Fagan: Council to consider revision of conflict of interest issue

March 18, 2005
Santa Paula City Council

A document to be presented to the City Council on Monday might just end the conflict of interest issues dogging the proposed Fagan Canyon development.

By Peggy KellySanta Paula TimesA document to be presented to the City Council on Monday might just end the conflict of interest issues dogging the proposed Fagan Canyon development. The council was to consider the report - that could lead to the participation of Councilmen Gabino Aguirre and John Procter and, ultimately, several Planning Commissioners - at the March 14 meeting, after the Santa Paula Time’s press deadline. Aguirre and Procter, whose residences are within 500 feet of the canyon’s border, have had to bow out of Fagan Canyon discussions due to the conflict of interest issue.According to the report by City Attorney Karl Berger, in November the council directed staff to retain a consultant to review the economic analysis done for Centex Homes. Centex is proposing building 2,150 homes in Fagan Canyon, which hugs the city’s northern border. In addition, the city retained its own consultant – Keyser Marston & Associates – and further work by BTI Appraisal to perform the study and review the other work. The peer review will be final next week.Berger noted that BTI “conducted a thorough review of the proposed project based on the draft Specific Plan for the development.” After reviewing, among other things, the project’s anticipated impact on public safety services, public parks and public schools, BTI concluded that such impacts would affect all property values within the city to an equal degree. Subsequently, “…no greater or lesser impact on value would be realized by either [Aguirre’s or Procter’s] properties.”
BTI concluded that approximately 34 percent of all residential property owners within the city would be affected in the same manner when it comes to traffic, as noted in Berger’s report.Berger wrote that the “conclusions are significant” in light of the Fair Political Practices Commission’s October 2003 ruling. The ruling noted that the “public generally exception to the conflict of interest regulations might apply to this project if a significant segment of the public would be affected by a council decision” on any project. The public generally exception set by the FPPC is 10 percent or more.“Accordingly, the property interests of Councilmembers Aguirre and Procter would generally be affected in the same way as all other residential property owners within the City, were the Fagan Canyon project approved,” noted Berger’s report. Berger recommended that the council should seek further FPPC direction on the conflict of interest issue to determine whether of not Aguirre and Procter can participate in the decision-making process for Fagan Canyon.



Site Search

E-Subscribe

Subscribe

E-SUBSCRIBE
Call 805 525 1890 to receive the entire paper early. $50.00 for one year.

webmaster