject your client (and possibly even you) to sanctions."...
by WILL CARLESS
August 26, 2008
Good for Briggs and Trowbridge, who are working to bring those discussions to light.
Lawyer to SEDC: Record Meeting
Cory Briggs, a local attorney who filed a lawsuit last week against the Southeastern Economic Development Corp., has written a letter to the agency's corporate counsel, Regina Petty, asking her to ensure that the closed session of SEDC's board meeting tomorrow is recorded.
Briggs' letter says his client, activist Ian Trowbridge, wants the meeting recorded because the closed session discussion could become evidence in his lawsuit against the agency. That lawsuit alleges that SEDC's board violated state open meetings law, known as the Brown Act, when it voted in closed session last month to pay outgoing SEDC President Carolyn Y. Smith a $100,350 severance payment.
The Brown Act forbids the board from discussing a termination payment in private... the open session discussion is preceded by a closed session item that's listed on the meeting agenda as "Public Employee PerformanceEvaluation/ Discipline/ Dismissal/ Release."
Briggs' letter reads:
"The need for a neutral, objective record of tomorrow’s closed-session discussions should be obvious at this point. The discussions are likely to be evidence in the above-referenced matter and may become evidence in other proceedings. The best protection for my client, your client, and especially the public is for there to be a clear record of what is discussed -- one that doesn’t rely on the memories or truthfulness of persons accused of breaking the law -- in the event that the discussions become relevant at a later date...
"[N]ot preserving a contemporaneous record of the discussions could constitute the spoliation of evidence and subject your client (and possibly even you) to sanctions."...
by WILL CARLESS
August 26, 2008
Monday, July 28, 2008
SEDC board member Chip Owen bilked taxpayers
Owen got $500,000 before joining board
By Jeff McDonald and Helen Gao
San Diego Union Tribune
July 22, 2008
"Three years before he joined the board of the Southeastern Economic Development Corp., Artie “Chip” Owen and a company he managed bought 4.4 acres that they instantly sold to the government agency for a $500,000 profit, records show.
"Caravan Properties LLC bought the property on Market Street near 54th Street in San Diego from Federated Industries Inc. of Chicago for $1.8 million on May 1, 2000.
The transaction was time-stamped 10:59 a.m., the same minute Caravan filed a quitclaim deed transferring ownership to the company and Owen. The subsequent sale from Caravan and Owen to SEDC for $2.3 million also was time-stamped 10:59 a.m.
The transaction was first reported by San Diego blogger and real estate broker Pat Flannery.
Records obtained by The San Diego Union-Tribune show SEDC entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Caravan Properties in April 2000 – before Caravan bought the land from Federated Industries.
Critics questioned the sale. Owen “knew the land and bought it,” said Kathleen MacLeod, who volunteers for a number of community groups. “Why didn't SEDC buy it for $500,000 less?”
Owen... was appointed to the board in February 2003 by then-Mayor Dick Murphy. He currently is the chairman.
The Market Street deal was not his first with the SEDC...
By Jeff McDonald and Helen Gao
San Diego Union Tribune
July 22, 2008
"Three years before he joined the board of the Southeastern Economic Development Corp., Artie “Chip” Owen and a company he managed bought 4.4 acres that they instantly sold to the government agency for a $500,000 profit, records show.
"Caravan Properties LLC bought the property on Market Street near 54th Street in San Diego from Federated Industries Inc. of Chicago for $1.8 million on May 1, 2000.
The transaction was time-stamped 10:59 a.m., the same minute Caravan filed a quitclaim deed transferring ownership to the company and Owen. The subsequent sale from Caravan and Owen to SEDC for $2.3 million also was time-stamped 10:59 a.m.
The transaction was first reported by San Diego blogger and real estate broker Pat Flannery.
Records obtained by The San Diego Union-Tribune show SEDC entered into a purchase and sale agreement with Caravan Properties in April 2000 – before Caravan bought the land from Federated Industries.
Critics questioned the sale. Owen “knew the land and bought it,” said Kathleen MacLeod, who volunteers for a number of community groups. “Why didn't SEDC buy it for $500,000 less?”
Owen... was appointed to the board in February 2003 by then-Mayor Dick Murphy. He currently is the chairman.
The Market Street deal was not his first with the SEDC...
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Carolyn Smith of SEDC out
By WILL CARLESS
Voice of San Diego
July 24, 2008
...Carolyn Y. Smith, the embattled president of the Southeastern Economic Development Corp., was forced out of the office she has held for more than 14 years by a unanimous decision of her board Wednesday night.
In a nearly six-hour board meeting that drew dozens of community members and many supporters of Smith, the SEDC trustees ultimately decided to grant Smith a severance package of $100,350 and to bring an end to a tenure that, while supported by some in the community, has been marred by scandal of late.
Smith has been at the center of a maelstrom of publicity since a voiceofsandiego.org story two weeks ago revealed a system of hidden bonuses and extra compensation under which she has paid herself and her staff more than $1 million over the last five years...
Voice of San Diego
July 24, 2008
...Carolyn Y. Smith, the embattled president of the Southeastern Economic Development Corp., was forced out of the office she has held for more than 14 years by a unanimous decision of her board Wednesday night.
In a nearly six-hour board meeting that drew dozens of community members and many supporters of Smith, the SEDC trustees ultimately decided to grant Smith a severance package of $100,350 and to bring an end to a tenure that, while supported by some in the community, has been marred by scandal of late.
Smith has been at the center of a maelstrom of publicity since a voiceofsandiego.org story two weeks ago revealed a system of hidden bonuses and extra compensation under which she has paid herself and her staff more than $1 million over the last five years...
Chip Owen and welfare for the rich
By ANDREW DONOHUE
Voice of San Diego
July 24, 2008
Months after Artie M. "Chip" Owen, now the chairman of the Southeastern Economic Development Corp., earned $500,000 by flipping a piece of property to the agency, he signed over $400,000 of that money to another developer doing business with the agency.
Owen, who joined SEDC's board three years after the land transaction, was listed in public documents and discussion as the sole businessman involved in the land sale and as the manager of the corporation that exacted it, Caravan Properties LLC.
However, shortly after the deal finalized, the lion's share of the earnings shifted to Santa Monica-based Pacific Development Partners LLC, according to documents on file with the County Registrar's Office and SEDC...
Voice of San Diego
July 24, 2008
Months after Artie M. "Chip" Owen, now the chairman of the Southeastern Economic Development Corp., earned $500,000 by flipping a piece of property to the agency, he signed over $400,000 of that money to another developer doing business with the agency.
Owen, who joined SEDC's board three years after the land transaction, was listed in public documents and discussion as the sole businessman involved in the land sale and as the manager of the corporation that exacted it, Caravan Properties LLC.
However, shortly after the deal finalized, the lion's share of the earnings shifted to Santa Monica-based Pacific Development Partners LLC, according to documents on file with the County Registrar's Office and SEDC...
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)