(l to r) Council members Ruth Atkin, Dick Kassis (mayor), Nora Davis, Ken Bukowski (vice-mayor), and John Fricke
The Two “No” Votes:
Bukowski Cries “Revenge”;
John Fricke Calls Censure “Toothless”
__________________________________________________
Council Also Votes to Cut Public Comment Period from 5 minutes to 3 minutes
by Brian Donahue and Tracy Schroth
The Emeryville City Council last Tuesday voted 3-2 to officially censure Vice-Mayor Ken Bukowski for unlawful and unethical conduct while in office. The strongly worded resolution criticized Bukowski for bringing “disrepute” on the city in general and the City Council in particular. The censure sought to publicly condemn Bukowski’s actions and invite “the reaffirmation of his oath of office and commitment to govern his activities as an elected official … in full compliance with … all laws of the State of California and the City of Emeryville.”
Bukowski and Council Member John Fricke voted against the censure. Bukowski characterized the move as revenge, while Fricke called it a “toothless” show for the cameras, noting that aside from public humliation, there is no consequence. He noted that the three Bukowski condemners were enthusiastic Bukowski supporters just a few short years ago, despite their knowledge of Bukowski’s transgressions (although the list has grown since then). Council members Nora Davis and Ruth Atkin ran on the same re-election slate with Bukowski, with the active support of (now-Mayor) Dick Kassis, in 2007.
Bukowski, meanwhile, characterized the censure as an act of revenge, claiming that his fellow council members were punishing him for voting against the city renewing its contract with City Attorney Mike Biddle.
This is the second time the Bukowski censure resolution has been put to a vote. Council Member Ruth Atkin introduced the same resolution at a Jan. 20 Council meeting. But, after a lengthy discussion, she withdrew it, preventing a vote. At the time, Council Member Nora Davis indicated she was against the censure and that Bukowski had served the city well. Last Tuesday, however, she voted in favor of censuring Bukowski.
In other business, the Council voted 4-1 (Fricke against) to reduce the public comment period from 5 minutes to 3 minutes per citizen. They also voted to ban dogs from the council chambers.
Here is a list of Bukowski’s offenses cited in the resolution:
- Failure to pay business license tax on his Doyle Street rental property.
- Disclosure to the public of confidential closed-session items discussed by the City Council. There is speculation that the disclosure had to do with the firing of a city staffer who alleged that the firing was racially motivated. Bukowski sided with the employee, publicly criticizing the handling of the case by then City Manager John Flores and City Attorney Mike Biddle. The city ultimately settled the case for $3.6 million.
- Failure to file the necessary campaign finance reports between October 2003 and 2006, “despite repeated reminders and requests from the City Clerk’s Office and referral to the Fair Political Practices Commission.” Bukowski has since been fined by the Fair Political Practices Commission, according to the resolution.
- Soliciting and obtaining personal loans from individuals that exceed limits and terms set by the Political Reform Act and not repaying at least one of those loans. It was disclosed at a public meeting several months ago that Bukowski received a loan from Emeryville developer Francis Collins.
- Entering into a consulting contract with Paxio, Inc., an Internet service provider that also has a contract with the city to supply services, and failing to disclose that consulting agreement to his fellow City Council members.
- Participating in and influencing decisions of the City Council regarding Paxio while on Paxio’s payroll.
Bukowski has “flouted and violated the law governing his activities as a local business owner and as a member of the office of the City Council on several occasions,” the resolution said, noting that “these violations are not limited to an isolated incident and have brought disrepute to the City of Emeryville” and the City Council. The resolution went on to say that the Council has “grown weary of Council Member Bukowski’s pattern of violating the law, followed by promises of reform once violations have been publicly exposed, and thereafter followed by further violations after some period of relatively ‘good behavior’ … “
It’s easy to see why the council lowered the Public Comments section from five minutes to three. This is the time when the citizens get to critisize them. It’s so brazen. People feel like they can just walk right up and critisize the government. Maybe these politicians should make it even lower…how’s 30 seconds sound everybody? Maybe they should just dispense with it all together and have done with it.
Councilmember Fricke just invents reasons to vote in the minority anymore. Voting against the censure because it is “toothless” is a worthless argument. That is not the point. The purpose of a censure is to allow the council to express its belief that Councilmember Bukowski’s actions were inappropriate. You have to vote your conscience–always. You have to be responsible to your constituents. From that vote, I have to assume that Councilmember Fricke does not disapprove of Councilmember Bukowski’s actions. Otherwise he would have voted for censure. There is no reason not to–other than purely procrustean contrariness.
What boils my temper is when I get 5 minutes to have my say before the council, then each council member gets unlimited time to rebut everything I’ve said. And now they’re limiting it to 3 minutes? Do they not care about their constituents’ opinions? I’ll remember this at election time, to be sure!
I’m not exactly sure why John Fricke ruffles so many feathers with his purist stance, but more power to him.
Procrustian? It’s not often you hear that word….
To take issue (other than the use of that well placed adjective): This was clearly not a vote about anyone’s ‘conscience’. This was just for the cameras as many have pointed out. This is, as they say, pure electioneering. You gotta ask yourself why these guys have run as a slate and endorsed Bukowski so much, even as they knew of his many pecadillos at the time. The public is rightfully outraged by Bukowski and these council members are trying to avoid getting sprayed by fecal matter from the storm.
The Secret News has done everyone in Emeryville an invaluble service. You have used the power of the press (not literally in this case), to illuminate what was previously dark and in so doing, you have rightfully brought down an arrogant public servant who violated his duties to the public. The wounds Ken Bukowski inflicted upon himself made public by you, will render any re-election bid unlikely. After more than twenty years of this man’s ethically challenged high-jinks made behind a curtin, we now have a news source of account…Emeryville owes you a debt of gratitude.
I watched this on TV and Bukowski said “People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones”, and bitterly made reference to wrongful acts committed by Nora Davis , Ruth Atkin and especially Dick Kassis. I think you should interview Bukowski and report on his allegations. After all, he’s in a good position to know of any possible clandestine wrongful acts made by them.
We should recall the good deeds done by council member Bukowski over the years. He has many times in the past, stood up against the council majority on behalf of the residents. He has been an independent voice on the council. It’s true recently he has lasped ethically and hasn’t made good choices, but overall he has been a good council member.
I’m sorry he turned on council member Fricke. That was a good coilition; pro-resident. I think Ken plays politics a little too much.
I can’t believe anyone would come to the defense of Ken Bukowski. Not only are all his public screw ups his own doing, he also violated a oath as a elected public official to not do what he’s been doing. We forget that politicians are to be held to a HIGHER standard than the ordinary citizen. The rest of the coucil doesn’t get it: it’s not that he has embarassed us, it’s that he has failed us. There should be zero tolarance for this from those ostensibly working in the public’s interest. We need to replace Ken Bukowski.
The commentor on March 24 that said it’s reasonable to assume that Councilmember Fricke does not disaprove of Bukowski’s actions either didn’t pay attention to what Fricke said or he’s (she?) just a s*** stirrer…someone who likes to provoke for it’s own sake. These are people not worth listening to.
Are you guys going to do any more stories?
They let Ruth in, just kidding. But seriously, from 5 to 3 minutes. Who do these asshats think they are?
I think it's about time Ken Bukowski got what he deservse in fact he deservse to b e tried foe that so called accidental death of a pedestrian I know for a fact he was High on meth ! I know more about him than anyone ! I'm his nephew and I've been here the majority of the time I've witnessed cash being handed to him more than once . He used me and tossed me out in the street . He killed that man and got away with it . You would think that would wake him up to stop doing drugs , but it got worse . He took advantage of my dying sister by taking all her money and not caring for her at all while she layed in bed at his house in pain dying of cancer , I used to look up to him , he was my idle . Now I hate him and I'm glad he got exposed cause I would never have told on him thank god someone did !