Recall Ordinance OKd, but Not Before Council Feathers Fly

THOUSAND OAKS — There was no clucking, in fact no barnyard sounds of any kind, when the City Council revisited Councilwoman Linda Parks’ proposed recall ordinance Tuesday night.

But the nasty, belligerent debate that took place before the council voted unanimously to approve Parks’ ordinance, which will require public disclosure within 24 hours of any contribution of $250 or more, clearly left some feathers flying.

Mayor Judy Lazar, Councilman Andy Fox and Councilwoman Elois Zeanah are all facing recall, and the subject has naturally come to dominate Thousand Oaks politics, with countless cloak-and-dagger accusations about the origin of the ouster campaigns.

“I’m going to vote for it, because I have nothing to hide behind the skirt of my campaign manager,” said Zeanah, clearly accusing Jill Lederer, a Domino’s pizza entrepreneur who managed Fox’s 1994 campaign and has given nearly $40,000 in loans to the group looking to oust Zeanah. Zeanah contends that Fox is behind her recall.

“I’m going to vote for it because I don’t make contributions or hide behind my husband,” countered Lazar, an obvious reference to a $500 loan Zeanah’s husband, James, made to the group looking to recall Fox and Lazar.

A proposal by Parks, who wanted to give City Clerk Nancy Dillon authority to ensure the new campaign reports would not allow contributors to hide behind a company name, was rejected.

“I’m getting a little leery that we’re doing this to see ‘what can I find out.’ You give the [state Fair Political Practices Commission] a question and they’ll go after it. Ask Scott Montgomery,” said Councilman Mike Markey, referring to the former Moorpark councilman who resigned from office because of conflict-of-interest charges.

Markey also said the ordinance could place an undue burden on the city clerk’s office, which will handle the resulting deluge of recall contributions paperwork.

But Dillon said she did not foresee much of a problem printing the contributions for the press and public.

Parks asked the council to consider publishing the list of contributors in a local newspaper to further inform residents, but Lazar objected, saying taxpayer money could be spent in better ways.

Fox then responded by proposing that any council member who makes a contribution publish the fact in the newspaper, a clear allusion to Zeanah, who has been spending her family’s money to defend herself. The proposal was rejected, but the council did agree to require all contributions by council members be disclosed within 24 hours.

After Fox, Lazar and Markey tabled her ordinance last month, Parks responded with a schoolyard chicken taunt. That did not amuse her council opponents, who accused her of juvenile, unprofessional behavior.

Parks later said the off-mike “bawk bawk bawk” remarks had been taken out of context, and were simply intended for the council, not the public.

In addition to revealing recall contributions of $250 or more within 24 hours, Parks’ ordinance will require that any recall-related advertisement include a disclosure statement identifying anyone whose overall contributions to that group totals $2,000 or more.

Parks initially sought to make that figure $6,000, but Fox and Markey questioned the motives, noting that Zeanah had contributed less than that amount to a group working to defend her from ouster, according to quarterly financial reports filed last week with the city clerk’s office.