SLT council to discuss allegations of wrongdoing
By Kathryn Reed
Even though the El Dorado County District Attorney’s Office has initiated an investigation into allegations of illegal activities by the South Lake Tahoe City Council, the five local officials want an airing of grievances at the next council meeting.
Councilwoman Brooke Laine started the latest firestorm with her opinion piece published on Lake Tahoe News on April 14 where she alleges illegal conduct by herself and her colleagues.
Laine in her column mentions the Mary Egan contract. She wrote, “To this day, that contract has never been addressed, corrected, or publicly acknowledged.”
At the end of the April 17 council meeting, acting City Manager Jeff Meston said the MRG bill needs to be paid and that he wants to discuss it at the next meeting. MRG or Municipal Resource Group, is Egan’s company. Egan was brought in last fall at the request of then Mayor Austin Sass to assess the culture of the city. The contract was never discussed in open session.
However, LTN was told that contract was paid through the city’s law firm Burke, Williams & Sorensen at the request of interim City Attorney Nira Doherty.
That contract is one of the examples Laine has of an alleged Brown Act violation.
Laine’s column was followed two days later by Mayor Wendy David’s rebuttal. David said she wanted the DA to investigate Laine’s accusations.
Laine on Tuesday said she had been contacted by the DA’s office and said two investigators have been assigned to the case.
She said the entire council should have weighed in on the decision to go to the DA, that it should not have been initiated by the mayor.
Councilman Jason Collin said he wants to discuss Laine’s accusations in public and to “do it swiftly so we can get back on track.”
Sass read the following into the record during council comments:
“First, I wish I could share everything that happened in closed session with the public. Every vote, their preceding discussions and the information and personal comments shared to us. I believe that doing such would clear this entire matter up and truly show who had the city’s best interests at heart and who impeded the process because of a lack of objectivity. Unfortunately, the California Brown Act legally prohibits that.
“At no time have I sat in a meeting or with council or had a conversation with Ms. Laine where she ever used the words corruption, personal gain, power struggle or many of the comments she stated in her opinion piece. She has never abstained from a vote, protested a vote, or raised the issue that a particular vote was illegal. Thus, without discussing specifics with council members, I hope Ms. Laine plans to share whatever evidence she has with the presiding and appropriate legal authority which I understand to be the district attorney. I hope the public is asking themselves the obvious question, ‘What is she talking about, who is she talking about and why didn’t she lodge an official confidential complaint like most whistle blowers do so an unbiased investigation can occur?’
“Corruption is generally defined as a form of dishonesty undertaken by a person entrusted with a position of authority, often to acquire personal benefit. Corruption may include many activities including bribery and embezzlement. Strong words for our little town. I do not believe for one moment that Tom, Jason, Wendy and myself personally benefited from any council vote or knowingly participated in any criminal activity. I look forward to the DA’s investigation and sincerely hope that all matters discussed in closed session can legally become public through such process.”
The council agreed the issue needs to be discussed and not just left with the DA. To bring a topic back to the next meeting requires a four-fifths vote of the council, otherwise it would be at least two council meetings down the road. All five agreed the allegations should get a public airing at the May 1 meeting.
We now have seen two Council members and one Chief of Police publicly slam the Council member who went public to confirm accusations that had previously already been outlined by Lake Tahoe News. All are acting as though these accusations were not real until uttered by a member of the Council. It seems this Council hold themselves in higher regard than the Public at large given previous laws suits against the voters and utter disregard for statements made by those outside their chambers. It seems a law is only broken if it is confirmed by a member of the City Council but can otherwise be ignored if the accusation comes externally, from the public.
It is beyond time for this to stop. Hopefully we will have the opportunity to correct some of this in the coming election where “None of the Above” may well be the best choice unless new blood is in the offering. In the mean time we all get to observe a gang of three attempt to consume their victim while the remaining Council member observes in silence this sad affair. Yet again, the lawyers will circle and the Public will pay for this sickening buffet of strife.
As sailers of old have observed: “Red sky at night, sailors delight. Red sky in the morning, sailors take warning”. The dawn will be red for our City Council… Storm clouds will greet the morning.
Mr Ramirez,
I don’t know where you went to school because as you came out to write about the sno globe and loop road and other subjects your wording has been eloquent. In the case of the Council I expect council member Tom Davis will find his voice on this soon if he hasn’t already because I’ve known him a long time and believe he will awakwn to what has transpired.It seems that the one who has done the protesting above, Mr Austin Sass is possibly the real culprit due to the timing. I’ve seen it many times in my 45 years here. Our town is a strong city manager city by its charter, so that the mayor position just runs the meetings and signs things that the council directs him to sign and gets to cut ribbons for show. It is illegal (Brown Act) to do do orhetwise. It still takes three council members to tell the city manager what to do under all the laws governing their meetings. I have seen many council members take their turn as mayor and then make it a living hell for the city manager, the employees and the other council members. It seems they can’t pass a mirror without looking at “THE MAYOR”and they give public speeches about how they as MAYOR are going to transform the city. Not every council member has done this when their turn as Mayor comes up. In fact some have turned down being Mayor like John Wynn, some have never been selected by the other council members and then some have not let it go straight to their noggin like Keith Kline who stayed humble. Not one council member I can remember has become so obsessed with the perceived power and let it go to their head in such an arrogant way as AUSTIN SASS. It is no secret that Sass tried to get the rest of the council to make this a strong mayor city like New York has with Sass of course being the chosen one. He still tries to butt in to tell our current Mayor Wendy David how to conduct the meetings. Sass was for turning off the cameras and microphone during the segment where citizens can speak on any subject to the council and he wanted to make it so that the council could argue back and intimidate the already nervous cirizens. So Mr.Ramirez should Sass try to attack you who are in reality one of his employers as he has done from his perch up there on the dais to many other citizens, stay firm because as you wrote “the red sky at mornin”is not far from coming and He should take warning. We other citizens are reading what you write and it is well done. No one ever agrees with others all the time. that is why they have five council members and not just one. None of us is smarter than all of us. One last word… if you end up running and you become mayor. throw out the mirror.
The Egan contract can be seen as the source of the current shambles of SLT. It got the ball rolling in what appears was a desire to get rid of the City Manager by at least one member of the city council, but there was need for cause as a cover, the CM having been recently evaluated as outstanding. Egan, an investigator by trade was sold as performing an “organizational assessment” which morphed into a CM evaluation. The contract was seemingly approved in a closed session marked for City Attorney appointment -this is where the Brown Act issues arise. A broad organizational assessment would be an open agenda item; a city manager evaluation services contract would be either open agenda or closed session noticed for City Manager Evaluation. A contract for investigation of the city manager could be done under the same notice or some notice of threat of litigation if there was one. It seems like a bait and switch to fish for something on the CM and the result was a botched process. It looks the CM’s contract was breached along the way as she was entitled to a written summary of her evaluation/the Egan report which seems to not exist. The City Attorney’s story seems to shift- the contract was either public or not per the Brown Act. Yet she released it as a public document earlier and said it would be back on an agenda before she decided to quit- She now acknowledges the contract as being for the City Manager’s evaluation, while being called something else, and she knows it was approved in a closed session noticed for City Attorney appointment, not city manager evaluation. The continued defense of these actions somehow being okay is astounding.
I believe Mr. Johnson commentary above is spot on.