Ethics in GT Still in Question:

From the Email Inbox:

Hi Grandpa Terrace,

My son installed something on my computer "to help me" (?) so I haven't been able to get my e-mails. Anyway, in doing some research I found the following that I thought you might find of interest:

According to the Key Ethics Law Principles For Public Servants (http://www.ilsg.org/), Personal Financial Gain "Appearing to Influence Decisions "

Public Officials: "Cannot request, receive or agree to receive anything of value or other advantages in exchange for a decision; "

"Cannot influence agency decisions relating to potential prospective employers"

and the Fairness, Impartiality and Open Government:
Public Officials "Cannot participate indecisions that will benefit their immediate family(spouse or dependent children)."

Also on the Public Official's Conflict of Interest Checklist:

"Any source of income of $500 or more (including promised income) during the prior 12 months for you or your spouse."

"You or a member of your family would have an interest (direct or indirect) in a contract with the agency."

"You have important, but non-financial, personal interest or biases (positive or negative) about the facts or the parties that could cast doubt on your ability to make a fair decision."

It goes on to say: "Even if it" legal, is it Ethical?"

In checking around I found that Mr. Miller"s wife doesn't have to WORK for there to be a conflict of interest. Her business cards are in their front office. Also, doesn't the DA need to look at the fact that Miller and Bea Cortes in close session voted to buy the Doodson property for $1.2 million when they actually did have an obvious conflict of interest when they voted for this in close session. This is the violation & the problem. They voted to buy the Doodson property for $1.2 million from someone who they both have a direct financial interest.

The evidence is that they admitted they had a financial conflict of interest when it was publicly voted on. They also admitted they had a conflict of interest when they voted on the other house on Arliss when both excused themselves because of their "interest" with Terra Loma and Gene Carlstrom.

I don't see Tom Schwab as being the "evil" one because 3 people (Miller, Cortes, Ferre) have a direct relationship with Carlstrom & you know they are always directing Mr. Schwab. Remember the sole right to sell of the 23 houses on Cardinal, the two redevelopment homes that went sour, the home on Arliss, the Doodson house and more... what is the common denominator? Terra Loma Real Estate

I am not convinced that the Doodson's are victims or even close to a victim. They are related to Carlstrom and if they were trying to sell their property for the 'last 10 years" how many times did they raise the price? I'm hearing from Realtors outside our area that that property was only listed twice in the MLS for short periods of time in the last year and the price was RAISED just before Carlstrom approached the city of GT. Zone change? The Realtors I know say that has been industrial for 20+ years. What is the old saying "You can't have it both ways." I guess you can if your brother-in-law has the ear of the City Council and their hand in his pocket. It is industrial property, has been for 20- 25 years. Is someone a bit greedy? I am the victim, you and every citizen of GT is the victim. The winner is the Doodson's and their Realtor relative.

The frustrating thing is that there is no way to get the DA involved with any of this when it seems such a clear violation.

And yes, you can use any of my letters that you wish.

3 Minute Rebel

From Grandpa Terrace:

Dear 3 Minute Rebel:

I don't agree with all of what you say, however it is of interest. Here it is posted for other's to read and digest the information it contains. I would not disregard Tom Schwab's complicity as readily as you have. He selects the developers, and the grandiose designs for development of projects like the OAC, and Senior villas independent of input or Council Direction, or Public input at the beginning of the project. In addition, I feel that if the OAC had not limited the potentiality of other's buying the Doodson's property you would be 100% correct about the suspicious linkage of relationships. However: When a city plan effectively removes the property from the market by limiting its use to be in accordance with a Plan as restricted as the OAC under the development of one developer any purchaser would be foolish to buy unless you were in fact the development company selected, without competitive selection, and public input, by non other than Tom Schwab the Director of the RDA, and City Manager.

It is clear that Mr. Miller's statement Mrs. Miller does business in Grand Terrace and has some sort of collaborative relationship on property transactions with Terra Loma, but is INDEPENDENT of them, is interesting in light of the fact she has no Business License in The City of Grand Terrace?