City Attorney’s Office
Memorandum
Date: July 12, 2023
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Luis Martin Haro, Deputy City Attorney
Subject: Conflicts Review – Parks & Recreation Commission Applicants
Background
The City Attorney’s Office has been asked to review applications to City Boards and Commissions regarding potential conflicts of interest. The applications generally do not provide complete information regarding potential conflicts; however, they do occasionally disclose potential confl icts of interest or incompatible offices. The purpose of this memorandum is to highlight areas of potential conflict that are disclosed by the application. In order to analyze potential conflicts, it is necessary to consider the duties of the particular commission for which the applicant is seeking appointment. This review is limited to the information provided on the applications and is not intended to be comprehensive investigation of potential conflicts involving the applicants.
Commission Duties
Pursuant to the City Charter and the City Code, the Parks & Recreation Commission is responsible for the establishment, acceptance and continue supervision of a long-range parks and recreations program for the City; planning and implementing an annual program of recreational and cultural activities for all age groups; recommending and supervising all the City’s contractual relationships with other agencies in the recreational field; and serve as correlating agency between the City and other units of government o n recreational undertakings.
Legal Conflicts that May Preclude Vote or Participation
Certain positions may preclude a commissioner from participating in a commission discussion or from voting if a matter involving the entity comes before the commission. While this list is not complete, these types of conflicts generally fall within one or more of the following situations:
• An applicant has an interest in property the value of which could be affected by a decision coming before the Commission
• An application shows entities that are “sources of income” to a potential commissioner within the 12 months preceding the start of the commission term, as defined under the Political Reform Act, • An applicant is an officer or employee of an entity that could be involved in a matter coming before the commission, or
• An applicant engages in a profession serving the local market that is likely to realize financial benefits or detriments, distinguishable from the public generally, that would result from the work performed by the Commission.
Conflicts Review – Parks & Recreation Commission Applicants July 12, 2023
Appearance of Bias
There may be facts which would not amount to a legal conflict of interest requiring a commissioner to recuse him- or herself from a commission vote or discussion, however the relationship could create an appearance of bias on the part of the commissioner. The Code of Ethics and Values requires that Commissioners “make impartial decisions, free of . . . financial and other personal interests that impair [one’s] independence of judgment or action.” Accordingly, a situation may arise that may require a commissioner to recuse him- or herself if the facts could reasonably lead one to conclude that the applicant would be biased for or against an entity or entities.
Review of Applicants
Set forth below are the applicants and any apparent legal conflicts of interest and/or appearance of bias related to entities that are likely to come before the commission in some manner, as identified on the applications.
• Peter Louis Delaney
o The applicant is semi-retired and has listed that he has been a Linux/Unix developer since 1980. No other sources of income were disclosed.
o The information disclosed reveals neither incompatible offices nor apparent conflicts of interest.
• Vikas Gupta
o The applicant did not disclose any sources of income. o The applicant disclosed membership on the Santa Clara El Camino Specific Plan Community Advisory Committee. Participation on the Committee is advisory and non- voting and therefore does not present a conflict of interest. o The applicant disclosed membership in Catalyze SV, Santa Clara Swim Club, and Santa Clara Community Advocates. Based on a web search of these organizations, it does not appear that the applicant still serves on the board of these organizations. However, if the applicant currently serves on the Swim Club board or serves on the board in the future, it would be prudent to recuse from taking action on any items coming before the Commission related to the Swim Club.
o The information disclosed reveals neither incompatible offices nor apparent con flicts of interest.
• Kiran Shinde
o The applicant is currently employed as a Senior Program Manager with Infosys. o The applicant has disclosed that he has served as a secretary and treasurer for the Maharashtra Mandal Bay Area. The application is not clear as to whether the applicant is currently serving in those roles. Participation with this organization does not present any conflicts.
o The information disclosed reveals neither incompatible offices nor apparent conflicts of interest.
Conclusion
The City Council may wish to consider the above comments in making its appointments to the Commission.
cc: Nora Pimentel, MMC, Assistant City Clerk