California’s Fair Political Practices Commission penalized Solvang City Councilmember Edwin Skytt $4,000 at its May 21 meeting for a conflict of interest violation from 2004.

According to the case file: “On April 12, 2004, as a Solvang City Council member, Respondent Edwin Skytt made a governmental decision in which he had a financial interest by voting to approve moving the proposed boundaries of a skate park located near his real property to a different location.”

Though the vote, which was to relocate the skate park from Hans Christian Andersen Park to Sunny Fields Park, failed at the time on a 2-2 vote, Skytt was still in violation, according to the file, since he owned a vacant lot within 500 feet of Hans Christian Andersen Park.

When the item was continued to the April 26, 2004 meeting, Skytt recused himself from discussion, citing the conflict of interest, and later told the commission he must have forgotten the 500-foot rule during the April 12 meeting.

Commission Executive Director Roman Porter said the commission did an investigation, held the hearing May 21 decided to fine Skytt $4,000 for the violation.

The maximum penalty is $5,000. He said Skytt paid the fine that day, and unless there is a civil case brought against Skytt, the matter is closed.

Skytt said the rules on that particular violation had just been changed at the time, and while he could have contested it, he said he’d rather pay the fine than prolong the matter with lawyers. He said the matter is closed now.

Skytt is known to regularly recuse himself from council discussion and business when he believes there may be a conflict of interest.

He also appears to check with the city attorney before voting on any item he may think has a potential for conflict of interest.

Skytt is a businessman who owns several properties in Solvang. To keep public officials from voting with their own financial interests in mind, the law makes it clear how to avoid a conflict of interest.

The basic rule is this: “No public official at any level of state or local government may make, participate in making or in any way use or attempt to use his/her official position to influence a governmental decision in which he/she knows or has reason to know he/she has a disqualifying conflict of interest.

A public official has a conflict of interest if the decision will have a reasonably foreseeable material financial effect on one or more of his/her economic interests, unless that effect is indistinguishable from the effect on the public generally.

A conflict of interest is disqualifying if the public official’s participation is not legally required.” (Fair Political Practices Commission regulation 18700).

The bi-partisan commission’s purpose is to “promote the integrity of representative state and local government in California through fair, impartial interpretation and enforcement of political campaign, lobbying, and conflict of interest laws,” according to its Web site.

Skytt said he never found out who reported the violation to the commission at the time, and when he was told an anonymous source sent the commission’s agenda to the Valley Journal, he noted the person “didn’t even have the guts to sign their name.”

The Valley Journal has issued a public records request to find out who brought the violation to the attention of state officials and the Journal. That information has not yet been received.

 

Reach Lauren Crecelius at lcrecelius@syvjournal.com.