.
Feedback

City Business Cards for Contracted Employees—Unethical?

Is the practice to issue City business cards to Charles Abbott & Associates employees who provide "contract services" lawful? ethical? conflict of interest? or other?

It is my understanding that Mr. is running for reelection in November. As a concerned voter and a city resident for more than 20 years I would like to have his view or City Manager Mr. Wilberg's view on this matter:

Is the official practice of the City of Mission Viejo to issue City business cards to Charles Abbott & Associates employees who provide "contract services" for the City's Building and Safety Department?

  1. Unethical?
  2. Misleading the public at large and the city residents because they are not City of MV employees?
  3. Violating the CA business and professions code?
  4. Violating employment laws?
  5. Unlawful?
  6. Is it OK since other organizations may practice it as well?
  7. Conflict of interest?
  8. Violating state and/or federal law?
  9. In the case of professional engineers violating both the PE act and the CA business and professions code by misrepresenting themselves?
  10. Other?

Your honest reply and views with regards to this matter is greatly appreciated. I belive the voters, residents and citizens have the right to know who is providing these services and the quality of services and end product received.
I shall look forward to your reply.

Sincerely,

Desi J. Kiss, MS, PE

City Council Candidate

Desi Kiss August 16, 2012 at 09:56 am
Perhaps one more question if I may: Why is there no conflict of interest per state law when CA& A " contract and/or consultant" employees review the work of other CA&A employees within the boundaries of the same City of MV Building and Safety Department?
Charles August 16, 2012 at 11:52 am
My guess is it is legal or it is not. I would think the legal department for the City of Mission Viejo has reviewed the legality of this practice. If they didn't perhaps this "Local Voices" blog will prompt them to go "Ooops" and correct matters.
Otherwise, I would think this issue (we don't have "problems" anymore, we only have "issues") isn't in the top 69 things the typical resident of Mission Viejo is concerned about.
Sergio August 16, 2012 at 01:20 pm
Hi Charles,
How do you mean typical residents? I would like some kind of answers, after all our tax payers dollars pay for these services. Problem or issue or whatever you may call it we have the right to be informed. Thx..
Dan Avery August 16, 2012 at 02:03 pm
Why all of a sudden does this remind me of the Orange Juice Blog? Charles is right. This isn't an issue. It's not even in the top 100 things we need to care about.
Oscar August 16, 2012 at 06:48 pm
O Lord # 100?. It's more like monkey biz.. I think it's unethical. I feel like the City had taken over my house. First when the Inspector came to my house for a City inspection his arrogance was out of line. He asked my contractor to do things that were not even required and it added to my tight budget. Charles somehow thinks I could be a second class resident and this is not a problem just some issue # 69, and according to you issue # 100. You both must be working together. How sad. At least the City should print a big NE on the cards so that the residents know with whom they are dealing. All they say at the City counter you don't need this, you don't need that, you don't have to pay for that, and once you tackle the project you're given the run around and that my friend is a real problem and pain you know where...
Charles August 16, 2012 at 09:25 pm
I should have more simply "most residents" or something like that. No big deal.
Johnnie August 18, 2012 at 06:30 pm
Yeah, you got that right Oscar! It's both unethical and misleading. Those guys run in a closed circle. LOL # 69 what a bad joke! Thx. Patch for bringing it up!
Canton August 19, 2012 at 05:08 pm
It is simple to ignore what may seem like a small issue like this, but ignoring minor symptoms of trouble can leads us to overlook larger problems that cause the small issue.
Desi Kiss October 23, 2012 at 01:35 am
Mr. Canton, well said. I would suggest to visit:
www.applebomb.com to learn more about the symptoms you are mentioning above.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Mission Viejo Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Greg Raths announced for Congress
Shripathi Kamath June 19, 2013 at 10:51 am
"As a Republican, he will go head to head with our current incumbant [sic]" Wait, areRead More there no other contenders? John Webb on the Republican side might run, and then there was that Irvine mayor Sukhee Kang fella, who finished second. The more the merrier. The more diversity in the views, even better. I would like to hear from contenders how they would vote differently on some of the votes the incumbents have cast. Because all too often we have "an independent minded Republican" or a "progressive reformer" or "Heck, I am BATMAN himself" only to have disappointing regurgitation of ideology of what should not be done ("low taxes", "freedom", "family values", "apple pie, motherhood"). Not what will be done. And until we have that, corporate monies shall determine our representative. I mean I can imagine Mr. Raths voting for the 45th time to repeal Obamacare, but seriously, which vote that John Campbell cast would be different if Mr. Raths were in office? If 90% of the positions are the same, it looks like a remarkable coincidence that an independent thinker is so like the incumbent, does it not? Mr. Raths did offer an 'independent' idea endorsing civil unions but not gay marriage. Cool. Is he going to sponsor a bill for civil unions? Or simply insist on enforcing DOMA because "sanctity of marriage", "religious liberty". How about H.R. 1797? How about the Gang of 8 bill on immigration if it passes the Senate and comes to the House? Will his vote be different than that of Mr. Campbell's? That is the key question. But again, I welcome Mr. Raths entry in the field, we need more variety, and if we cannot get that, we at least need more people willing to run. Good luck to you, sir.
Gregory Raths June 19, 2013 at 05:30 pm
I've talked with both John Webb & Sukhee Kang and they have indicated they will not be runningRead More in 2014. I do welcome all entries into the 2014 race. GREG RATHS
Human Options' Cristi Dugger
Peter Schelden (Editor) June 19, 2013 at 09:29 am
Uncanny timing—this is especially poignant in light of this announcement:Read More http://alisoviejo.patch.com/groups/police-and-fire/p/elder-sexual-abuse-caregiver-suspect-arrested
M June 19, 2013 at 07:32 am
Anymore info on this place? When I looked online the only location is vista, ca
Dan Avery June 16, 2013 at 10:09 am
Tom Thumb you didn't read section 1021(b)(2) closely enough. It wouldn't apply to those arming theRead More rebels because of the word "suspicion." We know they are arming the rebels. See the difference. 1021(b)(2) only applies to those we "suspect" like you. Notice how the word "reasonable" doesn't appear anywhere near "suspicion"? Hmmmm wonder why that would be. Section 1021(b)(2) seems to be the modern day "suspicion of lurking with intent."
Tom Thumb June 16, 2013 at 02:31 pm
Shoot, I don't know about that. What we are hearing now is Obama/McCain are pushing to arm theRead More rebels who are supporting and are part of Al Qaeda: www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-22095099
Shripathi Kamath June 16, 2013 at 03:02 pm
Hey Avery, I am totally stealing the "suspicion of lurking with intent" phrase. It mightRead More even flourish on reddit.