NOTE: This complaint has been revised for length and from input from City Staff regarding certain facts that we presented to them for vetting purposes. It has been seen by Director Battenberg, the City Building and Planning Staff and Lt. Joe Molettieri. The response from City Manager Zapata and Head of Building, Jerome Smith are available on our site.
Dear Mr. Zapata and Ms Greenwood,
We write this to file a complaint against Director Cynthia Battenberg. We are strongly requesting that you appoint a qualified Independent Investigator to follow up on these charges and those findings be used by you to uphold your responsibility as set forth in Section 405 of the San Leandro Municipal Code.
To provide a brief background into the matter, in March of this year a complaint was filed against Director Battenberg for which Ms. Hung and Mr. Kay decided no disciplinary action was needed. Subsequently, we became aware of the case and have uncovered additional information. We filed a complaint against City Manager Zapata for delegating his responsibility under Section 405 of the Municipal Code to adjudicate the matter. We also pointed out several areas of the Municipal Code which need to be updated.
We are heartened in Manager Zapata’s reply that he would undertake a revision of the Municipal Code and we look forward to those. We believe this will be important for City of San Leandro Staff and Citizens in the future.
We are however still adamant that the facts of the case against Director Battenberg be considered and appropriate action take place. Thus far we have seen no evidence that the current process avoids what we believe is an attempt by San Leandro management to protect one of its own.
Thus, we have taken it upon ourselves to talk to over 30 people including those on City of San Leandro Staff and are cc:ing informed Staff members to review the facts that we are outlining in this letter. We are confident that they, as did ALL the people we have talked to, will find Ms. Battenberg’s actions go against the values of the City, and possibly state law. We are linking to those Violations here.
So we very much appreciate it if everyone copied can read this and provide input as needed.
As we know, Ms. Battenberg in her capacity as Director of Community Development oversees Building, Planning and Code Compliance. It is a job where public trust is important and at a minimum the public should expect that a person who heads a Building and Planning Department, abides by a code of Ethics and simply that she follows the same codes and rules that she is entrusted to enforce on all of us.
We have uncovered an extensive list of violations by Ms. Battenberg that we believe destroys this trust and possibly breaks existing State of CA laws.
The first set of violations deals with Code Violations in Ms. Battenberg’s house.
Code Violation #1
In 2005 - Ms. Battenberg installed over 5 cubic yards of soil by our calculations and backfilled it behind a concrete retaining wall which was over 3 feet high and 21 feet long in length. She obtained neither the required zoning, planning, or building permits for this work. She also neglected to get a survey which led her to placing this retaining wall about 1.5 feet onto the neighbors side.
We write this to file a complaint against Director Cynthia Battenberg. We are strongly requesting that you appoint a qualified Independent Investigator to follow up on these charges and those findings be used by you to uphold your responsibility as set forth in Section 405 of the San Leandro Municipal Code.
To provide a brief background into the matter, in March of this year a complaint was filed against Director Battenberg for which Ms. Hung and Mr. Kay decided no disciplinary action was needed. Subsequently, we became aware of the case and have uncovered additional information. We filed a complaint against City Manager Zapata for delegating his responsibility under Section 405 of the Municipal Code to adjudicate the matter. We also pointed out several areas of the Municipal Code which need to be updated.
We are heartened in Manager Zapata’s reply that he would undertake a revision of the Municipal Code and we look forward to those. We believe this will be important for City of San Leandro Staff and Citizens in the future.
We are however still adamant that the facts of the case against Director Battenberg be considered and appropriate action take place. Thus far we have seen no evidence that the current process avoids what we believe is an attempt by San Leandro management to protect one of its own.
Thus, we have taken it upon ourselves to talk to over 30 people including those on City of San Leandro Staff and are cc:ing informed Staff members to review the facts that we are outlining in this letter. We are confident that they, as did ALL the people we have talked to, will find Ms. Battenberg’s actions go against the values of the City, and possibly state law. We are linking to those Violations here.
So we very much appreciate it if everyone copied can read this and provide input as needed.
As we know, Ms. Battenberg in her capacity as Director of Community Development oversees Building, Planning and Code Compliance. It is a job where public trust is important and at a minimum the public should expect that a person who heads a Building and Planning Department, abides by a code of Ethics and simply that she follows the same codes and rules that she is entrusted to enforce on all of us.
We have uncovered an extensive list of violations by Ms. Battenberg that we believe destroys this trust and possibly breaks existing State of CA laws.
The first set of violations deals with Code Violations in Ms. Battenberg’s house.
Code Violation #1
In 2005 - Ms. Battenberg installed over 5 cubic yards of soil by our calculations and backfilled it behind a concrete retaining wall which was over 3 feet high and 21 feet long in length. She obtained neither the required zoning, planning, or building permits for this work. She also neglected to get a survey which led her to placing this retaining wall about 1.5 feet onto the neighbors side.
We can excuse this as an honest error - however when the neighbors asked her to remove the retaining wall. Ms. Battenberg came back to them and told them that if they didn’t pay to remove this wall she would report other violations she found on their property to the City of Oakland:
On Sep 8, 2015, at 12:09 PM, Cynthia Battenberg REDACTED wrote:
Dear REDACTED-
I assume that you are aware of what you have and haven’t done in terms of building permits for your downstairs unit, as well as obtaining zoning approval and a business license to operate an Airbnb at REDACTED. If not, I encourage you to do some research.
She subsequently revised that blackmail threat and forced them to go to Mediation. Here is the agreement she signed:
On Sep 8, 2015, at 12:09 PM, Cynthia Battenberg REDACTED wrote:
Dear REDACTED-
I assume that you are aware of what you have and haven’t done in terms of building permits for your downstairs unit, as well as obtaining zoning approval and a business license to operate an Airbnb at REDACTED. If not, I encourage you to do some research.
She subsequently revised that blackmail threat and forced them to go to Mediation. Here is the agreement she signed:
4. Cynthia and REDACTED will not report any alleged code violations in REDACTED and REDACTED’s property
5. REDACTED and REDACTED will not oppose any permit variance related to Cynthia’s and REDACTED bathroom remodel project
We have the entire email exchange and the signed Mediation Agreement that supports our assertion that this is EXTORTION / BLACKMAIL, which we will turn over to an independent investigator.
In addition, had Mr. Zapata attended the Small Claims case, which we understand he was alerted, the judge in that case, while rejecting the dollar amount, called out Ms. Battenberg’s actions as “BLACKMAIL”. We have the testimony of people who attended and that needs to be entered into the findings.
Lets consider this in two ways:
First,
If a member of San Leandro’s police department went to a citizen and said the same thing - I won’t report this crime and in return you will grant me a favor - then it seems to us that this is something the San Leandro Internal Affairs unit would be very interested in investigating.
Ms. Battenberg is in charge of an Enforcement unit and she had previously told her neighbors that her people work with Oakland’s all the time especially on border issues. All parties knew of Ms. Battenberg’s position. She should be held to the same standards as a Police Officer. Someone with an Internal Affairs background should be brought in to investigate.
Second,
If someone in San Leandro is applying for a Variance - Do we want them to go dig up violations on the neighbors property and then threaten to report them unless they kept silent on the Variance application? Is this the type of City we want and is this how we want the Variance process to work? Neighbors blackmailing each other?
We the Citizens do not want this type of City and we simply will not stand by while the person in charge of this Department operates this way in her home and acts this way towards her neighbors. NONE of the people we spoke with believes this is appropriate.
Code Violation #2
In 2011, Ms. Battenberg applied for a set of Building permits for work done to her “unconditioned” and “non-habitable” basement. The legal portion was to rebuild a Powder room, install a washer dryer room and new exterior door. Following this legal work - she added a shower in her Powder Room making it a full bath. She has had guests staying in this basement for weeks at a time. The only way for guests to egress via the newly installed door is thru the neighbors yard given her prior un-permitted work of raising the grade of the backyard.
Ms. Battenberg, only now after our pointing out this violation to Mr. Zapata, has decided to “fix” this violation. That it took City Manager Zapata to get her to fix this violation, after complaints filed against the City on her actions, speaks to the depth of Director Battenberg’s incalcitrant approach to follow the code when it comes to her house.
We have filed a complaint with the City of Oakland - you may search for her home at 620 Santa Ray - and the City of Oakland has also verified this violation.
This destroys public trust in the entire Code Compliance unit which Ms. Battenberg heads up - a total lack of Accountability to follow the same Building and Zoning Codes as in San Leandro - that ensure public safety.
Incidentally it also is to be noted that not reporting an additional fixture would have an impact on the proper sizing of water supply pipes and gas pipes.
The City of Oakland as a result of this Violation ordered Cynthia Battenberg to place the following deed restriction:
Code Violation #3
In 2015, Ms. Battenberg applied for a Variance to build out her rear for the stated purpose of expanding her master bathroom and getting a 2nd full bathroom. In that Variance application she omitted the shower she had placed without permits in 2011. The Staff planner (whose relationship with Ms. Battenberg will be explored later) wrote in the Approval, “It is not uncommon for a three-bedroom home to contain two full bathrooms, as proposed”. Ms. Battenberg had mis-led Staff both in the drawing and the text of her application on the number of bathrooms her house actually contained. We are attaching the Drawing she submitted to the City of Oakland - we have the entire set - which a Professional Investigator is welcome to see.
In 2015, Ms. Battenberg applied for a Variance to build out her rear for the stated purpose of expanding her master bathroom and getting a 2nd full bathroom. In that Variance application she omitted the shower she had placed without permits in 2011. The Staff planner (whose relationship with Ms. Battenberg will be explored later) wrote in the Approval, “It is not uncommon for a three-bedroom home to contain two full bathrooms, as proposed”. Ms. Battenberg had mis-led Staff both in the drawing and the text of her application on the number of bathrooms her house actually contained. We are attaching the Drawing she submitted to the City of Oakland - we have the entire set - which a Professional Investigator is welcome to see.
We are attaching the signature page of the Variance Application that was filed and signed by Ms. Battenberg. We have the Drawings and other Documents related to this which we will turn over to an Independent Investigator - this needs to be part of the findings.
We would like to ask Planning Staff what exactly it means when at the bottom of the Variance application - it says that Applicants sign Under Penalty of Perjury. Both Oakland and San Leandro have the same language on their Variance applications.
—-> We believe these actions destroy the public trust in San Leandro’s entire Building, Planning and Code Compliance if Ms. Battenberg is to continue to oversee these departments. Her actions in her home - code violations, false statements on Variance applications, and blackmailing neighbors for her personal gain - taint the entire department. This investigation and its outcome needs to be about restoring that trust. There is a clear provision in San Leandro's Employee policy which deals with DISHONESTY.
CA State Law Violation #1: Tortious Interference
In May 2016, according to what Mr. Gary Porter of Canyon Design Build told the neighbor, Ms. Battenberg told Mr. Porter to go to her office to a meeting with someone in the Building Department (Mr. Smith denies he attended any such meeting and we duly note his reply), and there she told him not to follow thru on a verbal contract that Mr. Porter and the neighbor had agreed upon to remove the retaining wall that Ms. Battenberg had placed in 2005. Mr. Porter also told the neighbor that Ms. Battenberg sent him the text of the letter he wrote to the neighbors on May 11. Emails can be searched, even private ones, with the proper authority. We have emails that support our assertion that Ms. Battenberg told Canyon Design Build to break a contract with another private party. Specifically:
On April 6, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Cynthia Battenberg wrote:
-------
Our contractor is not willing to work for you. Our offer to pay your contractor $800 for the work still stands as does our offer to have our contractor remove the wall as part of our project
----
On May 3rd, Mr. Gary Porter and his colleague Jim of Canyon Design Build attended a meeting at the neighbors house which was attended as well by a witness. At the meeting Mr. Porter told the neighbors they would be happy to remove the retaining wall in a manner that the neighbors wanted and under contract with them as that would be the only way to assure that their would be no liability to them. They had no idea where the $800 number came from. Both sides left that meeting with the understanding this work would be done concurrently with the placing of the new retaining wall which would be properly placed. They all agreed with Ms. Battenberg's prior notification to the neighbors (on a March 25th email) that leaving the old retaining wall would pose an additional hazard as the un-permitted retaining wall would be further compromised.
Between March 3rd and March 11th, Gary Porter and CBD, decided not to follow through on this verbal agreement with the neighbors and sent the following letter which was received by the neighbors on March 12th - as they were saw cutting the existing wall. Mr. Porter explained to the neighbor that he had to break the contract because he was summoned by Director Battenberg, expressly told not to do the work and didn't want to anger her given her position.
—-> We believe these actions destroy the public trust in San Leandro’s entire Building, Planning and Code Compliance if Ms. Battenberg is to continue to oversee these departments. Her actions in her home - code violations, false statements on Variance applications, and blackmailing neighbors for her personal gain - taint the entire department. This investigation and its outcome needs to be about restoring that trust. There is a clear provision in San Leandro's Employee policy which deals with DISHONESTY.
CA State Law Violation #1: Tortious Interference
In May 2016, according to what Mr. Gary Porter of Canyon Design Build told the neighbor, Ms. Battenberg told Mr. Porter to go to her office to a meeting with someone in the Building Department (Mr. Smith denies he attended any such meeting and we duly note his reply), and there she told him not to follow thru on a verbal contract that Mr. Porter and the neighbor had agreed upon to remove the retaining wall that Ms. Battenberg had placed in 2005. Mr. Porter also told the neighbor that Ms. Battenberg sent him the text of the letter he wrote to the neighbors on May 11. Emails can be searched, even private ones, with the proper authority. We have emails that support our assertion that Ms. Battenberg told Canyon Design Build to break a contract with another private party. Specifically:
On April 6, 2016, at 5:41 PM, Cynthia Battenberg wrote:
-------
Our contractor is not willing to work for you. Our offer to pay your contractor $800 for the work still stands as does our offer to have our contractor remove the wall as part of our project
----
On May 3rd, Mr. Gary Porter and his colleague Jim of Canyon Design Build attended a meeting at the neighbors house which was attended as well by a witness. At the meeting Mr. Porter told the neighbors they would be happy to remove the retaining wall in a manner that the neighbors wanted and under contract with them as that would be the only way to assure that their would be no liability to them. They had no idea where the $800 number came from. Both sides left that meeting with the understanding this work would be done concurrently with the placing of the new retaining wall which would be properly placed. They all agreed with Ms. Battenberg's prior notification to the neighbors (on a March 25th email) that leaving the old retaining wall would pose an additional hazard as the un-permitted retaining wall would be further compromised.
Between March 3rd and March 11th, Gary Porter and CBD, decided not to follow through on this verbal agreement with the neighbors and sent the following letter which was received by the neighbors on March 12th - as they were saw cutting the existing wall. Mr. Porter explained to the neighbor that he had to break the contract because he was summoned by Director Battenberg, expressly told not to do the work and didn't want to anger her given her position.
The language is eerily similar to the emails sent by Ms. Battenberg to the neighbors a month earlier.
The retaining wall which was originally placed without permits was further weakened as Mr. Porter per Ms. Battenberg’s directions saw-cut it halfway. This wall is still attached to Ms. Battenberg’s new wall.
It is a mystery to us why the City of Oakland would allow this code violation to remain… the next violation might provide an answer….
Again, if a Police Officer told a Citizen to come to his desk in the Police Department and told that Citizen not to take on a job which he had agreed to do for someone else, is this something that Internal Affairs would follow up on? Again, Ms. Battenberg heads up an Enforcement organization and the not so subtle message of summoning a Contractor to her office and telling him what to do or not do regarding a separate personal matter is chilling to us.
CA State Law Violation #2: Influencing Prospective Employment
When Ms. Battenberg filed her Variance in 2015 in the City of Oakland, the Planner who took on the case was Mr. Aubrey Rose. Mr. Rose is a Supervisor and we understand that he has the responsibility of delegating cases to other Planners. It is interesting that he took this case on for himself. We reviewed the entire thread between the neighbor, Ms. Battenberg and the Planner and this is what we gather:
Mr. Rose was personally informed that the house had code violations - that the applicant had placed a retaining wall and backfilled her backyard with soil - raising the grade to adjoining properties by about 4 feet - this was done in 2005. This violation was re-stated in a letter to Mr. Rose on December 7, 2015 by the neighbors. Mr. Rose was also alerted of a Privacy issue with regards to a fence between the two properties due to a door that was placed in 2011.
Mr. Rose did not place any of these objections as a Condition. He simply wrote in Section A that the Applicants would move the retaining wall. This was not enforce-able, putting it in the Conditions section would have been.
In a subsequent investigation of Ms. Battenberg’s emails which we obtained thru a public Information request with both the City of Oakland and San Leandro - it was discovered that Mr. Rose and Ms. Battenberg were engaging in a separate personal discussion - one which the neighbors had no idea.
It is a long thread - among the comments:
On December 8, 2015 at 11:33 AM - Mr. Aubrey Rose wrote - “not sure how far you will get in the meantime without their cooperation” -
On December 21, 2015 at 5:15PM - Ms. Battenberg wrote, “ I would also be willing to construct a fence in which the boards are placed vertical on my side and horizontal on his side - you might want to keep this in your pocket for negotiations.
Mr Rose was passing along all emails from the neighbors to Ms. Battenberg and none from Ms. Battenberg to the neighbors. He was actively negotiating on behalf of Ms. Battenberg.
On December 22, 2015 at 6:13AM - Ms. Battenberg wrote , “Upon further consideration I am not interested in making a deal regarding paying for a portion of the fence…. I have meetings all morning, so I’ll give you a call this afternoon.”
Mr. Rose complied fully with Director Battenberg’s wishes as Not a single Condition - with regards to clearing prior code violations or alleviating any privacy concerns was placed on the Applicants - after being so informed in person and in writing.
Given the emails we have uncovered - there is little doubt to us that this was an unfair process where the Planner, Aubrey Rose, was actively negotiating on behalf of one side - who happened to be in a position who could positively impact Mr. Rose’s career.
About four months after this exchange - Ms. Battenberg alerted Mr. Rose of a job working underneath her in the City of San Leandro.
On May 2, 2016 at 12:37PM - Director Battenberg wrote, “Dear Aubrey- I hope this email finds you well. I wanted to make you aware that the Planning Manager position for the City of San Leandro is now open.” The Job announcement is Attached".
Mr. Rose wrote back to Ms. Battenberg expressing his interest in the job.
On May 2, 2016 at 1:03 PM - Aubrey Rose wrote back,
“Hello Cynthia, Thank you for thinking of me, this is a fantastic opportunity…”
While we are not sure if Mr. Rose applied, he doesn’t have it now, the law doesn’t need for that to happen:
The City of Oakland, based on State of CA laws has adopted the following provisions in its Municipal Code…
1. 2.25.020 - Purpose.
A. This Government Ethics Act is based on the premises that 1) the integrity of City government depends upon Public Servants who are entrusted by the public to use City time, property and resources efficiently and in a legal and ethically responsible manner, and 2) all individuals and groups who come into contact with our City should have a fair and equal opportunity to participate in government.
G. Influencing Prospective Employment. A Public Servant shall not make, participate in making, or otherwise seek to influence a governmental decision affecting a person or entity with whom the Public Servant is discussing or negotiating or has entered into an agreement concerning future employment.
Mr. Rose continued to handle the case after this correspondence.
In October 31, 2016 - Ms. Battenberg wanted to raise the fence heights above the maximum allowed on the rear side partly because of privacy concerns related to her prior illegal raising of soil in 2005. Mr. Rose consented to this.
A thorough investigation needs to be conducted why Mr. Rose failed to place any Conditions on the Applicant, actively negotiated on her behalf and whether the Planning Manager job in San Leandro had any influence on his actions. It also raises concerns in our mind if any other departments in Oakland have been influenced by Ms. Battenberg’s role.
Mr. Zapata, please directly respond to the 5 specific charges we have raised against Ms. Battenberg and not to our motives as concerned citizens.
Once again, we ask that you appoint a qualified independent investigator and we will supply all the primary documents that we have and provide additional leads/questions to ask. These are serious charges and we will not accept the incomplete investigation that has currently taken place by you and Staff.
Please rest assured that this investigation needs to be conducted on the assumption that all 425 Staff people that work in San Leandro and the 90,000 plus citizens and their elected Representatives will be watching.
In our democracy, unless we the people and press provide oversight, government will abuse its power - our Founders knew this. It is up to us to stand up to this - And we will.
We should all be horrified to read in Ms. Battenberg’s Attorney’s letter that Ms. Battenberg threatened to sue the complainants. We should be horrified to read that she tore down a fence and hired a Surveillance Company to install a Nest camera which enables her to watch and listen in on them 24/7. She did this immediately after the neighbors filed an Ethics complaint against her with City Clerk Greenwood. This is a fundamental violation of civil liberties - both the 1st and 4th Amendments.
The retaining wall which was originally placed without permits was further weakened as Mr. Porter per Ms. Battenberg’s directions saw-cut it halfway. This wall is still attached to Ms. Battenberg’s new wall.
It is a mystery to us why the City of Oakland would allow this code violation to remain… the next violation might provide an answer….
Again, if a Police Officer told a Citizen to come to his desk in the Police Department and told that Citizen not to take on a job which he had agreed to do for someone else, is this something that Internal Affairs would follow up on? Again, Ms. Battenberg heads up an Enforcement organization and the not so subtle message of summoning a Contractor to her office and telling him what to do or not do regarding a separate personal matter is chilling to us.
CA State Law Violation #2: Influencing Prospective Employment
When Ms. Battenberg filed her Variance in 2015 in the City of Oakland, the Planner who took on the case was Mr. Aubrey Rose. Mr. Rose is a Supervisor and we understand that he has the responsibility of delegating cases to other Planners. It is interesting that he took this case on for himself. We reviewed the entire thread between the neighbor, Ms. Battenberg and the Planner and this is what we gather:
Mr. Rose was personally informed that the house had code violations - that the applicant had placed a retaining wall and backfilled her backyard with soil - raising the grade to adjoining properties by about 4 feet - this was done in 2005. This violation was re-stated in a letter to Mr. Rose on December 7, 2015 by the neighbors. Mr. Rose was also alerted of a Privacy issue with regards to a fence between the two properties due to a door that was placed in 2011.
Mr. Rose did not place any of these objections as a Condition. He simply wrote in Section A that the Applicants would move the retaining wall. This was not enforce-able, putting it in the Conditions section would have been.
In a subsequent investigation of Ms. Battenberg’s emails which we obtained thru a public Information request with both the City of Oakland and San Leandro - it was discovered that Mr. Rose and Ms. Battenberg were engaging in a separate personal discussion - one which the neighbors had no idea.
It is a long thread - among the comments:
On December 8, 2015 at 11:33 AM - Mr. Aubrey Rose wrote - “not sure how far you will get in the meantime without their cooperation” -
On December 21, 2015 at 5:15PM - Ms. Battenberg wrote, “ I would also be willing to construct a fence in which the boards are placed vertical on my side and horizontal on his side - you might want to keep this in your pocket for negotiations.
Mr Rose was passing along all emails from the neighbors to Ms. Battenberg and none from Ms. Battenberg to the neighbors. He was actively negotiating on behalf of Ms. Battenberg.
On December 22, 2015 at 6:13AM - Ms. Battenberg wrote , “Upon further consideration I am not interested in making a deal regarding paying for a portion of the fence…. I have meetings all morning, so I’ll give you a call this afternoon.”
Mr. Rose complied fully with Director Battenberg’s wishes as Not a single Condition - with regards to clearing prior code violations or alleviating any privacy concerns was placed on the Applicants - after being so informed in person and in writing.
Given the emails we have uncovered - there is little doubt to us that this was an unfair process where the Planner, Aubrey Rose, was actively negotiating on behalf of one side - who happened to be in a position who could positively impact Mr. Rose’s career.
About four months after this exchange - Ms. Battenberg alerted Mr. Rose of a job working underneath her in the City of San Leandro.
On May 2, 2016 at 12:37PM - Director Battenberg wrote, “Dear Aubrey- I hope this email finds you well. I wanted to make you aware that the Planning Manager position for the City of San Leandro is now open.” The Job announcement is Attached".
Mr. Rose wrote back to Ms. Battenberg expressing his interest in the job.
On May 2, 2016 at 1:03 PM - Aubrey Rose wrote back,
“Hello Cynthia, Thank you for thinking of me, this is a fantastic opportunity…”
While we are not sure if Mr. Rose applied, he doesn’t have it now, the law doesn’t need for that to happen:
The City of Oakland, based on State of CA laws has adopted the following provisions in its Municipal Code…
1. 2.25.020 - Purpose.
A. This Government Ethics Act is based on the premises that 1) the integrity of City government depends upon Public Servants who are entrusted by the public to use City time, property and resources efficiently and in a legal and ethically responsible manner, and 2) all individuals and groups who come into contact with our City should have a fair and equal opportunity to participate in government.
G. Influencing Prospective Employment. A Public Servant shall not make, participate in making, or otherwise seek to influence a governmental decision affecting a person or entity with whom the Public Servant is discussing or negotiating or has entered into an agreement concerning future employment.
Mr. Rose continued to handle the case after this correspondence.
In October 31, 2016 - Ms. Battenberg wanted to raise the fence heights above the maximum allowed on the rear side partly because of privacy concerns related to her prior illegal raising of soil in 2005. Mr. Rose consented to this.
A thorough investigation needs to be conducted why Mr. Rose failed to place any Conditions on the Applicant, actively negotiated on her behalf and whether the Planning Manager job in San Leandro had any influence on his actions. It also raises concerns in our mind if any other departments in Oakland have been influenced by Ms. Battenberg’s role.
Mr. Zapata, please directly respond to the 5 specific charges we have raised against Ms. Battenberg and not to our motives as concerned citizens.
Once again, we ask that you appoint a qualified independent investigator and we will supply all the primary documents that we have and provide additional leads/questions to ask. These are serious charges and we will not accept the incomplete investigation that has currently taken place by you and Staff.
- No one on Staff has interviewed the original complainants
- Nor did they visit the site
- Nor obtain the emails that we uncovered
- Nor followed up with primary documents supplied to the City of Oakland.
Please rest assured that this investigation needs to be conducted on the assumption that all 425 Staff people that work in San Leandro and the 90,000 plus citizens and their elected Representatives will be watching.
In our democracy, unless we the people and press provide oversight, government will abuse its power - our Founders knew this. It is up to us to stand up to this - And we will.
We should all be horrified to read in Ms. Battenberg’s Attorney’s letter that Ms. Battenberg threatened to sue the complainants. We should be horrified to read that she tore down a fence and hired a Surveillance Company to install a Nest camera which enables her to watch and listen in on them 24/7. She did this immediately after the neighbors filed an Ethics complaint against her with City Clerk Greenwood. This is a fundamental violation of civil liberties - both the 1st and 4th Amendments.
If you do not see this and act - then we the people need to act - And we will.
In our complaint against you to the Mayor and City Council we asked for 3 changes to the Municipal Code:
Policy Change #1: Whistle-Blower Ordinance
Policy Change #2: Independent Public Ethics board to review complaints
Policy Change #3: Adopting a provision around Conflicts of Interest and Personal Gain
This case and its response so far also highlights the need for us to ask the following under the Whistle-Blower Ordinance.
In Oakland, citizen whistleblowers are afforded protection from retaliatory measures and that the confidentiality of complainants is preserved. In your memo to the Mayor you named the complainants over and over again. Please make sure you personally are aware of CA State laws concerning this as well as your Staff. The revision to the Municipal Code should include safeguards to make sure complaints can be filed confidentially and without retribution.
If we had not gotten involved, this entire matter would have been buried and none of these changes would be taking place. Citizens have a role to play in open, honest and ethical government - policies and procedures need to be in place for that to take place.
The final matter though comes down to PEOPLE. We can have all the policies and procedures in place, however without the right People it doesn’t matter.
People at the top should be held to a higher standard, or at least the same standard - not a lower one. There is a concern Mr. Zapata among your Staff that if these allegations were brought forth against a lower level Staff member that Management would have handled this case differently with disciplinary action taken.
We value Honesty and Integrity. We commit to truthfulness, fairness and the highest
professional and personal standards. What we DO shall be consistent with what we say.
—-CITY VALUE #1
On behalf of all the citizens of San Leandro and the Staff whose reputation this affects, we thank you Mr. Zapata for following up and making sure San Leandro takes Ethics seriously - as you said you would to the Mayor and Council. Ethics is best taught using Cases - let this Case be the one that drives reform in San Leandro. We trust that you will back your words with action - that you will DO. Starting with appointing a Professional Investigator.
Ms. Greenwood —-> please let us know that you received this complaint
Mr. Zapata —-> we would appreciate if you will let us know by the end of this week if you will be appointing an independent investigator or if you will respond directly to this complaint without taking that step.
Sam and Steve
Citizens for a Fair East Bay
[email protected]
In our complaint against you to the Mayor and City Council we asked for 3 changes to the Municipal Code:
Policy Change #1: Whistle-Blower Ordinance
Policy Change #2: Independent Public Ethics board to review complaints
Policy Change #3: Adopting a provision around Conflicts of Interest and Personal Gain
This case and its response so far also highlights the need for us to ask the following under the Whistle-Blower Ordinance.
In Oakland, citizen whistleblowers are afforded protection from retaliatory measures and that the confidentiality of complainants is preserved. In your memo to the Mayor you named the complainants over and over again. Please make sure you personally are aware of CA State laws concerning this as well as your Staff. The revision to the Municipal Code should include safeguards to make sure complaints can be filed confidentially and without retribution.
If we had not gotten involved, this entire matter would have been buried and none of these changes would be taking place. Citizens have a role to play in open, honest and ethical government - policies and procedures need to be in place for that to take place.
The final matter though comes down to PEOPLE. We can have all the policies and procedures in place, however without the right People it doesn’t matter.
People at the top should be held to a higher standard, or at least the same standard - not a lower one. There is a concern Mr. Zapata among your Staff that if these allegations were brought forth against a lower level Staff member that Management would have handled this case differently with disciplinary action taken.
We value Honesty and Integrity. We commit to truthfulness, fairness and the highest
professional and personal standards. What we DO shall be consistent with what we say.
—-CITY VALUE #1
On behalf of all the citizens of San Leandro and the Staff whose reputation this affects, we thank you Mr. Zapata for following up and making sure San Leandro takes Ethics seriously - as you said you would to the Mayor and Council. Ethics is best taught using Cases - let this Case be the one that drives reform in San Leandro. We trust that you will back your words with action - that you will DO. Starting with appointing a Professional Investigator.
Ms. Greenwood —-> please let us know that you received this complaint
Mr. Zapata —-> we would appreciate if you will let us know by the end of this week if you will be appointing an independent investigator or if you will respond directly to this complaint without taking that step.
Sam and Steve
Citizens for a Fair East Bay
[email protected]