Blog note: see later article on same topic
The Patterson City Council responded to the grand jury’s findings that the city ignored regulations and wasted $2.4 million on a building purchase for a City Hall annex. The formal response approved Tuesday says:
▪ the council did not violate the state’s public meeting law with its agenda notices and minutes on the closed-session discussions for the purchase;
▪ it complied with law in purchasing the 100-year-old building at 21/25 S. Del Puerto Avenue;
▪ and it did what it could to cooperate with the civil grand jury’s request for documents related to the purchase.
In June, the grand jury charged that city leaders ignored regulations when they bought the old building for $650,000 in 2012. It’s now known the building needs about $2.4 million in upgrades and repairs before it can be used for a City Hall expansion, the report said, citing estimates from the city.
Mayor Luis Molina told the grand jury on Nov. 13 that the council thought it was a good purchase at the time, but he felt the city had “bought a lemon.”
According to the grand jury, the council violated the Brown Act when it did not report the votes of each council member or consistently report actions taken for the purchase.
A city building official inspected the Del Puerto Avenue property in April 2012 and recommended the city seek an architect’s advice on what improvements were needed to make the building accessible to the disabled. That was not done before escrow closed in August 2012.
According to the report, the seller was supposed to make about $110,000 in repairs and be reimbursed by the city. The purchase was completed without the work being done and the seller was never required to make the improvements, based on advice from the deputy city attorney.
The council approved a response Tuesday that disagreed with most of the grand jury’s 16 findings. But it did agree the building cannot be used for its intended purpose without an extensive makeover. The project was supposed to create additional space for the chamber of commerce, historical society and public meeting rooms.
“While the city had hoped the property would be a convenient location and an opportunity to expand City Hall, it turns out that there are significantly more repairs required to satisfactorily update the building’s condition,” the response said.
A shorthanded council made a few changes before the proposed response was approved. It claimed the $2.4 million figure was not a documented estimate or valid. It also charged the grand jury violated its own rules by disclosing the mayor’s testimony.
City Attorney Tom Hallinan said council members Dominic Farinha and Deborah Novelli did not participate in the item.
The grand jury also charged that city officials failed to comply with a request for a copy of the purchase agreement and did not comply with a Feb. 2 subpoena to turn over information. The city’s response disagreed with that finding, saying they substantially complied with the request for documents.
The response says there never was a written purchase agreement for the transaction. Any delays in turning over documents were due to former City Manager Rod Butler’s departure last year to take another job, the response said.
Most of the negotiations over the purchase of the building were handled by Butler. Ken Irwin, who took over as city manager, told to the grand jury last November that he had no knowledge of the deal.
The Patterson council did agree to create property acquisition policy with procedures to follow for future purchases. And it will endeavor to provide meeting minutes as quickly as possible.
The grand jury is a government watchdog panel that performs a public service when it exposes this kind of scandal. It’s the kind of information that voters remember when they participate in local elections.
On another issue in Patterson, a court hearing on an extended restraining order, barring Councilwoman Sheree Lustgarten from the senior center, has been continued to Sept. 16. An investigation concluded that Lustgarten’s conduct was intimidating and aggressive toward seniors and volunteers when she served on a senior meals task force at the center.
In July, a council majority asked Lustgarten to resign and removed her from committee appointments after officials said she left angry and profane voice messages with city representatives. The council has said Lustgarten should submit to a fitness-for-duty examination.
September 3, 2015
The Modesto Bee
Ken Carlson: 209-578-2321
Read more here: http://www.modbee.com/news/article33806625.html#storylink=cpy
No comments:
Post a Comment