Updated June 25, 2:06 p.m.
The Sacramento Ethics Commission on Monday unanimously dismissed a complaint over how Mayor Darrell Steinberg handled Gaza cease-fire discussions earlier this year.
Commissioners followed the recommendation of an independent evaluator, Attorney Christina Cameron, who determined Steinberg complied with both the City Council rules of procedures and the Brown Act.
In the complaint, Equity and Wellness Consultant Amira Kotb alleged Steinberg violated the rules when he declined to refer Council members Mai Vang and Katie Valenzuela’s ceasefire resolution proposal to a committee in late January. Kotb also argued Steinberg violated the Brown Act when he limited public comments for and against a ceasefire resolution in a Feb. 6 council meeting.
Neither Steinberg nor Kotb attended the complaint hearing Monday, but in a statement earlier this month, Kotb urged the commission to direct Cameron to investigate further. Cameron told commissioners she didn’t ask whether Steinberg consulted with the city manager, city attorney and city clerk before deciding not to refer Vang and Valenzuela’s initial cease-fire proposal. He didn’t need to because the exception for issues outside of the city’s jurisdiction applied, Cameron said.
Cameron added she considered the argument about the city’s investments, but the proposal didn’t call for changing funding. Commissioner Alan LoFaso agreed and also said the public comment session on Feb. 6 was tense.
“The mayor got as good as he gave and in some respects probably a lot more,” LoFaso said. “So, I don’t see any violations in the mayor’s conduct, but I’m kind of inclined to give him a break given the way the mayor gets treated when he’s up here.”
The council ultimately passed a ceasefire resolution in March.
Original story, published June 6:
An independent investigator recommends a commission dismiss an ethics complaint against Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg when it holds a hearing scheduled for June 24.
The complaint alleged Steinberg violated the City Council’s rules of procedures and a state public meeting law when he blocked a Gaza cease-fire resolution proposal and limited public comments on the topic earlier this year.
Equity and wellness consultant Amira Kotb filed the complaint on Feb. 12, five weeks before the council passed a cease-fire resolution Steinberg brought forward after months of public pressure. The city hired attorney Christina Cameron of the law firm Daveny Pate Morris & Cameron LLP to evaluate the complaint, who determined sufficient cause existed for a full investigation, according to a staff report.
After requesting a three-week extension in April, Cameron submitted the evaluator’s report on May 9. Cameron concluded Steinberg didn’t violate either the council rules, which outline the process for members’ agenda requests, or the state Brown Act, which requires council meetings to be open and accessible to the public.
One aspect dealt with Steinberg’s late January announcement that he would not not refer Council members’ Mai Vang and Katie Valenzuela’s cease-fire resolution proposal to a committee. Cameron determined the mayor did not need to assign the proposal, arguing the exception for matters outside of the city’s jurisdiction applied.
But in an emailed statement to CapRadio, Kotb said the city has influence on the issue because of its investments in companies allegedly tied to human rights violations in Palestine. She also questioned whether Steinberg consulted the city manager, city attorney and city clerk about the decision to block Vang and Valenzuela’s proposal.
Kotb wrote the statement and six groups — including the Boycott, Divest and Sanctions Campaign Sacramento, Jewish Voice for Peace Sacramento, Palestine American League and Sunrise Movement Sacramento — endorsed it.
“To date, no due diligence was conducted to bring forward any documented evidence that such consultation has taken place,” the statement said. “Instead, the report based its conclusion on erroneous assumptions and a clear lack of understanding of the City’s finances and operation.”
Kotb and the organizations said they demand the ethics commission direct Cameron to investigate the city’s investment portfolio and reevaluate whether the proposed resolution was out of the city’s jurisdiction. They also requested the city’s Administration, Investment and Fiscal Management Board look to divest from companies profiting from human rights violations in Palestine.
Vang and Valenzuela’s proposed resolution urged the federal government to call for a permanent cease-fire and referenced the military funding it gives Israel, but did not demand the city change any investments.
The statement didn’t challenge Cameron’s finding that Steinberg complied with the Brown Act when he limited public comments regarding any cease-fire resolution in a Feb. 6 council meeting. The council wasn’t scheduled to discuss the issue during the meeting, but 10 people opposing and 69 people supporting it signed up to speak during the non-agenda public comment section, according to the evaluator’s report. Steinberg asked both sides to choose up to 15 speakers each in order to keep comments on the subject under one hour.
Cameron said the Brown Act allows limiting the total amount of time for public testimony on particular issues. She added council rules allow the presiding officer to limit public comments to keep meetings orderly as long as it’s done fairly.
Steinberg’s Chief of Staff Mary Lynne Vellinga texted a statement on Cameron’s recommendation for the Sacramento Ethics Commission to dismiss the complaint.
“The findings of the independent evaluator speak for themselves,” Steinberg said in the statement. “I run the City Council meetings fairly and always do my best to make sure everyone is heard.”
Commissioners could follow Cameron’s recommendation, direct her to investigate further, refer the complaint to the Fair Political Practices Commission or determine a violation occurred. If they decide there’s sufficient evidence of a violation, actions they could take include issuing a reprimand, a warning letter and an administrative penalty, according to the commission’s procedures.
The commission is scheduled to hold a hearing on the complaint during its 5:30 p.m. meeting on June 24.
Follow us for more stories like this
CapRadio provides a trusted source of news because of you. As a nonprofit organization, donations from people like you sustain the journalism that allows us to discover stories that are important to our audience. If you believe in what we do and support our mission, please donate today.
Donate Today
