Memo to Victoria Betancourt

Re. this little piece in today's Reg: Santa Ana official's Hawaii trip deemed OK,

Appearance of Impropriety

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Redirected from Appearance of impropriety)

Jump to: navigation, search

Appearance of Impropriety is a term often used in reference to a situation whose ethics is deemed questionable. It means that any layperson, without knowledge of the facts, would assume that something he/she saw or heard was inappropriate or a violation of a rule/regulation.

[edit]

See also

• Conflict of Interest

[edit]

Resources

• The Appearance of Impropriety Peter Morgan, Glenn Reynolds (ISBN 0743242661)

[edit]

External links

• Appearance of Impropriety article at the website of the United States Naval Inspector General
• Code of Conduct for United States Judges subsection on Appearance of Impropriety
• Alleged Conflicts of Interest because of the “Appearance of Impropriety” Hofstra law review article (PDF)

Update: Should anyone get really interested in this, as did commenter Thomas Gordon (great msg), and if the Register would like to follow up, Ms. Betancourt can be reached at her firm's office:

Coneybeare, Inc.
Full Service Staffing and Recruiting

2003 N. Broadway Santa Ana, CA 92706 Ph: 714-547-8546 Fax: 714-834-1848 info@Coneybeare.com

Comments

[Shame On Carlos Bustamante!]

Shame on Santa Ana City Councilman Carlos Bustamante and his twin brother and sister in law and Vicki Betancourt for having such low standards of ethics. Bustamante and his wife (whose councilman twin brother voted to make them city commish.'s voting on Harrah projects) also got a free Jet Ride and Condo stay. These are exactly the type of people we do not need in politics. People who use an elected or appointed office to increase their social standing and use the power to skirt/break the moral and ethical laws that most of us keep. Shame on the Bustamante family and shame on Ms. Betancourt. And does anyone really believe $1,000 is all it costs for her share of the fuel costs of a PRIVATE jet and luxury condo in HI??? Give me a break. And are Bustamante and his wife paying Harrah back as well? Why won't Councilman Bustamante condemn his brother and sister in law? Will Councilman Bustamante and his family be enjoying vacations in twin brothers Harrah condo? This does not pass the smell test!!

[View from the Top]

Was there a picture of the Capistrano Unifieid School District Trustees next to the term "Appearance of Impropriety" in the encyclopedia?

[Lurk]

No, it was Larry Agran.

[Thomas Gordon]

I have emailed Ms Betancourt seeking more details regarding the trip.

She has yet to respond.

Several important questions remain.

I am in the process of obtaining a copy of the FPPC letter to Ms.Betancourt.

The Register stated that the letter "based on facts provided by Betancourt – indicates the trip would qualify as a discount or rebate on the property sale because it is being provided to all investors who make $10,000 deposits."

The Register also stated "Betancourt said before the letter arrived she had given Harrah a check for nearly $1,000 to cover the costs of the trip, which occurred a little over a week after the Planning Commission voted 6-0 for a site plan for the ground level of the 37-story office tower Harrah is building in Santa Ana."

Nearly $1000?

United is charging $ 1444.38 from OC to
Kahului, HI departing June 23 returning June 25.

Toss in 2 nights lodgings and I'm sure there were several feast and groung transportation and "nearly $1000" is quite the bargain.

Further, based on conflict of interest info on the FPPC website, which I have listed below, Ms Betancourt is clearly in violation of common sense, at best.

Ms Betancourt should have filed a Form 700 with the FPPC listing all gifts or travel accepted and fully disclosing all assets and holdings.

She failed to do so.

The below is taken directly from the FPPC website:

Assets and income of public officials which may be materially affected by their official actions should be disclosed and in appropriate circumstances the officials should be disqualified from acting in order that conflicts of interest may be avoided."
Gov. Code section 81002(c)

"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."
Gov. Code Section 87100

The Political Reform Act prevents conflicts of interest in two ways -- disclosure and disqualification. (See Gov. Code Sections 87100-87350.)

Disclosure

The purpose of financial disclosure is to alert public officials to personal interests that might be affected while they are performing their official duties, i.e., making governmental decisions. Disclosure also helps inform the public about potential conflicts of interest.

Public officials at every level of state and local government must disclose their personal financial interests. Elected officials, judges, and high-ranking appointed officials generally have the most comprehensive disclosure requirements. (Gov. Code Section 87200.) These include disclosure of:
Investments in business entities (e.g., stock holdings, owning a business, a partnership)
Interests in real estate (real property)
Sources of personal income, including gifts, loans and travel payments
Positions of management or employment with business entities
For most other officials, including employees of state and local government agencies, it is up to the agencies that employ them to decide what their disclosure requirements are. Each state and local agency must adopt a conflict of interest code tailoring the disclosure requirements for each position within the agency to the types of governmental decisions a person holding that position would make. For example, an employee who approves contracts for goods or services purchased by her agency should not be required to disclose real estate interests, but should be required to disclose investments in and income from individuals and entities that supply equipment, materials, or services to the agency. (Gov. Code Sections 87301 and 87302.)

Unpaid members of boards and commissions and consultants to state and local government agencies also may be required to disclose their personal financial interests if they make or participate in making governmental decisions that could affect their private financial interests.

Disclosure is made on a form called a "statement of economic interests" (Form 700). The form must be filed each year. Filed forms are public documents that must be made available to anyone who requests them.

Disqualification

If a public official has a conflict of interest, the official may be required to disqualify himself or herself from making or participating in a governmental decision, or using his or her official position to influence or attempt to influence a governmental decision.

See the fact sheet, Can I Vote? Conflicts of Interest Overview.

To determine whether an official has a conflict of interest many factors must be analyzed. For example, is it reasonably foreseeable that the official's interest will be affected by a particular decision? Will the decision have a significant monetary impact on the financial interest or is the impact minimal? Will the decision affect the official's interest differently than members of the general public? Is the official even making a governmental decision?

In many cases, an official will need guidance from the Commission or an attorney to determine whether disqualification is required.

Note: Although they are required to file statements of economic interests, judges and court commissioners are not subject to the Act's disqualification provisions.

Campaign Contributions

See the fact sheet, Campaign Contributions May Cause Conflicts for Appointees and Commissioners.

In most cases, the receipt of campaign contributions is not the basis for disqualification by a public official. However, certain public officials who make decisions in proceedings involving licenses, permits, or other entitlements for use (e.g., planning commissioners, board members of joint powers authorities and other regional governing or planning agencies, and members of other state and local boards and commissions) are subject to the restrictions of Gov. Code Section 84308. Section 84308 prohibits solicitation or receipt of campaign contributions from parties, participants, or their agents, in proceedings involving licenses, permits, or other entitlements for use. The law also requires an official's disqualification in those proceedings if the official has received campaign contributions of more than $250 from a party or participant within the 12 months preceding the decision. Finally, Section 84308 requires disclosure of such campaign contributions.

Elected state officers, judges, and members of local government agencies who are directly elected by the voters (e.g., board of supervisors, city council, school board) are exempt from Section 84308 when they are acting as members of the agency to which they are elected. However, if one of these individuals is also a voting member of another nonexempt body, such as a joint powers agency or regional planning agency, he or she is covered by the law with respect to license, permit or other entitlement for use proceedings before the nonexempt body. For example, if three city councilmembers and two county supervisors sit on a city-county joint powers authority, Section 84308 applies to the license, permit or other entitlement for use proceedings before the joint powers authority because the officials were not elected directly to the authority. It does not apply to the officials when they are voting on matters before the city council or board of supervisors.

(Revised 5/03)

[Shame on Carlos Bustamante!]

Just because the FPPC says it's ok does not prevent the Grand Jury from taking a look at the Bustamante Brothers, Patricia Bustamante and Ms. Betancourt. This is an ethical crime if nothing else. Too bad Councilman Bustamante does not have the guts to tell his twin brother to step off the City Commission...but then again..if he does that he might not get to use the HI condo at Christmas! This is starting to sound like the George Jaramillo family with spouses involved in the schemes. Shame on the whole Bustamante Family. I'm embarassed to say that I'm also a Mater Dei Grad like them.

RE: "Shame on Santa Ana City Councilman Carlos Bustamante and his twin brother and sister in law and Vicki Betancourt for having such low standards of ethics. Bustamante and his wife (whose councilman twin brother voted to make them city commish.'s voting on Harrah projects) also got a free Jet Ride and Condo stay. These are exactly the type of people we do not need in politics. People who use an elected or appointed office to increase their social standing and use the power to skirt/break the moral and ethical laws that most of us keep. Shame on the Bustamante family and shame on Ms. Betancourt. And does anyone really believe $1,000 is all it costs for her share of the fuel costs of a PRIVATE jet and luxury condo in HI??? Give me a break. And are Bustamante and his wife paying Harrah back as well? Why won't Councilman Bustamante condemn his brother and sister in law? Will Councilman Bustamante and his family be enjoying vacations in twin brothers Harrah condo? This does not pass the smell test!!"

[Thomas Gordon]

"And does anyone really believe $1,000 is all it costs for her share of the fuel costs of a PRIVATE jet and luxury condo in HI???"

If she was to buy a ticket on United and fly coach with a 21 day advance, the price would be 1444.38.

Why would she write a check if she knew she had done nothing wrong?

Why has Benjamin Kaufman in the SA city Attorney not returned phone calls seeking answers?

Why has Victoria Betancourt not returned emails seeking answers.

Gov. Code 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."

Since she put down the 10 K several months ago and voted to approve One Broadway Plaza's site plan 1 week before going to Hawaii, how is there not conflict?

[Bustamante Brothers Busted!]

So if an elected official can get some rich developer to give them a free ride to Washington D.C. on their private Jet they only have to pay them back the price of a Jet Blue ticket? Does anyone other than the FPPC think this is not a crime?? Come clean Bustamante Brothers!