ENCINITAS — The Encinitas City Council’s appointment of Robert Prendergast to the Planning Commission last week violated a provision of the municipal code regulating commission appointees, multiple sources have confirmed to The Coast News, confounding residents, legal experts and former city officials.
According to section D of Chapter 2.30.020 of the city’s Municipal Code, “Appointees to any city commission will not be selected from among members currently serving on any other city commission.”
However, the council on May 25 voted 4-1 to appoint Prendergast, a real estate businessman also serving as a member of the city’s Mobility and Traffic Commission, to become the new Olivenhain representative on the Planning Commission.
Kranz, along with Councilmember Kellie Hinze, Councilmember Joe Mosca and Mayor Catherine Blakespear all voted in favor of Prendergast’s appointment. Councilmember Joy Lyndes was the lone vote against.
The appointment was made to fill the seat left vacant following the ouster of former planning chairman Bruce Ehlers.
When asked about the issue, Councilman Tony Kranz acknowledged the council had indeed violated the municipal code in appointing Prendergast.
“It’s not a good look and it was contrary to our city ordinances, so that was unfortunate,” Kranz said.
Kranz said the council may want to consider retroactively changing that portion of the municipal code in order to legitimize Prendergast’s appointment.
“If we need to we will make an effort to modify that ordinance to allow for circumstances like the ones we just did, so yes we may need to go ahead and modify this ordinance,” Kranz said. “Normally, we would want to modify the ordinance first and then make the appointment, but where I’m at, the role of the planning commission is too important, that if we have the best qualified person on another commission we wouldn’t want to limit our ability to make that appointment. I don’t know what my other colleagues are thinking but that’s where I’m at.”
Kranz explained the goal of the ordinance was to prevent new vacancies being generated by other appointments, but argued the planning commission ought to be an exception to the rule given its exceptional status as a policymaking entity.
“This particular commission is the most important commission we have, so if someone from another commission who is qualified is applying for that role then yes we want to be able to see that application,” Kranz said.
The council considered three applicants for the role, including Prendergast, Frederick Snedeker, engineering company president, and Dan Vaughn, a biopharmaceutical consultant who is the acting president of Encinitas Residents for Responsible Development.
Prendergast could not be reached for comment on this story.
Carla DiMare, a civil trial attorney in San Diego, said that the city should never have appointed Prendergast and needs to remove him from the Planning Commission immediately in order to avoid opening itself up to liability and other legal complications.
“It appears that if the City Council had any questions about a major move like appointing a new planning commissioner, that the City Council should contact the legal department before making that move,” DiMare said. “I think that this needs to be reversed right away, and if they [the council] don’t have a meeting for a while, whatever rules that apply for them to take action without meeting those rules should be invoked, they should do this immediately so as to undo what they know to have been improper.”
Per the applicable ordinance, Prendergast is not a legitimate planning commissioner and any decisions that he would make in the role are potentially voidable, DiMare said.
“Any actions that he would take would be voidable,” DiMare said. “Let’s say they approve Project A and the investors for Project A proceed to order expensive supplies, line employees up, and then they find out that the project’s approval is voidable because the planning commissioner was not a legitimate planning commissioner. It could be a really problematic situation and it’s something that they need to correct forthwith.”
Tarquin Preziosi, the Encinitas City Attorney, could not be reached for a comment for this story.
Various Encinitas residents reacted with dismay at the council’s apparent oversight on the issue.
“While I appreciate Tony Kranz’ admittance that Robert Prendergast’s appointment was in direct violation of municipal code, Robert Prendergast should have been dismissed as a candidate prior to the vote,” said resident Natalie Settoon. “City Manager Pam Antil, City Attorney Preziosi, and the council all failed. We have zero leadership to protect city interests. Who is running this circus?”
Rachel Graves-Hill, who lives in Olivenhain, agreed with Settoon, expressing that Prendergast’s application should never have been accepted based on this apparent disqualifying factor.
“There’s only about three or so rules about who can be a commissioner, so I mean it’s very simple and very basic — they shouldn’t have even accepted his application,” Graves-Hill said. “In fact, this information should have been on the application itself, and Prendergast even should have known better. Antil should have known better, Preziosi should have known better. It’s as clear as day and simple as it could have been.
“We should be hearing from all five council members, they should take back their vote and re-vote on this as soon as possible. They broke the law, and if it’s true that this was a mistake, it should have already been undone. The City Attorney should be stepping forward and saying that this is illegal and void.”
Former Encinitas mayor Jerome Stocks called the council’s appointment of Prendergast an “outrageous” breach of public trust, adding that he personally finds it hard to imagine the oversight was unintentional.
“The reality is that our mayor is a lawyer and our City Council works under the auspices and under the gaze of a very competent city attorney, so this decision was made under the full view of at least two legal experts,” Stocks told The Coast News. “So yes, I find it hard to believe that this was a mere oversight. (The appointment) speaks to an amazing arrogance and absolute disregard for the municipal code that the City Council itself has passed and adopted. I’m outraged at that level of arrogance in that they would break their own rule, instead of selecting somebody from the many other highly-qualified individuals requesting the appointment, that they would instead intentionally violate their own rule. I mean, I’m honestly ashamed for them.
“At no time was I ever a part of such any such decision in my 12 years on the City Council or as mayor, I can’t even fathom the city attorney or anybody on the council’s that I was on to propose such a thing. It makes every elected official look bad. It’s an erosion of the public trust, of our civic authority and institutions, and this is exactly the kind of crap that brings about the distrust of our civic institutions. This is more than just what it is, it’s a symbolic lack of respect for the public and a lack of respect for honest dealings, and it’s just shameful.”
1 comment
How is this not surprising. This is one of the few times that I have agreed with Mr. Stocks. The people “running” our city need to be removed and it all starts with Mayor Blakespear. No doubt this is another of her machinations. She even has the city attorney ignoring the law. What is the response of the city attorney? It is no response again their typical copout to avoid any accountability.
They are an embarrassment as well as dangerous to the city of Encinitas.
Comments are closed.