Monterey County Grand Jury
• 2012-2013
2012 Monterey County Civil Grand Jury Interim Final Report No. 2 Interference by Marina City Council with City Staff
⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 4 findings
F1
The CGJ found several instances where at least one member of the MCC acted in an administrative capacity with the general public on issues that should be in the purview of the City staff, thus causing confusion between the public and city officials. We reviewed specific written complaints from the general public complaining of MCC member interfering in the negotiations for the development of business opportunities between themselves and the appropriate city official.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The MCC should review the violations of the Brown Act by the MEC Ad Hoc committee with special emphasis on whether the violations call for specific cures to be adopted.
F2
The MCC did not follow one of the key guidelines for the use of an "AD HOC" committee, namely, they are temporary committees. The MCC established the MEC Ad Hoc Committee on August 19, 2008 after officially suggesting its formation as of February, 2008. While members have changed over time and the City staff was removed from working with the Ad Hoc committee, the committee is still operating--more than four years later. The CGJ observed little progress in completing the intended purpose of the MEC Ad Hoc Committee. By eliminating the staff support for the committee (essentially the source of professional help to this important project) the MCC reduced its expenditures on labor during part of this 4 year plus period. However, the MCC has recently authorized $33,500 to hire outside consultants to move the project along.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The MCC should develop and enact an ethical code of conduct for all City of Marina officials.
F3
Of the four members on the MEC Ad Hoc committee, 2 are members of the MCC. There were at least 2 violations of the Brown Act during the past year with regard to this committee. The minutes of the meetings were not made readily available to the public and only became available when a member of the public made an official request with City staff. Second, a member of the committee was denied access to portions of the official report of the committee that was to be presented to the MCC.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The MCC should coordinate and fully participate in training emphasizing the specific boundaries between the work of the MCC and the City Staff and ensure that no members of the MCC "cross the line" and interfere with City staff work
F4
The handling of the MEC Ad Hoc Committee has put the MEC site at possible risk of loss to the City of Marina. The City of Marina was given the property by the Federal Government in 1993, with the proviso that it must implement a plan to ensure it is used as a public park. Public access to the property is a significant component of meeting the Federal guidelines. Eighteen (18) years later, the City of Marina has not only failed to complete such a plan, but has not even provided a contemporary plan that meets the demands of the Federal Government. The Federal Government has suggested that this valuable asset could be at risk if the city of Marina does not comply with the covenants of the land transfer.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The MCC should encourage the City Attorney to take a more pre-emptive role in helping the MCC conduct its meetings. If procedural errors are identified and corrected immediately, the public will gain greater confidence in the operation of the MCC. The City Attorney has the experience to be helpful in this effort.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Marina
City