MSN_012518

malibusurfsidenews.com News
Malibu surfside news | January 25, 2018 | 3
SMMUSD Board of Education
Portion of conflict of interest talks go public
District’s counsel
discusses claims,
does not divulge
legal opinions
Lauren Coughlin, Editor
The public has been left
to fill in the blanks after receiving
a factual rundown
but no firm conclusion regarding
conflict of interest
allegations against three
Santa Monica-Malibu Unified
School District Board
of Education members.
Legal counsel Fagen,
Friedman and Fulfrost was
hired by the district to investigate
concerns regarding
board members Maria
Leon-Vazquez, Ralph
Mechur and Oscar de la
Torre. Firm representative
Howard Friedman spoke at
the Board of Education’s
Thursday, Jan. 18 meeting.
All members were in attendance.
“Please be advised, Mr.
Friedman will not be discussing
legal opinions in
public,” Board President
Richard Tahvildaran-Jesswein
said to open the discussion.
“The board has
not waived the attorney
client privilege with regards
to this investigation
or the communications or
advice that Mr. Friedman
or the district’s law firm
has provided the board.”
Tahvildaran-Jesswein
further noted that conflict
of interest allegations are
often investigated by the
District Attorney’s Office
and the Fair Political Practices
Commission, but said
the district is not aware of
either conducting an investigation
into the matters at
this time. Meanwhile, the
board reportedly will be
undergoing training sessions
and looking to improve
internal communication
practices.
Just the facts
Friedman’s summary
states that Leon-Vazquez,
a board member for 17
years, voted in favor of
nine separate contracts
with companies affiliated
with her husband Tony
Vazquez’s consulting firm,
Vazquez & Associates.
The contracts in question
concern financial adviser
Keygent (for which Leon-
Vazquez voted in favor
of four contracts between
2009-2017) and nonprofit
TELACU (for which Leon-Vazquez
voted in favor
of five contracts in 2017).
Further, it is noted that
Vazquez & Associates was
listed as an income source
on Leon-Vazquez’s statements
of economic interest
from 2003-2008, but not
from 2009-2017, when the
votes occurred.
A district memorandum
on the matter further notes
that “it has been reported
that Mr. Vazquez did arrange
for a breakfast meeting
in 2014 (about three
years before board action
on TELACU contracts),
with the then-superintendent
of the district, at
which TELACU’s services
were discussed.”
Friedman noted that
both Keygent and TELA-
CU have now completed
their work with the district.
“In terms of best practices,
when there’s a determination
of a financial interest,
any action by the board
may be barred under [California
Government Code]
Section 1090, and at least
at minimum the affected
board members should announce
their potential conflict
and then abstain from
voting,” Friedman said.
Concerns regarding Mechur
involved his work as
a licensed architect.
“It is reported that Mr.
Mechur performed architectural
services for the
district, a board member
and several clients with
ties to the district at times
prior to and following his
appointment to the board,”
the memorandum notes.
Investigations were carried
out regarding Mechur’s
work with the following:
Leon-Vazquez
and Vazquez, whose home
he worked on from 2001-
2003; Woodcraft Rangers
and The Pico Neighborhood
Youth and Family
Center, with which de la
Torre was then affiliated,
in 2002; the Unite Here
Local 11 union, which
was connected to 2015 and
2017 board actions regarding
the Doubletree Hotel
in Santa Monica (where
the union met), from 2002-
2011; and the district itself,
which reportedly
paid Mechur $29,000 from
2003-2006.
In the latter instance,
the memo notes that Leon-
Vazquez approved all four
contracts without noting
that she had any professional
relationship with
Mechur.
As far as the work with
Woodcraft Rangers, it is
noted that de la Torre’s position
did not have authority
over Mechur’s contract.
He also did not own the
building on which Mechur
worked.
The memorandum
further notes that Leon-
Vazquez voted to first appoint
Mechur in 2007, and
de la Torre voted to reappoint
Mechur in 2015.
Weighing in
Two members of the
public addressed the board
following the informational
report.
Santa Monica resident
Jerry Rubin spoke in support
of the board and said
he was glad the district
took the claims seriously,
but he agreed that looking
to the future and undergoing
training was in the
board’s best interest.
Kevin Shenkman’s comments
were more critical.
“I’m disturbed by the
fact that at the same time
as we’re talking about
transparency, the board apparently
has a report that it
is asserting attorney client
privilege over,” said Shenkman,
who encouraged the
board to release the report.
Board members’ comments
also varied.
Board Member Craig
Foster was frank, suggesting
to Leon-Vazquez that it
was a good time to retire.
“It’s negligence as a
board member not to read
the darn [consent] calendar
— and when your family
is paid by people on that
calendar, you have an exponentially
larger responsibility,”
Foster said.
De la Torre said he would
reserve his comments for a
private conversation with
Leon-Vazquez out of respect
for her family.
Board Member Laurie
Lieberman noted that the
board had “a very limited
amount of knowledge and
evidence” on the matter.
“There’s no indication
that anyone did anything
intentional or that there’s
any financial interest,” she
said.
Leon-Vazquez did not
comment on the matter.
COACH PITCH BASEBALL
REGISTRATION
AGES 4-7