San Benito County Supervisor Anthony Botelho is the subject of a Fair Political Practices Commission complaint that claims he violated the Political Reform Act’s conflict of interest provision. Vice President of Preserve Our Rural Communities (PORC) and Aromas resident Gina Paolini filed the complaint on Oct. 18.
The complaint alleges that Botelho did not disclose property on his Statement of Economic Interest form (also known as a 700 form), which influenced his decision on the rezoning of four commercial nodes at a Sept. 24 Board of Supervisors meeting.
According to the complaint, Bothelo “participated in decision making where property is located within a new designated land use node and can benefit financially.”
A notice sent to Botelho by the FPPC says the commission has not made a determination about the allegations in the complaint. The FPPC has 14 days from the first filing to do one of the following:
- Investigate the allegations
- Refer the complaint to another governmental agency
- Take no action on the complaint because the commission does not have jurisdiction to investigate
- Take no action on the complaint because the allegations do not warrant the commission’s further investigation
Botelho listed an address of 2171 Old San Juan Highway as “interest in real property” on his 700 form in 2016. The property is near the proposed Betabel project off Highway 101. However, the property is not identified in Botelho’s most recent filing on Feb. 9. Botelho said that while he managed the property for several years, he turned over his responsibilities for it to his sister in 2016-17.
“If there was an impact I would still have to step aside,” Botelho told BenitoLink. “The nodes have zero impact or conflict with that property.”
The District 2 supervisor said his grandfather owned part of what now is the Betabel RV Park about 40 years ago, and that the property where the proposed Betabel project would be located was leased to a farmer about 35 years ago. Botelho added that the sentimental value it has to him was the reason he worked hard on the C-3 rezoning to protect it.
Paolini also sent a letter to the county alleging that Botelho violated the Brown Act at an Oct. 8 meeting when he spoke about the nodes during the board announcements at the start of the meeting. The letter asserts that Botelho’s comments were political statements that were not agendized. PORC, a nonprofit organization opposed to the rezoning, said it was not present to “rebuff Supervisor Botelho’s erroneous statements.”
In her letter, Paolini requested “an unconditional commitment to cease, desist from, and not repeat the practices” from the county.
“Failure to do so will entitle Preserve Our Rural Communities to file an action for declaratory judgment and injunctive relief and for attorney’s fees and costs,” the letter reads.
In his Oct. 8 speech, Botelho called PORC “misguided” and said that they were “telling vicious lies to the public to get a signature.”
Botelho said his comments were not a violation of the Brown Act “by any stretch.” He said his speech was more about warning the public about “unscrupulous” people getting signatures for a referendum.
“Supervisors do have an obligation of reporting to the public on what’s the current state of affairs and events in the district,” Botelho said.
At the end of his Oct. 8 speech, Botelho requested a presentation from the San Benito County Elections Office on how much a referendum would cost the county.
Assistant County Clerk-Recorder Angela Curro told BenitoLink that ballot measure costs vary because the expenses are split among the local measures on the ballot. She said countywide ballot measures can cost between $200,000 and $500,000 to put before voters.
PORC President and spokesperson Andy Hsia-Coron said he was aware of the complaint, but was unable to comment on it since he had not reviewed it.
“I don’t like to speak unless I have seen the evidence and I haven’t seen it yet,” Hsia-Coron said, adding that all his focus has been on collecting signatures for the referendum (PORC handed over its signatures to the elections office earlier this week for review).
PORC later released a statement that said, “The complaints were not filed by PORC. However, we are very concerned about any potential conflicts of interests by officials involved in approving the Hwy 101 nodes. We will be reviewing the complaints in coming days. The complaints recently posted on social media were not authorized by PORC.”
In response to the complaint, Botelho said it is “just an effort trying to intimidate me by a handful of PORC people. I don’t believe it’s all PORC people, but it is for me to keep my mouth shut.”
Other related BenitoLink articles:
https://benitolink.com/supervisors-approve-rezoning-of-highway-101-nodes/