Del Mar City Council Special Meeting Agenda
Del Mar Town Hall
1050 Camino del Mar, Del Mar, California
October 16, 2023 City Council Special Meeting
INFORMATION RECEIVED
AFTER THE COUNCIL AGENDA
WAS DISTRIBUTED
(“Red Dots”)
1 Melinda Gould
Subject: FW: Today's Closed Session Comments
Attachments: 2023.03.20 City Council Closed Session Public Comments.pdf From: Michael Halpern <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2023 3:07 PM
To: Ashley Jones <[email protected]>; Melinda Gould <[email protected]> Cc: Leslie Devaney <[email protected]>; William Pate <[email protected]> Subject: Fw: Today's Closed Session Comments
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Unfortunately, the City Council must spend time discussing yet another lawsuit by Ken and Linda Olson. It's truly sad--this Closed Session is discussing not one, but two lawsuits by them! Even more unfortunate, it's likely that Councilmember Druker will again not be recused, even though he is hopelessly conflicted. This is a risk the City Council should not be allowing. Please include the attached comments from your March 20 Closed Session which addressed this topic in detail. They were submitted as a Red Dot at the time, but they were not published.
Thank you.
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Michael Halpern <[email protected]>
To: Terry Gaasterland <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Dwight Worden <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Ashley Jones <[email protected]>; Leslie Devaney <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, March 20, 2023 at 07:14:54 PM PDT
Subject: Today's Closed Session Comments
Per your request, I am submitting the attached copy of my closed session comments for publication as a red dot. I hope you all take a moment to read the attached two pages and consider the importance of answering the basic questions posed.
I appreciate that a few Councilmembers took the opportunity to briefly respond to my comments, but I was disappointed that Councilmember Druker's only response was to ask the City Attorney to affirm that he would not be forced to recuse. This would have been an ideal opportunity to put this issue behind us. After all, if my understanding of these relationships is inaccurate, it's only fair to Councilmember Druker and Mr. Olson that the record be corrected. It's possible that I owe one or both of them an apology.
Unfortunately, Councilmember Druker's refusal to address these questions leaves me even more concerned that my understanding was correct. And if Mr. Olson truly is a major investor and Board member of Councilmember Druker's companies, a great disservice is done to the City by not recognizing how obviously conflicted Councilmember Druker is. How can a Councilmember, in their position as a community volunteer, be expected to be impartial when asked to rule against the wishes of their employer and boss? The conflict is obvious.
Please take a look at the webpage of the California Fair Political Practices Commission: https://www.fppc.ca.gov/learn/conflicts-of-interest-rules.html I will simply quote the first paragraph of the CFPPC homepage and ask you to each ask yourselves--if Mr. Olson exercises control/oversight over Councilmember Druker's outside employer, how can Councilmember Druker avoid recusing in situations involving Mr. Olson?
1 October 16, 2023 Closed Session Item III - A,B
2 Under the Act, a public official has a disqualifying conflict of interest in a governmental decision if it is foreseeable that the decision will have a financial impact on his or her personal finances or other financial interests. In such cases, there is a risk of biased decision-making that could sacrifice the public’s interest in favor of the official’s private financial interests. To avoid actual bias or the appearance of possible improprieties, the public official is prohibited from participating in the decision.
Every resident who's heard about this issue believes it should be addressed. In the interest of clean and transparent government, please make it a priority to address the questions raised and properly settle this issue.
Thank you.
2 October 16, 2023 Closed Session Item III - A,B
404 Torrey Point Rd, Del Mar: Violations of Carmel Valley Precise Plan (CVPP) Closed Session Public Comments – March 20, 2023
Hello. Thank you for taking the time to listen to my remarks, although I’ll preface my comments by letting you know I wish I wasn’t here. I have a feeling most of you also don’t want to be dealing with Ken Olson’s litigation threats again. The big question is whether Councilmember Druker will put the City’s interests first and properly recuse himself this time.
Councilmembers in Del Mar are volunteers. Ideally, you chose to become Councilmembers out of a spirit of community, and you see yourselves as public servants. I’m sure most of you would agree that a Councilmember should never use their position to their personal financial benefit. To do so would be unethical, immoral, and illegal.
Councilmember Druker—according to your LinkedIn profile, you are a Vice President of the companies DataSkill and TradeSun. Why is this relevant to your responsibilities as a Councilmember? According to your own statements, you have known Ken Olson for more than 20 years and during this time you’ve had an ongoing professional relationship with him. I’ve been told that Mr. Olson is or was a Board member and major investor in both companies for which you work. Is that correct? And if this is even close to correct, how is it possible that you are not always recused in matters involving Mr. Olson— especially when Mr. Olson is suing or threatening to sue the City? Let’s take a quick look at Mayor and Councilmember Druker’s history of recusal in matters involving Mr.
Olson:
The City initiated a code enforcement case against Mr. Olson in February 2019. In the same month, then-Mayor Druker went from being Vice President only of DataSkill to also being Vice President of TradeSun. What was Mr. Olson’s relationship to these companies and to this contemporaneous promotion? And why has Councilmember Druker’s employment by these companies been inconsistently reported on his required Form 700 filings? Mr. Olson’s appeal to City Council resulted in public hearings on four dates from September to November 2019. Mayor Druker declined to recuse for the first hearing, but changed course and did recuse for the final three. It’s unclear what delayed Mayor Druker’s recusal, but with him recused the Council ruled against the Olsons. Unsatisfied, Mr. Olson and his wife sued the City the following month.
Following the December 31, 2019 initiation of litigation, Councilmember Druker did not recuse from a single one of the at least seven City Council closed session conferences with the City Manager and City Attorney to discuss the City’s legal strategy.
What changed in Councilmember Druker’s longstanding personal and professional relationships with Mr. Olson between November 4, 2019 and these many sessions where he sat with the rest of you to hear the City Attorney’s legal recommendations?
3 October 16, 2023 Closed Session Item III - A,B
By not recusing, Councilmember Druker had the opportunity to influence the Council’s deliberations during your closed sessions, and possibly more importantly, the ability to pressure City Staff and/or the City Attorney on behalf of Mr. Olson. How can this be okay? Amazingly, the Olson code enforcement case and subsequent litigation are not the only situations where Councilmember Druker has been accused of using his position to benefit a longtime friend and superior.
Nigel Hook, CEO of both DataSkill and TradeSun, also lives in Del Mar and also has conflicts about trees with neighbors, although Hook’s position is the opposite of Olson’s. Hook wants his neighbors’ trees cut while Olson resists cutting his trees. Councilmember Druker may have been inconsistent about what to support about trees and views, but he has been 100% consistent in using his influence to benefit people who apparently can benefit him.
During Mr. Hook’s appeal to City Council, public accusation of Brown Act violations caused Councilmember Druker to recuse. Like Mr. Olson, Mr. Hook also had an unsuccessful appeal. And again like Mr. Olson, Mr. Hook sued the City of Del Mar, of course represented by the same attorney as Mr.
Olson.
The difference in the Hook case is that Councilmember Druker remained recused during City Council closed session legal conferences. A striking example of the difference is the July 25, 2022 City Council closed session, in which Councilmember Druker recused for Hook v Del Mar, but not for Olson v Del Mar. How can this difference be explained?
Frankly, there are many questions regarding the influence Mr. Olson’s had on Councilmember Druker and Councilmember Druker’s inconsistent pattern of recusal. What are the answers? Councilmember Druker—you’ve been clear about your multi-decade friendship with Mr. Olson, but opaque regarding your professional relationship. I’ve been told that Mr. Olson is or was a Board member and major investor in both companies for which you work. Is that correct? If so, please provide details. If not, could you please clarify? In the interest of transparent and clean government, the people of this community deserve to have a full and complete understanding of Mr. Olson’s potential influence over you.
Furthermore, we call on you to immediately recuse yourself from today’s closed session discussions regarding Mr. Olson and to remain recused from any and all future discussions regarding Mr. Olson.
Until you are able to adequately address the swirl of questions surrounding your past and present relationship with Mr. Olson, it is clearly not in the City’s interest to have you involved in these matters.
Should you refuse to do this voluntarily, we call on the rest of the Council, the City Manager and the City Attorney to do the right thing for Del Mar and force Councilmember Druker’s permanent recusal on these matters. Thank you.
4 October 16, 2023 Closed Session Item III - A,B