Office holders are required to undergo ethics training and that they be conversant with the conflict-of-interest provisions of section 1090.

RANCHO MIRAGE —Former Councilmember Meg Marker’s abrupt resignation from the Rancho Mirage City Council and the variety of issues raised by her are getting a good deal of news coverage and social media comments.  Some members of the public seem to be confused as conflict-of-interest rules and regs can be complex.  In an attempt to avoid the complexity of issues involved, in this writing, I’ll deal with only one issue raised by the former Councilmember in her resignation comments during the Rancho Mirage council meeting of Sept. 19.

To set the context, her resignation was prompted by an item on the agenda for that day.  The item dealt with establishing a procedure for city staff to follow in order to assure compliance with California State conflict of interest regulations.  The former councilmember not only spoke in opposition to this item, but she also suggested that approval of the item would result in preventing city businesspeople from running for a seat on the council.

As an example of the potential problem created by this proposed resolution, she cited the example of an owner of a solar company who also sat on City Council.  She suggested that if the city wished to install a solar system and if this imaginary solar company owner / council member offered a bid that would save the city tens or even hundreds of thousands of dollars, the city would not be able to take advantage of such an offer if we were to pass the proposed resolution.  She suggested that this is a good reason why we should not pass the resolution and also a reason why business owners would have concerns about running for a seat on council.

The example she cites is factually incorrect.  The fact is that the condition she suggests is and has been against the law in the State for many years.  Simply stated, the city cannot do business with any entity owned and controlled by a sitting council member (in this instance the fictitious solar owner / council member).  It does not matter if the city might save considerable money, it is still a violation of law.  Her suggestion that passage of the proposed resolution would prevent the action she conjured is clearly incorrect – because – the action is already against the law in California.  Passage of the resolution and her incorrect example are completely unrelated.

California State Code 1090 is the section of law dealing with conflicts of interest.  The California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) oversees compliance with section 1090.  In the FPPC’s publication “A Quick Guide to Section 1090”, the FPPC states “the prohibition applies even when the terms of the contract are demonstrably fair and equitable or are plainly to the public entity’s advantage.”  The net is that, in former Councilmember Marker’s example, her contention that the proposed resolution would be the nexus preventing the contract is entirely incorrect – the example already is and has been a violation of CA law.

Office holders are required to undergo ethics training and that they be conversant with the conflict-of-interest provisions of section 1090.  In fact, the former councilmember is in receipt of two “Section 1090 letters” from the FPPC informing her that actions she proposed to take in the operation a business that she owns would be a violation of law.  The former councilmember owns a business that operates radio stations in the Coachella Valley.  As a result of required ethics training and her years as a business owner, I’d have expected her to be more conversant with rules.

I’ll leave it to readers to form your own conclusions about the fact that she was not conversant with the rules and the fact that she received multiple Section 1090 letters.  Readers interested in the content of the Section 1090 letters can find them posted on the FPPC website as these FPPC opinion letters are a matter of public record.

You may read the first letter here: https://ukenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/FPPC_MarkerLetter2.pdf

You may read the second letter here: https://ukenreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/FPPC_MarkerLetter1.pdf

After the former councilmember resigned and left the council meeting, the remaining council members voted unanimously to pass the resolution designed to protect the residents of Rancho Mirage from the evils of conflicts of interest.

Image Sources

  • Conflict of Interest: Shutterstock