Livingston planning commissioner might be removed; officials cite conflict of interest

The Livingston City Council this week discussed ousting a planning commissioner because of a potential conflict of interest with his elected seat on the city’s school board.

Commission chairman Luis Enrique Flores, 30, was appointed to the Planning Commission in 2010. Flores was also elected to the Livingston Union School District Board of Trustees in November. City officials are considering whether the two offices are incompatible and present a clash of duties or loyalties.

City Attorney Jose Sanchez told the council Tuesday that there’s no case law on the issue, but a 2001 opinion from the attorney general’s office said if two offices cover common territory, a person cannot serve on both. “Not being able to separate duties,” he said. “That’s when the incompatibility occurs.”

The Planning Commission makes land use decisions that affect the entire city. Flores’ seat on the five-member school board covers a smaller portion of Livingston, from Olive Avenue to White Crane Road.

Flores said he wants to stay on both the Planning Commission and the school board, even refusing to forfeit his seat when asked by Mayor Rodrigo Espinoza during the council meeting. If he stays on the commission, Flores agreed to withdraw from voting on issues related to the school board’s property.

But a few council members still weren’t convinced. Mayor Pro Tem Gurpal Samra said the city dealt with a similar issue when another school board member wanted to serve on the Planning Commission. That person was told he couldn’t hold both offices, and decided not to apply for the commission seat.

“We already have a precedent in the city not allowing dual loyalties,” Samra said Tuesday. “We didn’t allow that individual the opportunity to serve on both. If we don’t allow one, we shouldn’t allow another – we need to be consistent in what we do.”

Samra said Flores knew this issue would come up because he was running unopposed for the school board seat. “You knew very well what you were getting yourself into,” he said. “You knew you’d win.”

Councilman David Mendoza was quick to defend Flores, accusing fellow council members of being “against” him. “I’m pretty sure when he votes, he votes in the best interest of the citizens,” Mendoza said. “So it’s not a conflict for me.”

An independent expert said Flores holding the two offices doesn’t appear to be a conflict of responsibilities.

Robert Wechsler, a Connecticut-based author and director of research for City Ethics, a nonprofit that provides resources to local government ethics programs, said “incompatible offices” are generally those where one supervises the other or is involved with its budgetary processes.

In Flores’ case, Wechsler said, the potential for conflict may arise when the Planning Commission considers issues related to the school district, but he believes those are pretty minor.

“He just can’t be a part of that vote,” Wechsler said. “I would say the conflict is so small and unlikely to happen. And when it does, it’s so easy for him to recuse himself from the Planning Commission that it wouldn’t be a problem.”

The Livingston Union School District hasn’t taken a position on the issue, according to Superintendent Andres Zamora. The district is seeking the legal opinion of its attorney, he said, and expects to have an answer by the end of the week.

Zamora said the school district has never dealt with a situation like this before. “This is a unique circumstance, and my impression is everyone wants to do the right thing,” he said. “Ultimately, he will have that decision to make if there’s a legal conflict.”

If Flores doesn’t voluntarily resign, Espinoza said he plans to bring a resolution before the City Council to remove him from the commission, based on the city attorney’s direction.

This story was originally published January 21, 2015 at 8:41 PM with the headline "Livingston planning commissioner might be removed; officials cite conflict of interest."