Last Updated Tuesday, 8/20/13 @ 3:35 PM
The Oversight Board to the dissolved 29 Palms RDA meets in a regular meeting Wednesday, August 28, 2013, 4:00 PM at city hall. This will be the Board’s first meeting since 03-13-2013.
A few questions for the Oversight Board and City Attorney Patrick Muñoz, law partner of Rutan & Tucker
On February 7, 2013 — just two OB meetings ago — Cactus Thorns published a story delineating Muñoz’s statutory conflict of interest being seated as an official or legal advisor to the Oversight Board. Actually it is quite shocking why Muñoz continues to advise and direct the Oversight Board.
The law appears to be clear such that there are indeed conflicts of interest and California Bar Professional Responsibility violations should Muñoz continue his tenure with the Oversight Board.
Will Muñoz take a seat (as usual) as a Board official? Will Muñoz continue to furthering his statutory conflicts of interests of representing dual clients with conflicting interests? Will Muñoz continue to deny that he has not or is not providing legal advice and/or direction to the Oversight Board — when city videos evidence otherwise.
Who is paying Muñoz’s legal fees? The city or the Oversight Board? Either way, the evidence of his conflicts are real. Will Muñoz continue to pretend that he doen’t advise the OB or provide direction?
Has Muñoz breached his Professional Code of Conduct (State Bar Act) by representing clients with adverse interests?
California Rules of Professional Conduct
Rule 3-310 Avoiding the Representation of Adverse Interests
(C) A member shall not, without the informed written consent of each client:
(1) Accept representation of more than one client in a matter in which the interests of the clients potentially conflict; or
(2) Accept or continue representation of more than one client in a matter in which the interests of the clients actually conflict; or
(3) Represent a client in a matter and at the same time in a separate matter accept as a client a person or entity whose interest in the first matter is adverse to the client in the first matter.
Does the Oversight Board have on file an “executed consent document” accepting Munoz’s adverse interests? Has Muñoz advised the Board of this as required? If not, the Board needs outside legal counsel; if he has then it he is advising Board and has lied when he represented on record that he doesn’t advise the Board. If he doesn’t advise or direct them, why is he there?????
One of the items to be discussed during the August 28 Meeting is approval of the Long Range Property Management Plan. The former Twentynine Palms Redevelopment Agency owned four non-housing “grouped” properties which are grouped into a single location at the intersection of Highway 62 and Bullion Avenue.
The Plan must be sent to the Department of Finance for approval to be transferred back to the city.
The Bullion properties are just east of the downside of Donnell Hill. This is the location Councilman Corbin is pushing for two pet projects: The proposed 29 Palms Arch and improvements to the Tourist Park for paving, Wi-Fi access, et cetera.
Moreover, Councilman Mintz has indicated he owns property in that area. Mintz is commended for making this disclosure during a council meeting several months ago.
As you can ascertain from the Staff Reports this is an issue that has many facets and hurdles to overcome.
Review of the Oversight Board’s Agenda for August 28 Meeting
REGULAR SESSION AGENDA
Next Oversight Board Resolution Number: 13-07
CALL TO ORDER
Pledge of Allegiance.
Oath of Office for New Board Member
Seating of New Board Member
Changes to the Agenda.
These proceedings will be televised on Cable T.V. Channel 10, as follows: Monday,
September 2, 2013 following the broadcast of the City Council meeting starting at 6:30
p.m. and Monday, September 9, 2013 following the broadcast of the City Council
meeting starting at 6:30 p.m. This meeting may also be viewed on demand on the City
of Twentynine Palms’ website at www.29palms.org.
This is the time for the public to address the Oversight Board on issues within the
jurisdiction of the Oversight Board that are NOT on this agenda. All comments are to be
directed to the Oversight Board and shall not consist of any personal attacks. Members
of the public are expected to maintain a professional, courteous decorum during their
1. Approval of Minutes of Oversight Board Meeting Held on March 13, 2013.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT CALENDAR FOR DISCUSSION
DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS
2. Presentation and Discussion of Successor Agency and Legislative Updates.
3. Approval of the Long Range Property Management Plan
FUTURE OVERSIGHT BOARD INITIATED ITEMS
Current average ratings.