OPEN MEETINGS — The San Diego District Attorney’s Office is looking into whether the Imperial Beach City Council may have violated the Brown Act by appointing a former mayor to fill a vacancy created by the death of a city councilman three days before.

As reported by the San Diego Reader,

On June 9, Leon Schorr of the San Diego County district attorney’s office informed city attorney Lough that the City is under investigation for violating the Brown Act — the government statute that insures public access to local government meetings and deliberations.

“We got some complaints from the general public about the appointment,” said Schorr in a June 10 phone interview.

Those complaints stem from a May 26 notification sent out by the city clerk of Imperial Beach to a local paper, requesting applications to fill the vacant council seat. The next day, at a special meeting intended to “consider filling the vacancy,” mayor Jim Janney informed the council that Rose had contacted him and volunteered to fill the position. The council then agreed to appoint the former mayor.

“There was no mention at all or any intent given in the agenda that Rose was to be appointed that evening,” read the complaint submitted to the district attorney’s office. “The intent of the agenda was to decide on how to fill the vacant seat by holding a special election or an open application process. There was no mention of filling that seat at the May 27 meeting.”

As for the investigation by the district attorney’s office, Schorr says his office has to wait until the City of Imperial Beach releases the official record of the June 3 council meeting before his office can determine whether or not the appointment is valid.

__________________________________

After being warned by the District Attorney’s Office that a remedy was being sought and a complaint/s had been filed, Council approved the minutes of the meeting where Rose was illegally appointed.  This started the official 30 days to file action clock. Deputy District Attorney Leon Shorr has refused to provide this reporter with a second interview and has not returned this reporter’s  calls for almost a week now. Preliminary information indicates that the District Attornney has significant evidence and motive to pursue further investigation into serial meetings and illegal process, but may decline to do so because of political rather than legal reasons.  Stay tuned because this story is only going to get bigger. Every vote that Diane Rose makes while illegally apointed, could be and should be revisited. Her vote on the Sudberry proposal suggests a major conflict of interest since she was trying to extract consulting fees from other contractors competing for the same project EAN.

Everyone on the council who voted to place her back on council illegally knows that she is a wanna -be, influence- peddling!  Did I leave out that she’s a pawn for hire and a puppet and a rubber stamp?  It’s not even important any more what the District Attorney thinks or does………….It’s obvious that Diane Rose….and everyone who supports her fraudulent deals of the past and the future should be removed from public office and public trust.  JOIN THE RECALL EFFORT.   NO MORE ROSE….NO MAS  CUCARACHAS  AT CITY HALL !