Censure of Pat Meyering: Defense - May 5th, 2013 - part 3

Pat Meyering's Defense:

Permanent link:
 http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2013/05/censure-vote-of-pat-meyering-may-5th_9053.html

Pat Meyering spoke in his defense immediately after Mayor Spitaleri read the censure motion. 

 

The incident of being silenced he refers to at minute 12:40 can be found excerpted at:
http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2012/09/sunnyvales-lesson-in-free-speech-part-i.html

and

http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2012/09/sunnyvale-city-councils-lesson-in-free.html

Censure of Pat Meyering: Charges - May 5th, 2013 - part 2

Reading of  Charges Against Pat Meyering

Permanent Link:

http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2013/05/censure-vote-of-pat-meyering-may-5th_19.html

(Edit 1/25/2014:  Sunnyvale is using a new version of video recording presentation which is incompatible with their old version so I am directing everyone to the YouTube versions here:
http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2013/10/meyering-censure-on-youtube-part-1.html
End edit of 1/25/2014)

The agenda item of whether to censure  Councilman Pat Meyering came up at the May 5th meeting at time 3:26:38 on the video available at
http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/CityGovernment/CityCouncil/CouncilMeetings/WatchCouncilMeetingsOnline.aspx

The motion was read by Mayor Spitaleri:

Censure of Pat Meyering: Public Comments - May 5th, 2013 - part 1

Public Comments on the Day of the Censure Vote:

Permanent link:
http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2013/05/censure-vote-of-pat-meyering-may-5th.html

(Edit 1/25/2014:  Sunnyvale is using a new version of video recording presentation which is incompatible with their old version so I am directing everyone to the YouTube versions here:
http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2013/10/meyering-censure-on-youtube-part-1.html
End edit of 1/25/2014)

Early in the meeting, several people spoke during the public comments section, when anyone may speak for 3 minutes about any topic not on the agenda.  Several spoke about the previous meeting's vote to take put the issue of the censure of Pat Meyering on the agenda for the May 5th meeting.

First was Tap Merrick, who intends to run for City Council against incumbent Jim Griffith.  He was followed by Michael Goldman (me - not running for anything), then by Steve Hoffman who is also running for City Council, and then by Andrew Maloney, (private citizen).

(this excerpt starts at 1:24 on the video of the May 5th meeting available for download or viewing at http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/CityGovernment/CityCouncil/CouncilMeetings/WatchCouncilMeetingsOnline.aspx
)

Campaign Contributions & Conflict of Interest - I

Permanent Link:
http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2013/05/campaign-contributions-conflict-of.html

Several people have claimed that Councilman Pat Meyering was making false accusations when he said that council members had received campaign donations.

This is not correct.  There were at least two contributions from "Specialty Solid Waste" to members of the City Council.  The owner of Specialty Waste is Jerry Nabhan as seen at: 

http://www.manta.com/c/mm29rct/specialty-solid-waste

He has at least two direct contributions to CC members campaigns.

One is Nabhan's contribution of $200 to CM Moylan 

  http://specialinterestwatch.org/Chris%20Moylan.aspx

as seen in this PDF of a filing with the CA Fair Political Practices Committee (FPPC) for January through June of 2009.

http://specialinterestwatch.org/FPPC%20Reports/Campaign%20Forms/Moylan/Moylan010109to063009.pdf

and the other is $300 to Mayor Spitaleri.

  http://specialinterestwatch.org/Tony%20Spitaleri.aspx

Mayor Spitaleri tried to stop CM Meyering from speaking and Moylan voted for the censure of Meyering for mentioning this.

You can also see Moylan, Spitaleri, and others trying to silence Meyering at an earlier meeting here:

http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2012/09/sunnyvales-lesson-in-free-speech-part-i.html

In that last post, it is Meyering's turn to speak, Mayor Spitaleri asks Meyering if he can go first, Meyering pleasantly agrees, then Moylan makes a motion to cut off debate right after Spitaleri speaks.  It is shameful bullying of Meyering by Moylan, Spitaleri, and others.  Meyering is more sinned against than sinning.

Campaign Contribution Information

Permanent link to this post:
http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2013/05/campaign-contribution-information.html

Candidates in California are required to file reports of their campaign contributions with the CA FPPC (Fair Political Practices Commission).  These are available for viewing at http://www.fppc.ca.gov/ ; this is also provided by Sunnyvale at: http://nf4.netfile.com/pub2/Default.aspx?aid=COS .

For example you can view Mayor Spitaleri's filings for his 2009 run at:
http://nf4.netfile.com/pub2/AllFilingsByCandidate.aspx?id=6818843&candidate=Anthony+Spitaleri

Councilman Meyerings filings are available at:
http://nf4.netfile.com/pub2/AllFilingsByCandidate.aspx?id=6818860&candidate=Pat+Meyering

Good luck trying to find what you are after.  For the Sunnyvale site some of the filings can be viewed only by going into the office to view them in person.  The filings available online or in the office are simply scans of the paper filings or the electronic equivalent.  These have to be looked at individually.  Try looking at one to see how hard it is to figure out who got what from whom over the course of the election.  It is doable but it requires a certain amount of dedication.  It has been suggested that the information could be assembled by the state into an online database but this has been resisted so no laws have been passed or funding provided to do it.

Fortunately for Sunnyvale, there is an online summary provided for each politician.  It is here:
http://specialinterestwatch.org/Default.aspx

E.g., For
Pat Meyering: http://specialinterestwatch.org/Pat%20Meyering.aspx
Tony Spitaleri: http://specialinterestwatch.org/Tony%20Spitaleri.aspx

The (losing) opponents' filings used to be available there as well but I get "404" now when I try to access some of them, like Bo Chang's, though I recall it was considerably more than Pat Meyering's - like 5-7 times as much.

This site also has lists filings of independent organizations which support a candidate or oppose a particular candidate.  SUNPac is the (in)famous one that was specifically created to support more high density construction and commercial development of Sunnyvale.

http://specialinterestwatch.org/SUNPAC.aspx

Politics Behind the Move to Censure Meyering

Permanent link:
http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2013/05/politics-behind-move-to-censure-meyering.html

There has been a movement among some to initiate a recall against Pat Meyering.  If the City Council Censures Pat Meyering, it will provide a backing to this movement.

You can view campaign contributions from the public filings (which are hard to view except individually as PDFs downloaded from the state or county) at http://www.specialinterestwatch.org/Filings.aspx.  Also see http://sunnyvale.ca.gov/Departments/OfficeoftheCityManager/CityClerk/Elections.aspx , filings are separately available at http://static.netfile.com/agency/cos/

The City Council is currently composed of 3 main factions based on who supports them.  There is the "development faction" which relies on developer money for their election contributions (Griffith and Martin-Milius), the "city union" faction which relies primarily on contributions from city unions for their funding (Davis & Spitaleri), and the independents (Whittum & Meyering) who funded their own election.  Moylan was funded primarily by developers but seems to have an independent streak and is arguing and voting against further office and high-density housing development.  The first two factions often vote to support each other with Moylan and Davis being swing voters.

Elections for 3 seats on the CC are in November.  Spitaleri and Moylan are termed out this year.  Griffith is running for his second term against Tap Merrick.  Developer-backed Griffith, Hendricks and Larsson are running against "independents" Merrick, Frazer, and Hoffman, respectively, in three separate "districts".
 See http://nf4.netfile.com/pub2/Default.aspx?aid=COS&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1

Hendricks was the treasurer for Griffith's first campaign.  Developer-focussed SunPAC's founder Pat Castillo is backing Griffith, Hendricks and Larsson.

The 2 factions backed by developers are afraid that if 2 out of the three independent candidates win, they will lose their voting majority and development will slow down, and city wages and benefits will not continue to be among the highest in the state.  If they can force Meyering into a recall, their chances of retaining a majority are bigger.

Meyering was outspent by an enormous amount (I think it was on the order of 6-1).  For the multi-million $ deals that are going through the city council, outspending self-financed candidates is easy.  The attack on Meyering is part of the overall plan to protect developer interests.

The Motion to Censure Pat Meyering - Legal/Moral Issues

Permanent link:

 http://calpensionsbrief.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-motion-to-censure-pat-meyering.html

(for a video of the incident go to:
http://calpensionsb rief.blogspot. com/2013/ 05/pat-meyering- censured. html  )

The City Council meeting tonight, May 7th, 2013 at City Council Chambers, 456 W. Olive Ave., Sunnyvale, CA should not be a time when a motion to censure Councilman Meyering is voted on.  The appropriate thing to do is refer the issue to a neutral panel (such as three retired judges - similar to an arbitration procedure) which can consider the issues and decide whether there is cause to proceed.  If probable cause is established the city council should refer the case to an impartial adjudication panel, since the majority of the City Council is the complainant.  (C.f., http://government.lawyers.com/Impeachment-and-Censure-of-Elected-Officials.html ).  The current situation puts the complainants (4 out of 7 on the CC) in the positions of:

1.  "the accuser": who can not possibly be considered objective as evidenced by the fact that they are declaring themselves an aggrieved party - they feel their honesty has been called into question.

2.  "the district attorney":  who would decide if there is a case worth bringing,

3.  "the grand jury": a body of unbiased citizens convened to decide if the govt. has probable cause to initiate an action.  Without a grand jury the govt. could initiate false but very costly harassing claims against anyone it doesn't like, losing all of them but effectively punishing and silencing opposition.  A grand Jury is a basic protection against government abuse of power.

4.  "the judge": an unbiased neutral party who determines that proper procedure is being followed and the legal rights of both accuser and accused are being observed.  The city council cannot fulfill that role since it is by definition biased as the accuser.  Neither can the city attorney because her employment depends on the city council.

5.  "the jury": unbiased individuals who are to impartially weigh the evidence and decide if the accuser is correct, has proven his case beyond reasonable doubt, and suggest a punishment.

For the CC to proceed with a vote tonight would be a travesty of justice.