Foster City Councilman Sanjay Gehani has violated the Brown Act, but no punitive action will be taken, according to San Mateo County District Attorney Steve Wagstaffe.
The Brown Act was passed by the California legislature in 1953 to ensure transparency in local government. It specifically prohibits a councilmember from “discussing an item of business that is within the subject matter of a jurisdiction of the council with a majority of the council outside of a noticed meeting,” according to a letter dated Aug. 9 that Wagstaffe sent to both Gehani and City Attorney Jean Savaree.
Gehani, who was elected to the council in November and is also a partner and chief marketing officer for Building Kidz, a franchiser of preschools, had plans to buy and redevelop 388 Vintage Park Drive in Foster City into a preschool, according to the letter. That site was formerly home to Mexican restaurant El Torito.
According to the letter, Gehani understood that his redevelopment plans would require involvement and/or approval by the council. Gehani indicated to City Manager Jeff Moneda that he intended to be the spokesperson for the project when it was presented to the council and that he already had the support of two councilmembers, according to the letter. Interviews established that Gehani discussed the redevelopment proposal with three councilmembers, the letter reads.
“We do find that [Gehani] violated Section 54952.1(b)(1) by conducting what is referred to as a ‘serial meeting’ with other members of a legislative body, one at a time, until [Gehani] had discussed with a majority of the council [his] intention to buy and redevelop the El Torito site,” according to the letter. “That effort would qualify as ‘business’ within the subject matter jurisdiction of the council in that the council would have to approve a ‘general plan amendment’ for the project to proceed.”
The letter goes on to declare that no action will be taken.
“As no action was taken by the council on this matter, there is no need for any ‘cure and correct’ remedy,” the letter reads. “Further, we will decline any further action on this matter since we believe there is no pervasive failure by [Gehani] nor this council to abide by the regulations and spirit of the act in conducting the business of the city of Foster City.”
Gehani described his actions as a “rookie mistake” and looks forward to putting the experience behind him.
Recommended for you
“This was a rookie mistake. I have learned a lot from this,” he said. “Now I am excited to put this experience behind me and continue my focus on serving our community.”
Mayor Sam Hindi said he takes the Brown Act seriously and hopes that his colleagues are more careful about what they discuss moving forward.
“I take this very seriously. I don’t want this to happen again. This is a rule and a law that was put in place for a reason so the public is privy to everything we talk about and vote on and everything that will impact the city, policies and decision that we make,” he said. “It’s important that all of us abide by that and, moving forward, it’s my hope that people are a whole lot more careful when they decide to talk about things that might come before council in the future.”
Vice Mayor Herb Perez offered a different perspective to the news.
“It’s unfortunate that for the first time in Foster City’s history, an elected official would use their public position for their personal and financial gain,” he said. “It’s a stain on our elected officials and has eroded the pristine reputation our city has previously had. I am hopeful that this will serve as a clear warning for all others not to behave in such a fashion.”
Wagstaffe said Brown Act violations are not exactly uncommon in San Mateo County, adding that they typically result in a letter of admonition similar to the one sent to Gehani or perhaps Brown Act training is recommended. He cannot recall a single Brown Act prosecution, in which the offender was aware of the fact that he or she was breaking the law and did it anyway. If that happened, the offender could be fined $100,000 and spend up to six months in jail, Wagstaffe said.
Vice Mayor Herb Perez, while Mayor in 2016, was given a Brown Act Violation warning from the DA. Please take any quotes from now Vice Mayor Perez with a large grain of salt, as well as his complicit Mayor.
400 COUNTY CENTER, 3RD FLOOR | REDWOOD CITY | CALIFORNIA 94063 | TEL: (650) 363-4636
August 9, 2019
Councilman Sanjay Gehani
____________________
Foster City, CA 94404
RE: May 2019 Brown Act Violation
Dear Councilman Gehani:
As you are aware, a complaint was made to our office alleging that you violated the
Brown Act (California Government Code Section 54950, et.seq.) by discussing a potential item of business with a majority of the City Council outside of a noticed meeting. Our review included obtaining statements from City Manager Jeff Moneda, Councilmembers Herb Perez,
Catherine Mahanpour, Richa Awasthi, Sam Hindi and yourself, a review of the May 20, 2019 Council meeting and a discussion with City Attorney Jean Savaree.
We examined the statute at issue, Government Code Section 54952.2, specifically
subsections (a) and (b)(1). Those sections prohibit a Council member from discussing an item of business that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council with a majority of the Council outside of a noticed meeting.
From our investigation, it appears you understood that your proposal for redeveloping the old El Torito restaurant as a pre-school would require City Council involvement and/or approval and, in fact, you indicated to City Manager Moneda that you intended to be the spokesperson for the project when it was presented to the Council. Further, you indicated to Mr. Moneda you believed you already had the support of two council members, proving that you had prior
conversations with at least those two council members. Interviews with Council members
established you discussed the proposal with three other Council persons.
Thus, we do find that you violated Section 54952.1(b)(1) by conducting what is referred
to as a ‘serial meeting’ with other members of a legislative body, one at a time, until you had
discussed with a majority of the Council your intention to buy and redevelop the El Torito site.
That effort would qualify as ‘business’ within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council in that the Council would have to approve a “General Plan Amendment” for the project to proceed
As no action was taken by the Council on this matter, there is no need for any ‘cure and
correct’ remedy. Further, we will decline to take any further action on this matter since we believe there is no pervasive failure by you nor this Council to abide by the regulations and spirit of the Act in conducting the business of the City of Foster City. The Brown Act exists to ensure the legislative process is conducted in an open and transparent manner so that the public can be informed of actions taken by their representatives. We trust and expect this will serve as a reminder to all members of the Council of the importance of due caution in discussing matters that are clearly within the jurisdiction of the Council.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(3) comments
Herb Perez lecturing on ethics. Wow.
Vice Mayor Herb Perez, while Mayor in 2016, was given a Brown Act Violation warning from the DA. Please take any quotes from now Vice Mayor Perez with a large grain of salt, as well as his complicit Mayor.
Text of DA Letter.
Stephen M. Wagstaffe, District Attorney
CHIEF DEPUTY ASSISTANT DISTRICT ATTORNEYS
ALBERT SERRATO JAMES WADE
SEAN F. GALLAGHER
SHIN-MEE CHANG
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
400 COUNTY CENTER, 3RD FLOOR | REDWOOD CITY | CALIFORNIA 94063 | TEL: (650) 363-4636
August 9, 2019
Councilman Sanjay Gehani
____________________
Foster City, CA 94404
RE: May 2019 Brown Act Violation
Dear Councilman Gehani:
As you are aware, a complaint was made to our office alleging that you violated the
Brown Act (California Government Code Section 54950, et.seq.) by discussing a potential item of business with a majority of the City Council outside of a noticed meeting. Our review included obtaining statements from City Manager Jeff Moneda, Councilmembers Herb Perez,
Catherine Mahanpour, Richa Awasthi, Sam Hindi and yourself, a review of the May 20, 2019 Council meeting and a discussion with City Attorney Jean Savaree.
We examined the statute at issue, Government Code Section 54952.2, specifically
subsections (a) and (b)(1). Those sections prohibit a Council member from discussing an item of business that is within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council with a majority of the Council outside of a noticed meeting.
From our investigation, it appears you understood that your proposal for redeveloping the old El Torito restaurant as a pre-school would require City Council involvement and/or approval and, in fact, you indicated to City Manager Moneda that you intended to be the spokesperson for the project when it was presented to the Council. Further, you indicated to Mr. Moneda you believed you already had the support of two council members, proving that you had prior
conversations with at least those two council members. Interviews with Council members
established you discussed the proposal with three other Council persons.
Thus, we do find that you violated Section 54952.1(b)(1) by conducting what is referred
to as a ‘serial meeting’ with other members of a legislative body, one at a time, until you had
discussed with a majority of the Council your intention to buy and redevelop the El Torito site.
That effort would qualify as ‘business’ within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council in that the Council would have to approve a “General Plan Amendment” for the project to proceed
As no action was taken by the Council on this matter, there is no need for any ‘cure and
correct’ remedy. Further, we will decline to take any further action on this matter since we believe there is no pervasive failure by you nor this Council to abide by the regulations and spirit of the Act in conducting the business of the City of Foster City. The Brown Act exists to ensure the legislative process is conducted in an open and transparent manner so that the public can be informed of actions taken by their representatives. We trust and expect this will serve as a reminder to all members of the Council of the importance of due caution in discussing matters that are clearly within the jurisdiction of the Council.
Sincerely,
STEPHEN M. WAGSTAFFE, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
By:
Sean F. Gallagher, Assistant District Attorney
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.