Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/05/1996 COMPLAINTCITY OF ASHLAND Administration MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: RE: October 9, 1996 Mayor and City Council Attached is a copy of a notice from the Office of the Secretary of State, Elections Division indicating that a written complaint has been submitted from David W. Fadden. The complaint alleges that there were election law violations by the City's elected and appointed officials. The written complaint and exhibits are attached for your information. I have talked to the Elections Division and they indicated that they are "reviewing" the complaint. Although, there does not appear to be any major cause for concern, we will continue to monitor this review and as additional information becomes available we will update the Council. For your information, Dick Trout and Martin Levine also received copies of the notice from the Elections Division. Enclosure cc: Brian Almquist Paul Nolte Barbara Christensen ('~fl'l( I': (>1 I'111: ,%I'{;Id:IARY (}F .o'°° // October 3, 1996 Martin Levine Chair of Municipal Audit Committee c/o City of Ashland 20 E. Main St. Ashland, Oregon 97520 Dear Mr. Levine: This is to notify you that a written complaint has been received by the Secretary of State alleging that there may be violations of provisions of Oregon election law. A copy of the complaint letter is enclosed. This office is required to notify a person who is the subject of such a complaint that a complaint has been received within 48 (business) hours of our receipt (ORS 260.345). We will be reviewing the complaint as soon as possible, and will contact you if we need any further information. Sincerely, Norma J. Buckno Program Representative Enclosure 96-154 C)FFICE OF TIlE ~ECRITFAIO,' OF ,C, TATE PHIL KEISI.1NG i'll.E( .q'Ic)Ns [)l\'l'ql 141 STATE SaLI~M, ()r~!(;<>x 9731{b0-22 El.ec:'t~o~s ~ (503) October 3, 1996 David W. Fadden 326 N. Main St. Ashland, Oregon 97520 Dear Mr. Fadden: This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter of complaint on October 2, 1996. Specifically, you state that there may have been election law violations by the City of Ashland's elected and appointed City Officials. You also mention other concerns in your letter regarding meeting or governing laws. The Secretary of State's Elections Division has jurisdiction of Oregon Election laws, Chapters 246 to 260, and Administrative Rules, Chapter 165. Enclosed is a copy of the 1995-1996 Oregon Election Laws for your information and reference. ORS 260.345 (1) states, that "any elector may file with any filing officer a written complaint alleging that a violation of an election law has occurred and stating the reason for believing that the violation occurred and any evidence relating to it." ORS 260.315 to 260.995, is the section titled "Election Offenses." There are aspects of your complaint regarding election law that this office will be reviewing. You will be informed of any correspondence and determinations made in that regards. We did want to inform you of other concerns that we do not have jurisdiction to review, and give you some information on those. One of the other concerns in your complaint is regarding public meeting laws. From our informal review of the Oregon statutes regarding public meetings, we find that under ORS 192.680, a person affected by a decision at a public meeting can file suit in the circuit court of the county in which the governing body meets. Additionally, complaints of violations of ORS 192.660 alleged to hav~ been committed by public officials may be made to the Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission for review and investigation as provided by ORS 244.260. David Fadden October 3, 1996 page 2 For your information, the Oregon Government Standards and Practices Commission is located at 100 High St. SE Suite 220, Salem, Oregon 97310-1360. Their telephone number is (503) 378-5105. Another concern mentioned was that the newspaper, The Ashland Daily Tidings, has not contacted you for differing views or offered you an opportunity for an equal promotional commentary. Newspapers are private enterprises. There is no Oregon state election law that requires them to provide equal access to all sides of a political issue, or to all candidates for a race. We will be further reviewing your complaint as soon as possible and will keep you informed of any actions taken. Thank you. Sincerely, Norma J. Buckno Program Representative enclosure 96-154 Secretary of State Elections Division 141 State Capitol Salem, Or. 97310 September 30, 1996 Dear Sir: I am filing a formal complaint against Ashland's elected and appointed City Officials, according to their individual violations of any State and Federal laws. I request the appropriate State Departments to review the printed material that I have included. If any violations of election, meetinq, or qoverninq laws are evidenced, I ask that the Departments investigate and take appropriate action against persons responsible for such violations. Two City Measures, #'s 15-50 and 15-51, have qualified for the November 5, 1996 ballot. Ashland's Mayor and City Council are in opposition to these two approved measures. A public, Special Meeting, was held on August 14, 1996, between the Mayor, City Council, and their appointed Citizen's Budget committee. This meeting was not televised, and apparently no sound recording was made. The only records of this Special meeting are the published minutes and the attenders, of whom I was one. From the beginning of the meeting, the City Council brought forward planned agenda topics that were not published on the agenda or public meeting notice. The public was not informed of the topics discussed and therefore were deprived of their discussion rights. Please review the Council Agenda and meeting minutes showing the singular Aqenda Item, "regarding financial impacts of proposed charter amendment initiatives." It would appear the Mayor, City Council, and their appointed Citizen's Budget Committee tampered with the initiative voting process. The City's Attorney, publicly declared that the two City Measures were in violation of the State's Constitution. All City Officials then made the decision, that if the two measures passed, the commissioners election dates would be changed, from the petition's approved 1997 dates to their unqualified 1998 dates. These unqualified decisions were made after : 1. The same City Attorney had written both the petition's Captions, Questions, and Summary's, 2. The petition's wording had been approved for circulation by The City's Elections Officer, 3. All required petition signatures had been collected, and 4. The two measures had qualified for the November 5, 1996 ballot. These unqualified decisions arbitrarily over-ride the Election Officer's petition approvals and the will of the petition's signers. Please review the meeting minutes; the City Attorney statement, paragraph 2; and the supporting published newspaper commentary on 09-19-96, by Martin Levine, paragraph 3. Please note: Mr. Levine is a C.P.A., Chair of the City's - Audit Committee, and Chair of the City's - Citizens Budget Committee. Although he was appointed to these two City Commissions by the Mayor and City council, his professional C.P.A. status, gives him some creditability when he opposes the two City Measures. I believe his published commentary was meant to purposely mislead the voters by attempting to damage the creditably of the two measures. I also believe that it was authorized by City Officials. Please note: The Ashland Daily Tidings, our only local newspaper, is very supportive of our present Mayor and City Council. They exclude most City Official criticisms. They have not contacted me for possible differing views; nor have they offered me opportunity for an equal promotional commentary. They have published two other misleading measure headlines, both designed to mislead the voters. They have refused to acknowledge my objections and have refused to print any corrective retractions. The City of Ashland has a very un-level political playing field. Additional "questionable topics" were discussed and decisions made as follows: a. They discussed their City Official opposition campaign of the two Citizen Measures. b. They discussed the raising of funds to oppose the two Citizen Measures. c. They made unqualified statements of pure conjecture, as to the costs these two measures to the city and its staff. They have formed an political committee, "Citizens For Continued Efficiency in Government", headed by Mr. Trout, an appointed Citizen Budget Committee member. They have published their opposing views in the Voter's Pamphlet I am a typical citizen, unable to afford an Attorney to "Fight City Hall" I only have the hope that my Government will protect its citizens rights and correct any injustices. If you require additional information, please contact me. I am thanking you for your prompt reply, as the elections are drawing near. David W. Fadden, Chief Petitioner/Treasurer Measures #'s 15-50 & 15-51 326 N. Main St. Ashland, Or. 97520 (541) 488-0025 enclosures 2 LOUO COUNCIL AGt~NDA . This publication of selected agenda items is published by the City Council for your information. The complete agenda is available in the City Administrator's office, City Hall on the Plaza. The Council meetings are cable-cast live over RVTV's cable access seen on TCI Cablevision channel 9. Internet address: http:/Iwww.ashland.or.us ADJOURNED MEETING o Wednesday August 14, 1996, 7:00 p.m., Council Chambers at 1175 East Main Street. Letter from ODOT regarding status of North Main/Siskiyou prservation overlay project and bikeway widening proposal. Second reading by title only of "An Ordinance adding Chapter 2.20 of the Ashland Municipal Code to establish procedures for dealing with chronic nuisance property". First reading of an ordinance withdrawing an annexed area for Jackson County Fire District No.5. (Access Annexation) Reading by title only of "A Resolution approving the formation of the Oregon' Public and Cooperative Utility Association and authorizing membership in the Association". Joint meeting with the Citizens' Budget Committee regarding financial impacts of proposed charter amendment initiatives. ,4~ox..r~ o,~ ~ c,~ g',,srce~;~/o'~ The City Council invites your attendance at all meetings.. Public participation is welcomed on any item on the agenda unless the item has been the subject of a public hearing which has been closed. We also welcome any comments or suggestions on any item of interest from citizens which is not on the agenda under the Public Forum portion of the official agenda. (Paid advertisement by the Ashland City Council) Publish on August 13, 1996 Purchase Order No. 17731 Questions: Call Dave Goddard at 488-6002 MINUTES FOR SPECIAL MEETING ASHLAND CITY COUNCIL August 14, 1996 SPECIAL AGENDA ITEM 7:30 P.M., Council Chambers Joint meeting between Council Members, Councilors Wheeldon and Reid were absent and the Citizens' Budget Committee members, Dick Trout, Regina Stapahin, Patti Acklin and Marty Levine regarding financial impacts of proposed charter amendment initiatives. City Attorney Paul Nolte informed council and bud et committee ~)?~?~'~memLers that=the initiatives that were filed require that the five members be elected at the next mail in election held in of budget impact there would be no expenditures expected until the commission were to take office. There is no severability clause. Discussion that the initiatives are not clear as to when members would take office. /v~ ~~_ ~ ~c~ ~ Clarification on how members would be appointed if a member could not continue with their term. co~s,~ z~e~, ~ Question and discussion as to how expenses would be handled, what types of documents could be requested and received.-/~ Finance Director, Jill Turner stated that it is difficult to ~1 determine what is meant by financial audit in the proposed >/initiatives. She explained that the current financial audit is performed by an outside certified public accounting firm which has to be done under state statutes. ~- Turner commented that it would be difficult to add additional I projects to her department. Turner gave examples of costs which could associated with special projects. Budget committee member, Dick Trout stated that to create this .~f~ ' new commission would cause additional costs to the city. Read statement to other budget members and council in regards to consequences of creating two commissions, misperceptions regarding what the city is currently doing and submitted facts and background material for articles. ~-~c,~. There was general agreement that they had an obligation to inform citizens of the consequences of these initiatives. v/o~ ~a~.o~ ? Special Council/Budget Committee meeting 8-14-96 Discussion as to whether a political committee could be fo~ed to oppose this initiative. /~ Budget member, Patty Acklin felt that the positive aspects that the budget committee has brought forward should be made public. Public should be informed of the safeguards that are in place and ~hat another level of government is not necessary. Councilor Hauck noted that in other cities, they have elected officers who have professional staff to do audits. Meeting Adjourned: 8:55 p.m. Barbara Christensen, Recorder Special Council/Budget Committee meeting 8-14-96 2 Some thoughts For The Special Budget Committee Meeting on 8-14-96 Creating these two commissions will- 1. Cost more money for the Staff's time, for the hiring of probably too man~ consultants, and for supplies and facilities. 2. Create unnecessary conflict without adding anything useful, as IDon Laws noted to the press. New commissions have a tendency to justify their positions by seeking and discovering "problems" /~t2~/,?. 3. Put another bureaucracy on top of a bureacracy, as noted by Mid Manzano in the T~;dings recently; plus, there is already a ¢~..-~,~/~ lack of qualified people wi]lin.q to serve on the Council and on 9~commiss ons ~~f~ ~o~ '~~ r~ ¢ ~ 4. Create confusion. How does "strictly advisory" e to having command~of the C~ty st~ff for audits9 The 3anguage of , .~¢~ these measure~is vague; and we don't know the extent or the ~~r/ ~im~ts of these~ commissions' authority~ ~~¢~¢~~~~- Some things we can consider doing are- 1. Sponsor some "argumeots against" in the voters pamphlet. At least one from the Council and one from the Budget Committee ¢or each measure; more if possible. 2. Letters To The Editor and Commentaries in newspapers. listed some ideas below. I've 3. Don't put a measure on the ballot now to raise money for the additional costs if these two measures pass. This would probably be taken as a threat, and the costs are unknown at this time. But we should note in the voters pamphlet the likely need in the future; voters should know that these won't come free. 4. We should agree, publicly, that although it's proper to have initiative measures on the ballot, we believe these two should be defeated. And, of course, say why. _~-~.~//,~r/5 ~ ~.~¢_. ~'~_ ? 5. Consider a planned, paid-advertising campaign to assure that citizens are accurately informed on these measures. Some apparent misperceptions to address are: 1. Formal audits are not being done and should be because others do them and it always pays off. Ownership of e g the electric utility is not seen as a .... ' benefit to them by many Ashlanders i.e. the tax and user fee ,/vP~'~structure is not clearly understood to be in their benefit. Some facts and back.qround material for articles' /;4//~/~/~C 1. Financial audits are already performed annually, as per state ~£~/~:~ law. ¢¢~ ~4~2. The citizens elect a Council to oversee the operations of the City, and the Council appoints the Budget Committee for additional, separate, monitoring of expenditures and operations. 3. Comparisions on just an equal-population basis don't work; we're not a typical Oregon city, due to tourism and Shakespeare~,r~.¢/~, and SOSC (tax free properties), and due to services provided through ownership of some of our own utilities. 4. People need to realize that there is a carefully conceived plan in Ashland meant to give us the most~overall for our money. You can't look at things as'isolated pieces; not just 'one piece to another piece in some other city, but the entire picture in both places must be considered. 5. We intentionally hire the best people (which costs more than._~.~-- ¢'zL~r ]ess-than-best) and they do the best job, such as effectively implementing the policies of the Council, properly handling the day-to-day operations of the City, selecting the best equipmentOr-- for an intended purpose at the best all-things-considered cost (Cherokees) and finding ways to save the City money (BPA contract ). ? s goal is to be better than the average city. Dick Trout ity measures not justifiable, cost-wise Should we add a City Cost Commission and a City Utility Commission, as proposed on the Nov. 5 ballot? After all the other committees and commissions, outside auditors, city councilors and what-have-you have completed their reviews, can we reasonably expect these two new commissions to save us sig~LF~cantly more than the costs they add? What costs, you say? For one, ballot initia- tives and elections don't come cheaply. Neither does the cost of city staff time and supplies to "fully cooperate with the (commissions) by promptly supplying all requested information." Meeting facilities, communication facilities, and documentation all take resources. And resources cost. The proposals contain two immediate prob- lems: As drafted, no commissioner can be legal- ly elected and seated on their respective com- mission until Jan. 1, 1999, and the Utility Commission "shall be available to assist citizens with their utility billing inquiries, and will be available for other commissions or committees." Are these volunteer (unpaid) commissioners being dected to handle customer complaints over at the utility department? Also troubling is the granting of unbridled authority to access city records and information. The Citizens' Budget Committee, for example, may receive only that information relevant to its purpose. But these initiatives contain no such restriction. What if, for example, one 6f the com- missioners requests the phone numbers of all female city employees or utility customers? Commentary Martin Levine They're unquestionably being granted that authority, and ff the Personnel Department refuses to comply, such refusal would then vio- late the law. The emanation of these initiatives appears to have grown from a misperception, by some citi- zens, that there are potentially significant ineffi- ciencies in our city departments and utility com- pany. Efficiency requires two components: what you get and what it costs you. And maximum efficiency is getting the most for the least. Ashland, like any complex business or insti- tution, already functions under a system of internal controls (checks and balances, if you will) designed to assure at least reasonable oper- ational efficiency. Each year, by law, the city is audited by an independent f'wrn of certified pub- lic accountants -- professional experts in evalu- ating procedural and operational efficiencies without any agenda or vested interests. At the center of the audit is an evaluation of internal controls. The rules and procedures in place are reviewed to ascertain the level of assurance pro- vided, then transactions are randomly selected and tested against supporting documentation to determine ff the systems function as intended. The auditors report areas of concern noted during the audit, as well as recommendations for improvement. One of the functions of the Municipal Audit Committee is to (publicly) review these concerns, together with written responses from the responsible ciW official, and submit to the City Councfi any recommenda- tions for remedial action. The Citizens' Budget Committee also, by law, annually reviews (publicly) the funds budgeted for each department and the utility company. The budget report is available at the library and City Hall. It is a remarkably complete document, yet concise, and has consistenfiy won state awards for exceilence. Recent2y, CounciLman Ken Hagen labeled these initiatives an "expensive duplication." When one considers all that is currenfiy being done to assure fiscal efficiency -- by the Citizens' Budget Committee, by the Municipal Audit Committee, by independent auditom,'a~nd by staff- one realizes that the tasks to be per~ formed by these proposed commissions would indeed be duplicative, would likely be performed by individuals less qualified than those already performing the tasks, and could result in abu- sive exercise of authority. The bottom line here is that we cannot reasonably expect these com- missions to produce any significant, reMizable savings. The initiatives are simply not cost-justi- fied. Accordingly, we should vote no on ballot measures 15-50 and 15-51. Martin Levine, C.P,4., currently chairs the Ashland Citizens' Budget and the Municipal Audit committees. His views do not ~ly reflect those o/the editorial board. ~).'T['. t~'/t~/ 141 ST,*.TF. C^mTo, S^k~.~, O,t¢;o~ 97310-0722 ELZCT~OXS -- (503) 986' 151g December 17, 1996 David W. Fadden 326 N. Main St. Ashland, Oregon 97520 Dear Mr. Fadden: This is in response to your letter received in our office on December 13, 1996. I am sorry that your telephone call was not responded to. You wrote in about the status of a complaint you had filed with this office in October of this year. You asked for copies of any and all correspondences in this matter. Please find enclosed copies of the letters this office has received in response to inquiries made. The concerns in this complaint involve legal issues that have yet to be reviewed with our counsel from the Attorney General's office. It is hoped that this will OC, cur in the next few weeks and a determination letter issued. You will receiv~¢ copies of any such findings. Thank you. Sincerely, Norma J. Buckno Program Representative enclosure c: City of Ashland 96-154 BE6 9