The city of Sacramento has an unsung hero in the Natomas permit scandal.
It was a Utilities Department employee, still unnamed, who noticed that someone in the development department had approved permits for new home construction in the Natomas flood zone in April – though a federally mandated building moratorium had been in effect since last December. The employee also noticed irregularities with the fees.
That person did the right thing, contacting Assistant City Manager John Dangberg, the city manager and the city attorney. The next day they all met. They realized immediately that this could affect federal funding for Sacramento's levees and flood insurance subsidies. They contacted the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
The city attorney drafted a memo on the issue, which was hand-delivered to the mayor and council members, the city manager, the assistant city manager and the head of the development department.
But – and this is the most important part – the public never would have known about that scandal in the development department if someone hadn't leaked the memo to The Bee. It would all have been hush-hush.
Unfortunately, Mayor Kevin Johnson went out of his way to champion secrecy over disclosure. He went so far as to label the leak a "crime" and unsuccessfully attempted to hold a closed session to ferret out the leaker. The council was told Tuesday that disclosure of the memo was not a crime. No closed session.
But the mayor isn't alone in a penchant for secrecy. Council member Steve Cohn suggested at Tuesday's council meeting that the city attorney no longer should provide copies of memos to council members. Address issues in closed session, he recommended: "No copy given." Lauren Hammond chimed in, "Just don't put it in writing to us anymore."
Was that a directive to the city attorney? We hope not.
Don't council members want to have information before they meet on important issues? Don't they want to be able to read supporting documents, and think about them? Or do they simply want to make snap judgments on things without any preparation? This hankering after secrecy – urging the city attorney to dispense with documentation rather than face potential public disclosure – not only is harmful to good public decision-making, it is utterly impractical.
Just what are Cohn and Hammond afraid their constituents, the public, will find out? The council on Tuesday approved a good plan for an independent investigation of the Natomas permit fiasco (which could expand into other areas) and, separately, an audit of the development department.
The council, however, has far to go in demonstrating commitment to open government. Public officials should not keep information confidential merely because they might be embarrassed by it.
The utilities department employee acted appropriately in flagging the Natomas permits. And others did the same in making sure the larger public would learn about it.
What truly destroys confidence is punishing people who bring mistakes, missteps and mischief to light. The mayor, Cohn, Hammond and others on the council should know that.
About Comments
Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.