The City Attorney's office has
determined that awarding PDC the contract
would violate Government Code section 1090, which prohibits public employees
and contractors from benefiting financially from decisions that they influence.
Dear Mayor Sanders, City Attorney Michael Aguirre,
and City Councilmembers,
Please enforce 1090. PDC influenced the City's
selection of the Regents Road bridge project. It
is therefore illegal for them to benefit financially
from that decision.
Doing final design before an EIR is also
illegal under CEQA and financially irresponsible.
Do not approve the $4.8 Million PDC contract
for final design of the proposed Regents Road bridge
project.
Sincerely,
[Name and address]
Contract Requires Six Council Votes to Pass ö This
is its required second reading.
Why is this contract for final design a 1090 violation?
The
City paid PDC $1.8 Million to do the old EIR, which was supposed to consider
equally a number of alternative projects. Unbeknownst to the public, city
staff promised PDC a large design contract on the proposed Regents Road bridge
project if that alternative was selected. Numerous emails from PDC and city
staff show that PDC influenced the city to select the bridge project. It would
thus be a conflict of interest for them to benefit financially from that decision.
Read
the City Attorneyâs Memos explaining why this contract violates 1090.
Read recently
found emails from Gordon Lutes, PDCâs Project Manager.
One was
sent out August 1, 2006, a few hours after the City Council voted to certify
the EIR and implement the Regents Road bridge project. Gordon points out how
important the consultant team was to this victory. Both emails show Gordon knows
he has a big contract awaiting him.
Read the letter from our attorneys about
why this contract violates CEQA.
