Santa Clara County Grand Jury • 2009-2010

2009-2010 Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury Report is a Conflict of Interest Guiding the Santa Clara Valley Water

Published: June 18, 2010 64 pages
Ver PDF original

Findings and Recommendations 9 findings

F1
The SCVWD plans to build an additional outdoor education center (Gold Street Education Center) at a cost of between $1.1 million and $1.3 million in Alviso. The attendance data provided by SCVWD for the existing education centers do not support the need for another education center.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
In lieu of building the Gold Street Education Center, the SCVWD should consider less costly methods of satisfying stated education goals like the addition of strategically placed interpretive signage on hiking and biking trails bordering the Alviso Slough, and Bay and/or at the Marina, detailing history and current conditions of water issues related to Alviso.
F2
The SCVWD provided this Grand Jury with a summary of their outdoor classroom program attendance. After repeated requests, the Grand Jury was told that the data verifying the summary figures do not exist.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The SCVWD should maintain accurate records that verify the outdoor classroom program attendance to properly evaluate the need for any additional education centers.
F3
The Gold Street Education Center site is located directly adjacent to Director Santos’ mobile home park. Director Santos should have properly recused himself from all aspects of voting, decision making and influencing the project. His failure to recuse himself may have been a violation of conflict-of-interest laws.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
Director Santos should fully and consistently recuse himself and refrain from otherwise influencing any aspect of the Gold Street Education Center project. Director Santos should adhere to all conflict-of-interest laws and policies to which he is subject. 18
F4
SCVWD directors were aware that Director Santos advocated for the Gold Street site location for the education center. SCVWD directors were also aware that Director Santos had a personal financial interest in the adjacent mobile home park and that Director Santos did not recuse himself from voting on Gold Street Education Center consistently or otherwise refrain from influencing the decision making regarding the project. The directors failed in their fiduciary responsibility to the SCVWD and their constituents by acquiescing to Director Santos’ promotion of the Gold Street Education Center project at considerable expense to rate payers.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The SCVWD Board should re-evaluate its commitment to the Gold Street project given Director Santos’ conduct and Board members’ acquiescence to Director Santos’ inappropriate involvement in the project.
F5
Director Santos has significant property interests in Alviso that greatly limit his ability to ethically participate in SCVWD projects in Alviso. Under Board governance policies, the Board commits itself and its members to ethical, businesslike, and lawful conduct including that members must have loyalty to the SCVWD unconflicted by personal interests. Director Santos’ conduct with respect to Alviso-based projects does not adhere to Board policies.
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
If Director Santos cannot conform to Board governance policies because his conflicts of interest are too pervasive, he should either divest himself of his property interests or resign from the SCVWD Board.
F6
Director Santos has been attending the Alviso and Lower Guadalupe Collaborative meetings, Alviso Water Task Force meetings, and other community meetings. At these meetings, he has berated SCVWD staff, and advanced personal or other interests without explicit SCVWD Board authorization, which is a violation of the SCVWD Board’s code of conduct, per Board Governance Policy 6.
Related Recommendations (1)
R6
At these meetings, Director Santos should adhere to the conduct required of him by SCVWD Board Governance Policy 6. 19
F7
On June 6, 2006, the SCVWD Board minutes reflect that Director Santos abstained from voting on portions of the budget related to the Alviso Slough Restoration Project. Later, on Oct. 14, 2008, SCVWD Board minutes reflect that Director Santos voted in favor of the SCVWD’s Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) that included funding for improvements to the Alviso Slough, even though he had abstained from that vote in 2006. On Nov. 10, 2009, Director Santos voted to approve the specific ASRP plan, after having abstained in 2006.
Related Recommendations (1)
R7
Director Santos should fully and consistently recuse himself and refrain from otherwise influencing any aspect of a project in which he has declared a conflict of interest, such as the ASRP.
F8
Director Santos is a long-time member and staunch advocate of the South Bay Yacht Club, a nonprofit organization. As a member of the SCVWD Board, he has advocated that the Board fund improvements to the SBYC and its clubhouse at both SCVWD Board and community meetings. His unconflicted loyalty is owed to the SCVWD (Board Policy 6.1), but his demonstrated allegiance has been to the SBYC.
Related Recommendations (1)
R8
Director Santos should adhere to SCVWD Board Governance Policy 6.1 that requires him to be unconflicted by loyalties to other organizations. In order to abide by this policy, he should recuse himself from discussing, voting, or influencing the SCVWD regarding the SBYC to avoid the actual or appearance of ethical impropriety.
F9
The SCVWD Board did not adhere to its own good governance policies when it acquiesced to Director Santos’ promotion of projects where it was apparent he had personal and/or financial interests.
Related Recommendations (1)
R9
The SCVWD Board should consistently adhere to its own governance policies.

Conclusions 10