An Anaheim residents’ group has appealed a March court ruling that quashed its lawsuit alleging the city broke the state’s open meetings law in crafting and approving the Angel Stadium sale.
The People’s Homeless Task Force OC last week filed the appeal of Orange County Superior Court Judge David A. Hoffer’s ruling in favor of the city, said Kelly Aviles, the group’s attorney. The suit had alleged city leaders improperly made decisions on the stadium deal behind closed doors and shut the public out of the process, which would violate the state’s Brown Act.
The city has repeatedly maintained that it followed the law and its process was appropriate.
It came to light May 16 that Mayor Harry Sidhu, who spearheaded stadium negotiations for the city, is under federal investigation. Among allegations in an affidavit for a search warrant, investigators said it appeared he may have passed confidential information meant for Angels officials in the hope of later receiving $1 million to support his reelection campaign.
“We are aware of the notice to appeal and will continue to evaluate as we learn more in the days ahead,” city spokesman Mike Lyster said.
The stadium buyer was to be Angels owner Arte Moreno’s business partnership, SRB Management. The City Council voted May 24 to void the deal and SRB officials announced Friday they would not challenge that decision.
Sidhu, who has since resigned, has not been charged with a crime, and his attorney said in a statement last week that a fair investigation would prove Sidhu didn’t leak secret information and “never asked for a political campaign contribution that was linked in any way to the negotiation process.”
In the affidavit, FBI Special Agent Brian Adkins alleged Sidhu “may have affected the ruling of an Orange County Superior Court judge presiding over a civil matter involving the sale of the stadium.”
Aviles said her arguments in court laid out a similar timeline to what Adkins asserted in his affidavit, and she had questioned whether the city was withholding documents and information from the court; Adkins alleged Sidhu used a personal cellphone and destroyed potentially incriminating texts and emails related to the stadium sale.
The fate of the now-dead deal doesn’t factor into the decision to appeal, Aviles said, because she and her clients believe the city didn’t follow the law for what can and cannot be discussed in closed session, and the process was not transparent. They want to ensure that’s corrected in any future stadium negotiations, she said.
Aviles said she’s skeptical when city officials say that anything improper Sidhu may have done, was done by him alone, and other city leaders didn’t know or participate – particularly since at the time, two council members and numerous residents were publicly calling out what they thought was wrong with the process.
“These people who are entrusted to do what’s in the best interest of the public blindly looked the other way,” she alleged. “Worst case, they’re complicit.”
Aviles said the appeal could take six to nine months to work its way through the court.
from Signage https://ift.tt/bVIDwgT
via Irvine Sign Company
