Santa Ana City Council Give Away May Violate Constitution

Santa Ana Dumps More Money Down the Drain

In an action that may well violate the California Constitution, the City Council of the City of Santa Ana gave former City Attorney Joseph Fletcher more than $330,000 from the city when he stepped down last week, even though they were under no apparent contractual obligation to do so. The payout includes $142,080 from a severance deal he negotiated last month with the City Council. But it also includes $191,699 in cashed-out vacation and sick time, according to figures released by the city. That brings the total to $333,779. Mr. Fletcher’s contract called for an appproximately $280,000 payout in the event that he was fired, but Mr. Fletcher had indicated his intent to resign several months ago and both parties concluded that this “give away” (my words, not theirs) was done at the end of a voluntary departure. In addition, and perhaps even more troubling, his contract allowed him to accrue vacation as if he were hired nearly 13 years earlier than he really was – another give away at the beginning of his tenure.

Article 16, Section 6, of the California Constitution provides that no city can make a gift of public funds to any individual. Afterall, it is the taxpayers’ money, not the City Council’s. Giving someone money without a legal obligation, as appears to be the case in Santa Ana, is a violation of the California Constitution.

In the private sector, it is all about making a profit and acting in the best interests of the company’s owners whether it be shareholders or individuals. While controversial, giving out “golden parachutes” to departing executives is done to encourage top notch recruitment of replacements, to reward executives whose hard work and positive results leads to a buyout of the company or to reduce liability for an abrupt departure – in other words, the “golden parachute” is a substitute for job security.

In the public sector, decisions are supposed to be made in the best interest of the public and obviously profit is not a factor. Unless a right is properly created through a legal contractual provision, bonuses and other rewards cannot be given without violating the California Constitution.

I have only had the briefest encounters with Mr. Fletcher and his office and barely know the man. This is not personal. He may well have done a great job and deserve a number of pats on the back. However, that does not excuse the potentially illegal give away of more than a third of a million dollars. This should become another poster child for lack of local governmental accountability.

For more on this abuse of local power see:

http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-282633-fletcher-severance.html

About Geoff Willis

Take the Money and Rub

Posted January 5, 2011 at 4:34 PM

This is the same guy who during interviews promised he would buy a house in Santa Ana and after getting the job moved to Tustin.

Same Story Different Title

Posted January 5, 2011 at 7:50 PM

This is exactly the reason the Orange County Board of Supervisors is fighting the Orange County Sheriff’s Department’s retroactive pension. When they enacted the 3% at 50 formula, it was retroactively applied to all deputies, even though they had not yet earned this. That is, when other formularies are applied to other County emplees, the new formula starts a new accrual period. Say for instance employee A works 10 years for the County as a clerk typist and accrued 10 years at 1.77 % at 55. The County then enhances the retirement to 2% at 55 so for the next 10 years this person makes this formula (now has 10 years at 1.77 and 10 years at 2.0). However, the Sheriff’s deputies 3% at 50, even if they already had 25-30 years of service at 2.0% at 50, they automatically get the 3% at 50. This is the same premise as the above story. It seems to be a gift of public funds. Why then did the rest of the County staff when the formula went from 1.77% at 55 to 2.75% of 55 not get retroactive status for all their years of service.

dkmfan

Posted January 5, 2011 at 8:42 PM

Fletcher got a payout, but $330K isn’t that much in the sceme of things.

I am scared tht this is a Red Herring.

I watch the LOC Girls, raging about stuff like this, meanwhile the real $$ are spent $ 1,250 a time X 3000………EACH YEAR on silly shit like the OC Healthcare Agency.

A lawyer for the 55th most populated city in the US gets a quarter million. RIGHT???

The #1 saleman at Fletcher Jones Mercedes in Newport Gets $900K

Why are we bitching. Why Because the sluts don’t get enough!!! For a city the size of Santa Ana, dealing with the BULLSHIT HERE, he should make $250K, Get $1m walking money.

Take it from Prevatt and tChemmy, who don’t live here but claim to care.

THIS IS A BULLSHIT DIVERSION BY OCEA!


Geoff Willis

Posted January 5, 2011 at 9:32 PM

Have you ever read any of my other posts? I am a huge watchdog of public union/public pension abuse. It is disturbing though not surprising that folks are willing to tolerate what may well be illegal payments to a public official simply because of a lower dollar value than other abuse of public funds.