Roseville Municipal Code 2.60.020 Findings, Purpose and Intent: requires an effective enforcement mechanism <<< This quote is straight out of the city code.
The City has not identified any additional records responsive to your request as we understand it (communications with Scott Alvord) as previous communication records were recently provided to you in response to your previous records request.
Additionally, we understand, based on your communications, that in addition to contacting the City Clerk’s Office, which independently provides the function of filing officer, you have contacted the most appropriate agency, the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC), concerning your allegations and concerns and that the FPPC is undertaking an investigation of these matters. Notwithstanding, and pending the results of your FPPC complaint, as a general note, the City has been, and remains more focused on ultimate compliance rather than strict penalty enforcement.
We, as you are, are interested in the outcome of your FPPC complaint.
Sonia Orozco, MMC
City Clerk Department
So there you have it. The City of Roseville has just said, we do not care about putting any teeth in to our own city campaign ordinances. I am pretty sure the FPPC will fine Scott Alvord for what he did, but not only has the City of Roseville displayed apathy – they could very well get fined by the FPPC themselves for not enforcing the city code.
All this and I had to file a PRA to get the date-stamped campaign finance reports.
I will say this again – the City Clerk serves at the pleasure of the City Council. What a huge disincentive for them to do their job. And yes, there could easily be retaliation by a councilmember if they got fined for violating city ordinances. Based on my personality profile of Scott Alvord it is 100% within his paradigm – so is the City in on the cover up? Or are they cowards?
Perhaps the Charter Review Committee should just recommend that the entire body of campaign finance ordinances be repealed since they appear to mean nothing. In the meantime, if a council candidate takes $5K from a donor, what is the City going to do about it? Suppose Alvord donates money out of his campaign account to other democrats running for office, what is the City going to do about it?
Apparently, nothing. Looks like Open Season is upon us.
P.S. Please note that Alvord’s illegal campaign donations included money to Krista Bernasconi, Bruce Houdesheldt and Pauline Rocucci. They represent enough votes to fire the City Clerk. I’d be remiss if I did not put this out there and ask if this is one of the reasons why City Staff are refusing to enforce their own ordinances. Note that none of the aforementioned three have done anything wrong by accepting the donations, (as Scott will get fined and then have to cover them out of his own pocket) nor do I have any evidence they have said a thing to city staff. I have intel that indicates none of them were even aware of Scott’s multiple violations of campaign finance law until your intrepid blogger posted it. The point is that City Run elections are problematic because the enforcement officer (in this case Roseville City Clerk/Attorney who are refusing to do their job), is literally in the position where they would be fining someone that signs their paycheck. This is a reason why elections should all be run by their respective county.
P.P.S. Click here to see the applicable FPPC Codes at the State level that are explicit as to the duties of a filing officer. It is these explicit guidelines that are the basis for why I believe that the City of Roseville is exposing themselves to state sanction for not doing their job.
Sign up to receive RightOnDaily updates sent to your inbox.