What Does ‘Misconduct’ Mean?

Two blogs broke the news that City Manager Dennis Wilberg wants to change his contract, literally on the eve of the recall election. He’s asking the council to approve amendments during the Feb. 1 meeting. For details, read articles on MissionViejoDispatch.com http://missionviejodispatch.com/?p=14443
and OrangeJuiceBlog.com http://orangejuiceblog.com/

Among other amendments, Wilberg wants to change the definition of “misconduct” that could be grounds for dismissing him. Here’s a key paragraph from the Dispatch:

“Wilberg wants to rewrite his clause on misconduct, which is now defined in his contract as ‘dishonesty, fraud, self-dealing or willful misconduct.’ His attorney wants all of those eliminated, so that misconduct is redefined to include only misappropriation of funds or conviction of a felony (involving ‘moral turpitude’). The matter could have significant cost implications to taxpayers, because Wilberg is entitled to nine months’ severance pay if released for reasons other than misconduct.”

Residents who reacted to blog posts said Wilberg is worried that Councilman Lance MacLean will be recalled on Feb. 2. The current council majority (Lance MacLean, Frank Ury and Trish Kelley – the MUKsters) might go along with such shenanigans from Wilberg about redefining misconduct, and losing MacLean on Feb. 2 could end the lockstep majority votes. As an aside, why would any council member vote to lower the established standards of conduct for highly compensated city administrators?

If Mission Viejo voters decide in the Feb. 2 recall election that they want to change the direction of city hall, Wilberg has an opportunity to change his direction as well. Not only has he been an advocate of wasteful spending (e.g., Rose Parade float, pillars on Crown Valley, “Easelgate” anniversary party), he has used his official position and taxpayer funds to oppose the recall, which is illegal. On July 8, Wilberg was videotaped stalking and harassing a signature gatherer in front of the library. Witnesses say he appeared to use his city-provided cell phone to call and text as he attempted to intimidate workers who were gathering signatures on the recall petition.

Beyond Wilberg’s political involvement, he may have other problems after the Feb. 2 Special Election if MacLean is removed from office. In addition to residents’ dissatisfaction over the way city government is run, Wilberg’s own staff may be dissatisfied with his performance. Information has quietly come from insiders who say shell games and “two sets of books” have been used to hide expenses and give an illusion the city is awash in cash. Wilberg has stated during council meetings that the city has $20-million-plus in “discretionary reserves.” Because nearly all monies are obligated, encumbered or already spent, less than $500,000 is available for discretionary use.

With many city streets in disrepair and slopes showing serious deterioration, the cost to restore infrastructure could be as high as $100 million. The MUK majority has painted a picture throughout the recall that everything is wonderful. Residents might not be keenly aware of such risks as slope deterioration, but potholes and cracks in streets are obvious. While Wilberg tries to keep his staff happy with “free” lunches, parties, festivals and a feel-good atmosphere, not all employees are comfortable upholding a code of silence when it comes to wrongdoing.

Residents want public services, decent roads, flowing traffic and other taxpayer-funded amenities they are entitled to receive. By contrast, they are getting glossy city magazines that tell them how happy they should be.

Instead of “lawyering up” to amend his contract by redefining misconduct, Wilberg should consider amending his ways.