 |
|
|
|
|
Kawczynski, council take civility pledge
By Kelly Wilkinson
After flexing political muscle over Councilman Stan Kawczynski since August, council members unanimously agreed at last week's meeting that his behavior did not constitute a breach of the city's code of ethics. The council vote made official a decision that had been made a week earlier by a council subcommittee.
The council meeting gave Kawczynski his first opportunity to respond publicly to Fowler's allegations, which he did with a philosophical and aggressive four-page letter discussing "trust and fidelity and the price we pay for them."
Kawczynski did not respond directly to the charges that had been introduced by Councilman Fred Fowler, except to call them "spurious" and "nonsense," but he did concede that the council was not entirely out of line.
"While recognizing that the job [of a council member] itself requires directness, openness, and skepticism, I also understand that it requires the maximum civility we can bring to contentious matters," he said. "I have always tried to muster that civility in every circumstance, but I'm also sure that, like others acting in good faith, I have not always succeeded."
Kawczynski also made complaints against what he called the "nonresponsiveness" of city administration and management--giving a hint of the attacks that had gotten him in trouble in the first place--but ultimately said he would let his complaints rest with the verdict.
"The finding shows that the charges were a sham and a farce," he said. "Bringing such frivolous charges might, itself, violate our code of ethics, but I choose not to pursue that because we have important business to which we must attend."
With a decidedly deflated tone, council members had weighed in earlier in the meeting on the allegations that were brought against Kawczynski in August.
"In certain instances, he certainly acted in a way that we felt was unbecoming, argumentative, and disruptive to the business at hand," Mayor Manuel Valerio said. "But those circumstances did not rise to the level of violation of the code of ethics."
Valerio, Vice Mayor Pat Vorreiter, and Councilman Jim Roberts comprised the subcommittee which investigated the allegations and unanimously decided, two weeks ago, that no disciplinary action was necessary.
All council members agreed--including Fowler. After asking Valerio if he thought his charges were "insubstantial," Fowler voted with the rest of the council to put the matter to rest.
"It looks like [the subcommittee] has come to a different conclusion than I have," he said. "But that's not bad, because we went through the process."
Other council members and residents differed on the merits of the investigative process. Vorreiter--who called herself a "reluctant member of this subcommittee"--said she did not think the exercise was a waste of time despite not having any evidence to support the charges.
"This exercise humbles us all a little bit and puts us on caution to the code of ethics," she said.
Councilwoman Julia Miller did not offer comments about the process at last week's meeting, but criticized the process at the Sept. 14 meeting for being too insular.
"I don't have a problem with the principle [of the investigation], but I have a problem with the process," she said. "I don't believe it is right for us to sit in judgment of ourselves. Any four of us could get together and go after one [council member]."
Miller called for the process to be revised and stated she would be in favor of a standing ethics committee that would not be made up of council members.
"It is very important to have an ethics committee," Miller said. "But it should be an independent board--a board that does not judge itself."
Resident Warner Gans, who supported the subcommittee's conclusions and praised its members for their objectivity, also criticized the council.
"What I learned out of this is that people will say the process worked--and it did--but I think the process can be improved," he said. "The city could have saved itself a lot of bad, bad publicity."
In supporting the subcommittee's findings, Gans also took a jab at council members' collective behavior.
"Rudeness is not [Kawczynski's] exclusive domain," he said. "I've seen a lot of rudeness in this chamber."
Councilman Jack Walker agreed.
"I see Stan [Kawczynski] sometimes get a little passionate on some issues and I applaud that," he said. "It never bothered me. We're all adults here and we can take a little abuse. As an elected official, if I was that thin-skinned I shouldn't be up here."
Walker also admitted his belief that there was never enough evidence to support the original charges against Kawczynski.
"I supported the original motion because charges had been made in public," he said. "But personally I wasn't convinced those charges were substantive enough. I'm gratified to see the committee come to the conclusion I had already come to."
|
|
|
|
Sunnyvale, California Since 1994
