A somber City Council and an attentive audience listened as two
council members presented a report detailing a tangled scandal
involving surveillance of the city manager, allegations of a sexual
affair between the city manager and the city attorney, misuse of
power by a sitting council member and suggestions of impropriety by
the city
’s highest-profile private attorney.
A somber City Council and an attentive audience listened as two council members presented a report detailing a tangled scandal involving surveillance of the city manager, allegations of a sexual affair between the city manager and the city attorney, misuse of power by a sitting council member and suggestions of impropriety by the city’s highest-profile private attorney.
In an hour-long meeting Wednesday the report, written by Councilmen Greg Sellers and Larry Carr and based on information from a private investigator hired by the city, alleges that attorney Bruce Tichinin hired an investigator to track Tewes in a search for proof that Tewes was having a sexual affair with City Attorney Helene Leichter.
Mayor Dennis Kennedy began the meeting by urging integrity and compassion.
“We must proceed with the utmost sensitivity,” Kennedy said. “The impact on careers and personal lives can be enormous.”
They took no action and scheduled another special meeting for Wednesday to review the report and decide the next course of action.
Council actions can range from no action through censure and condemnation to referring the case to the District Attorney and the State Bar.
Councilwoman Hedy Chang, the report states, had hired Tichinin to defend her against claims of defamation and harassment made against her by City Attorney Helene Leichter.
Both had firmly stated their innocence of impropriety.
Chang said Tuesday that she was sure she would be cleared.
“The citizens of Morgan Hill have known me for a long time and know what kind of person I am. I am fully confident that, after the truth is out, my name will be completely cleared,” she said.
The report states that the surveillance might have been linked with several land-use applications Tichinin is handling that are expected to come before the council. It also alleges that the surveillance could have been used in Chang’s favor, though, again both deny it.
Tichinin is said by the report to have wanted the information to undermine the city attorney.
He denies this allegation, which was an ambiguous statement in the report:
“Therefore, Mr. Tichinin explained, his only recourse was to ‘offer proof’ by placing Mr. Tewes under surveillance in hopes of catching him with Ms. Leichter in Huntington Beach.”
The report goes on to say, “That discovery could then be used to undermine the city attorney.”
Tichinin insists that the second sentence is Sellers and Carr guessing what his intentions were and he disclaims any similar intention.
“This implicitly accuses me of an attempt to blackmail,” Tichinin said Thursday and categorically denies any such intention.
Tichinin said what he meant to do with proof of a sexual affair between the two city employees, if found, was to present it to the council to show the city attorney was possibly not acting independently in her opinion.
Sellers said Thursday night that he concurred with Tichinin’s interpretation and regretted the use of the word “undermine” in the report. Carr said he was not part of that particular conversation and would accept Sellers’ interpretation. Both said they hoped Tichinin would appear at the July 14 meeting to point out any other differences with the report.
Neither Tichinin nor his attorney, Steven Fink, was present at the hearing though he had delivered a statement to the press and to the council on Tuesday declaring that his actions were legal and that citizens have the right to keep an eye on government.
The Council also heard a firm denial from Chang, also accused of reputation-damaging impropriety, and from several members of the public. Chang acknowledged hiring Tichinin to defend her against possible claims of harassment and defamation by the city attorney but said she did not authorize the hiring of a private investigator.
At the hearing’s conclusion, the council voted 4-0 (with Chang abstaining) to accept the report.
“This is the most difficult task I’ve had to undertake in my almost four years on the council and four years on the school board,” Carr said Wednesday night. “But our greatest duty is to maintain the public’s trust.”
Tewes and Leichter, who are married to others, have both denied they were involved in a sexual affair. Both were present at the meeting, but neither made any statement.
The report alleged that Chang knew about the investigator and possibly encouraged it, which Chang and Tichinin emphatically deny.
Chang’s attorney Linda McPharlin read a prepared statement objecting to the report being released to the public Friday evening, at the beginning of a three-day weekend, and to be considered at a public meeting the following Wednesday, leaving little time for Chang to correct errors in the report or to prepare.
The release was “highly unorthodox” she said, and could expose the city to civil liability and monetary damages. The report and investigation have already cost the city about $50,000.
Carr and Sellers took Mayor Kennedy, Councilman Steve Tate and the chamber full of concerned residents and the entire city executive staff through the report suggesting again that Chang was behind the investigation that caused Tewes some fear and the council some worry since, in the beginning, they did not know who was following the city manager.
McPharlin read out Chang’s objections: “The result of this use of city resources has been to harm council member Chang’s reputation through expression of her political opponents’ opinions based on scant and inaccurate facts,” McPharlin said.
McPharlin cited:
• That the council has a legitimate interest in whether the city manager and city attorney have a personal relationship which could compromise their objectivity though no investigation of this has occurred.
• That council member Chang did not hire, cause to hire or discuss Tichinin hiring a private investigator.
• That Carr and Sellers made no attempt to follow other possibilities, including Tichinin’s other clients who may have land-use issues before the council which often relies upon advice from the city manager.
• That the facts about when Tichinin was released from the client-attorney privilege was misrepresented.
• That, instead of being obstructive to the investigation causing the city substantial cost, Chang urged Tichinin to reveal that it was he who hired the investigator.
• That Chang’s inquiry as to Tewes’ whereabouts during his trip was normal and regular and did not have the nefarious intent suggested in the report.
McPharlin was followed by several residents worrying about a possible affair between city staff, the report’s timing, how the investigation was carried out and possible improper relationships between council and Tichinin.
Two former mayors, Laurie Barke and John Sorci, said they had heard rumors of an affair between the city manager and city attorney from several sources besides Chang.
“If you want to know anything, come to Sorci’s Barber Shop,” Sorci said. “I did hear (about the affair) from other sources and more than once.”
Resident Tom Magas questioned the council’s motives.
“It’s incredibly coincidental that two main opponents to last year’s failed attempt to stop Ford are now targets,” Magus said.
Chang was the sole “no” vote on the Ford Store and Tichinin represented Scott Lynch in trying to stop the new car dealership.
Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Susan Bernardini, Tichinin’s ex-wife and opponent on the land-use issue, urged council to look at themselves and at Tichinin’s other clients too.
“What special relationships are there between the council, Chang and Bruce Tichinin,” Bernardini asked. “Each council member should disclose contributions received and he should disclose developers he has worked for. Ask him to explain every single case he’s been involved with.”
Councilman Steve Tate said the preliminary hearing found nothing to support launching an investigation into an affair.
Chang made no comment at the meeting except to say she was asked not to attend City Council closed sessions over the past several weeks when the report was being discussed.
Sellers said he prepared the report “with a heavy heart” and acknowledged that Chang and Tichinin are loved and respected by many in the community, including the rest of the council.
Human Resources Director Mary Kaye Fisher said the city’s employment handbook does not specifically address adulterous liaisons among city employees though unwanted attentions are. Instead, she said, such behavior would fall under the city’s ethics policy.
The clause reads:
“Officials and employees should conduct their official and private affairs (which have a nexus to the public duties) so as not to give a reasonable basis for the impression that any such official or employee can be improperly influenced in performance of his/her public duties. Such officials or employees should so conduct themselves as to maintain the public’s confidence in their performance and the public trust in the government they represent.”
