Scott Voigts - The Tale Continues...

Yesterday we looked at some of the behavior of Scott Voigts and the consistency with which his remarks matched his deeds or the truth. Let’s review –

• Voigts claimed he had only $5,000 to spend on his 2010 campaign when in fact he had amassed $15,000 when he made that remark and eventually spent $37,000+.

• Voigts campaigned against increasing the size of Musick Jail then signed an agreement to more than double the size and to allow maximum security prisoners to be placed there.

SAVE LAKE FOREST

During the 2013 “Save Lake Forest” campaign, then Mayor Voigts on several occasions claimed that the people circulating the petition to invalidate his vote were lying. The truth was that Voigts was upset because the “Save Lake Forest” people made revelations that showed that Voigts (and fellow Council member Robinson) had accepted money and then voted against the wishes of the staff, the Planning Commission, and the majority of Lake Forest citizens who had appeared at Council and Commission meetings, to give special exemptions to the developers who bankrolled their campaigns. Voigts was invited to begin legal proceedings if there was any slander in any of the work done by the “Save Lake Forest” campaign, but nothing happened because they were not lying. Yet Voigts continued to claim that the “Save Lake Forest” people were lying.

On a related issue, in the Development Agreement between Brookfield Homes (one of the two developers who helped finance Voigts’ campaign) and the City, a special exemption was given to the children of the future inhabitants of the Brookfield project, which gave them first choice to get into local schools. Voigts repeatedly denied that exemption existed. Here it is “word for word” -

“District [SVUSD] shall use reasonable efforts that all K-12 Project Students [kids who live in the homes built by Brookfield] have the option to attend the applicable school closest to their neighborhood that is not overburdened.”

If you want to see for yourself, it is Item #7 in the Developer Agreement signed Aug 20, 2013.

So Voigts’ claim that this paragraph didn’t exist was another distortion of the truth.

ACTS OF OMISSION

Lying can take several forms. You can state something that isn’t true, or you can withhold relevant information that should be revealed. In the case of the former it’s what we call a lie; in the later, it’s called an act of omission. Voigts can be a master of the act of omission.

Taking Money

Voigts accepts money from businesses that come before the Council asking for favors, licenses, permits, etc. To my knowledge, Voigts has never revealed this relationship prior to voting on such an issue. In his defense, it’s not against the law to remain silent under these circumstances, but it is against the Ethics Code of the City to do so. Article 2.3 states –

“Safeguard ability to make independent, objective, fair and impartial judgments by scrupulously avoiding FINANCIAL and social relationships and transactions that may compromise, or GIVE THE APPEARANCE , objectivity, independence, and honesty.” (emphasis added)

Interested readers can click here for more information. To date, I've been able to track more than $10,000 Voigts accepted from people and or businesses who come before the Council asking for permits, licenses, or other forms of favors. When you take money from a person or business, it's hard to be neutral when they appear before you asking for a permit, license, or favor. Most people would agree that the proper etiquette would be to reveal the money and then recuse yourself from any vote, as seems to be required by the City's code of ethics. Voigts does not announce the receipt of the money and then votes on the issue, granting the favor. Sometimes he votes with others, but sometimes his is the lone vote in favor of the person/business asking for the vote.

Making Appointments

In 2013, Voigts voted for people to be appointed to City Commissions. Three of these people had either worked for him in his campaign or were related to campaign contributors to his campaign. Voigts revealed none of this when voting the people into office. Once again, the acts of omission are not illegal, though they do appear to contradict the City’s Ethics Code.

FINAL MEETING AS MAYOR

At his last meeting as Mayor, Voigts continued to spread false information. I suppose there is some symmetry there, or perhaps it’s merely habit. The false claims came up in a discussion of Musick Jail. Voigts claimed that “OC Alert” would notify residents when Musick prisoners escape. As I understand it, while it’s possible that OC Alert could be modified to do this, at present OC Alert is limited to “emergency events” (e.g., wildfires, earthquakes). Councilman Robinson informed me that the County wanted to charge an additional $80,000 to allow the City to alert locals when a prisoner escaped, and the City didn’t want to spend the money.

At the same meeting, Voigts also claimed that the addition to Musick Jail is not designed for maximum security cells. Again, this is not true. Indeed, there are 32 maximum security cells being built in the new jail addition and these are intended to house maximum security prisoners (why else would you go to the expense of building maximum security cells?). How many maximum security prisoners will be housed there, for how long, etc. is up to the sole discretion of the Sheriff.  For more information click here.

Tomorrow we’ll summarize