How much have taxpayers spent defending Rush Hill for conflicts of interest?

Register columnist Jack Wu asks a good question … how much have taxpayers spent defend Rush Hill for conflicts of interest.  We hear it’s more than $50K.


Commission proves itself ‘mostly dead’

JACK WU 2014-05-07 10:39:37 In the 1987 movie “The Princess Bride,” Inigo and Fezzik take a supposedly dead Westley to Miracle Max in an attempt to revive him. There, Miracle Max tells the guys that Westley is “only mostly dead,” and supplies a pill to revive him. I wonder if that’s how the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) deals with local politicians. Recently, after two years, the FPPC found Mayor Rush Hill mostly guilty, saying that his “… conduct amounted to a conflict of interest within the meaning of Section 87100” and the 500-foot rule. Section 87100 states “No public official at any level of state or local government shall make, participate in making or in any way attempt to use his official position to influence a governmental decision in which he knows or has reason to know he has a financial interest.” But because Hill asked the FPPC two months after voting on issues within the city’s Neighborhood Revitalization Committee (NRC), and then began to recuse himself from any future votes, he was only issued a warning letter as if to say “do it again, then we’ll really be mad.” So I have to wonder if Hill read the same letter, because it was clear that he broke the law, yet he called it, “true vindication.” Yet, what the FPPC seemed to have forgotten was that it had already issued Hill a warning back in 2012 for voting to appoint himself to paying commissions. For those who are counting, that’s two FPPC violations and warning letters in two years, and he’s been in office for … four years. Keith Curry and Ed Selich seem to be on the City Council for decades now and how many violations or warning letters did they get? Zip, zero, zilch. And so the city of Newport Beach, because it’s required to defend its employees and officers against all lawsuits – and yes, city council members are considered city employees – how much taxpayer money did they spend to defend Hill? Not enough if found innocent. But what if you are found guilty of the charges? Would Councilman Hill have to refund the money back to the city and taxpayers? Apparently not. Councilman Mike Henn was also served with FPPC complaints regarding his involvement with the NRC, and his FPPC letter simply said, “We found insufficient evidence of a violation of the Act, and we are closing our file on this matter as to you.” That’s truly a “not guilty” verdict. That’s true vindication. An “if you do it again, we’ll really punish you” warning letter? That’s equivalent to “mostly dead.” – Jack Wu, who lives in Newport Beach, is a Costa Mesa accountant. He is a longtime Republican Party loyalist and volunteer campaign treasurer for Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Costa Mesa. Contact him at [email protected]. Contact the writer: © Copyright 2014 Freedom Communications. All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | User Agreement | Site Map



Comments ( 1 )
  • Abdou says:

    Wow! .When I came upon this site I was looking for adidtional impartial analysis on how I might vote on Measure J. ~ This rant by Wane in Ventura, was the answer I guess I needed.Sometimes you find your answer in mysterious ways. I will vote YES on Measure J

Leave A Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *