HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Package - PB_Jul27_2026
Personnel Board
AGENDA
Monday, July 27, 2026, 1:00 p.m.
Council Hearing Room, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo
The Personnel Board holds in-person meetings. Attendees of City Council or Advisory Body meetings
are eligible to receive one hour of complimentary parking; restrictions apply, visit Parking for Public
Meetings for more details.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR PUBLIC COMMENT:
Public Comment prior to the meeting (must be received 3 hours in advance of the meeting):
Mail - Delivered by the U.S. Postal Service. Address letters to the City Clerk's Office at 990
Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California, 93401.
Email - Submit Public Comments via email to advisorybodies@slocity.org. In the body of your
email, please include the date of the meeting and the item number (if applicable). Emails will not
be read aloud during the meeting.
Voicemail - Call (805) 781-7164 and leave a voicemail. Please state and spell your name, the
agenda item number you are calling about, and leave your comment. Verbal comments must be
limited to 3 minutes. All voicemails will be forwarded to the members and saved as Agenda
Correspondence. Voicemails will not be played during the meeting.
*All correspondence will be archived and distributed to members, however, submissions received
after the deadline may not be processed until the following day.
Public Comment during the meeting:
Meetings are held in-person. To provide public comment during the meeting, you must be
present at the meeting location.
Electronic Visual Aid Presentation. To conform with the City's Network Access and Use Policy,
Chapter 1.3.8 of the Council Policies & Procedures Manual, members of the public who desire
to utilize electronic visual aids to supplement their oral presentation must provide display-ready
material to the City Clerk by 12:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Contact the City Clerk's
Office at cityclerk@slocity.org or (805) 781-7114.
Pages
1.CALL TO ORDER
Chair Calvin Stevens will call the Special Meeting of the Personnel Board to
order.
2.PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
The public is encouraged to submit comments on any subject within the
jurisdiction of the Personnel Board that does not appear on this agenda.
Although the Personnel Board will not take action on items presented during the
Public Comment Period, the Chair may direct staff to place an item on a future
agenda for discussion.
3.CONSENT
Matters appearing on the Consent Calendar are expected to be non-
controversial and will be acted upon at one time. A member of the public may
request the Personnel Board to pull an item for discussion. The public may
comment on any and all items on the Consent Agenda within the three-minute
time limit.
3.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - June 11, 2025 PERSONNEL
BOARD MINUTES
5
Consideration of the Personnel Board Minutes of June 11, 2025.
Recommendation:
Approve the Personnel Board Minutes of June 11, 2025.
4.BUSINESS ITEMS 9
4.a Vice Chairperson Election
Select a Vice Chairperson to serve a two-year term. Pursuant to the
bylaws, a Vice Chairperson will be elected at the first meeting of
alternate calendar years to serve two-year terms.
Recommendation:
To elect a Chairperson to serve a two-year term.
4.b Review of the Brown Act
Robert Schultz to provide the Personnel Board with a review of the
Brown Act.
4.c Overview of Personnel Board's Roles and Responsibilities
Nickole Domini, Robert Schultz, and Markie Kersten to provide the
Personnel Board with an overview of their roles and responsibilities.
4.d Review and Consider a Complaint and Request for a Censure Hearing
Review and consider a complaint and request for a Censure Hearing by
Councilmember Jan Marx against Mayor Erica A. Stewart in accordance
with Chapter 8 of the Council Policies and Procedures.
5.ADJOURNMENT
The Personnel Board meets as needed. The next meeting will be published 72
hours before the meeting date.
LISTENING ASSISTIVE DEVICES are available -- see the Clerk
The City of San Luis Obispo wishes to make all of its public meetings accessible
to the public. Upon request, this agenda will be made available in appropriate
alternative formats to persons with disabilities. Any person with a disability who
requires a modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting
should direct such request to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7114 at least
48 hours before the meeting, if possible. Telecommunications Device for the
Deaf (805) 781-7410.
Agenda related writings or documents provided to the Personnel Board are
available for public inspection on the City’s website:
https://www.slocity.org/government/mayor-and-city-council/agendas-and-
minutes. Meeting video recordings can be found on the City’s website:
https://opengov.slocity.org/WebLink/Browse.aspx?id=61073
Page 4 of 162
1
Personnel Board Minutes
June 11, 2025, 5:30 p.m.
Human Resources Conference Room, 994 Mill St., Suite 200 (2nd Floor), San
Luis Obispo
Administrative Review
Board Members
Present:
Jill LeMieux, Linda Mielke, Patricia Ponce, Sharon Seitz
Administrative Review
Board Members
Absent:
Calvin Stevens
City Staff Present: Diana Federico, Nickole Domini
_____________________________________________________________________
1. CALL TO ORDER
The Regular Meeting of the San Luis Obispo Personnel Board was called to
order on June 11, 2025 at 5:33 p.m. in the Human Resources Conference Room
at 994 Mill St., San Luis Obispo, by Vice Chair LeMieux.
2. PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Public Comment:
None
--End of Public Comment--
3. CONSENT
3.a CONSIDERATION OF MINUTES - DECEMBER 4, 2024, PERSONNEL
BOARD MINUTES
Motion By Sharon Seitz
Second By Linda Mielke
Approve the Personnel Board Minutes of December 4, 2024.
CARRIED
Page 5 of 162
2
4. BUSINESS ITEMS
4.a CHAIRPERSON ELECTIONS
Motion By Linda Mielke
Second By Sharon Seitz
To elect a Chairperson to serve a two-year term.
CARRIED
4.b REVIEW OF PERSONNEL BOARD BYLAWS
Motion By Linda Mielke
Second By Patricia Ponce
To revise and approve Personnel Board Bylaws as follows:
The officers shall be a Chairperson and a Vice-Chairperson, who shall be
elected at the same meeting every other calendar year to serve two-year
terms. To align future elections, the Vice-Chairperson elected in 2024 shall
serve a one-time term of three years, with the next election for both
officers occurring in 2027.
1. The Chairperson shall preside over all meetings of the Personnel
Board. The Chairperson shall direct the legal advisor to the Board
to invite or subpoena witnesses and require the production of
books, papers and any other materials pertinent to the investigation
or hearing.
2. The Vice-Chairperson shall serve in the absence of the
Chairperson.
3. The Director of Human Resources or their designee shall serve as
recording secretary, keeping record of all meetings, and shall issue
all necessary notices, copies of agendas, minutes and copies of
necessary documents.
CARRIED
5. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 5:52p.m. The next Regular Meeting of the
Personnel Board meeting will be held on an as needed basis. The public will be
notified at least 72 hours in advance.
Page 6 of 162
3
_________________________
APPROVED BY ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW BOARD: XX/XX/202X
Page 7 of 162
Page 8 of 162
Personnel Board Agenda Report Item 4d
Department: City Attorney
For Agenda of: 7/27/26
Placement: Business
Estimated Time: N/A
FROM: Markie Kersten, Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT: COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR CENSURE HEARING BY
COUNCILMEMBER JAN MARX REGARDING MAYOR ERICA A.
STEWART
RECOMMENDATION
Review and consider complaint and request for a censure hearing submitted by
Councilmember Jan Marx against Mayor Erica A. Stewart in accordance with Chapter 8
of the Council Policies and Procedures and either:
1. Direct the Chair of the Personnel Board, with support from the Assistant City
Attorney, to prepare an advisory opinion to the City Council as to whether there is
sufficient evidence to determine if the alleged violation of law or serious policy
violation occurred or not; or
2. Appoint an ad hoc committee to conduct further investigation and/or hearing on the
matter to gather facts and sufficient evidence to reach such conclusion , with
direction to the committee and staff regarding the scope and content of the
committee’s report to the full Board.
POLICY CONTEXT
According to Section 8.2.1 of the City of San Luis Obispo’s Censure Policy (the “Censure
Policy”):
“Censure is a formal Resolution of City Council reprimanding one of its own
members for specified conduct, generally a violation of law or of City policy where
the violation of policy is considered to be a serious offense. Censure should not
follow an occasional error in judgment, which occurs in good faith and is
unintentional. Censure carries no fine or suspension of the right of the member as
an elected official, but a censure is a punitive action that serves as a punishment
for wrongdoing.”
A copy of the City’s Censure Policy is included with this report as Attachment A.
DISCUSSION
Page 9 of 162
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR CENSURE HEARING REGARDING MAYOR ERICA A. STEWART Page 2
On July 13, 2026, Councilmember Jan Marx submitted to the Chair of the Personnel
Board, Calvin Stevens, a written complaint and request for censure hearing against Mayor
Erica A. Stewart in accordance with Chapter 8 of the City of San Luis Obispo’s Council
Policies and Procedures (the “Complaint”). Specifically, the Complaint alleges that Mayor
Stewart arguably violated California Penal Code Section 933.05(f)1 as well as City of San
Luis Obispo Code of Ethics Section II(D) (Use of Confidential Information)2 by sending a
confidential copy of the San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury Report “Round & Round with
Town & Gown” (the “Report”) to then Cal Poly Community Relations Director, Courtney
Kienow, prior to the Report’s public release. A copy of the Complaint with exhibits
provided by Councilmember Marx is included as Attachment B to this report. Digital copies
of the Complaint’s exhibits are provided here for legibility purposes. On July 23, 2026,
Mayor Stewart submitted a letter to the Personnel Board in response to the Complaint for
the Board’s consideration, which is included as Attachment C to this report per the
Mayor’s request.
Pursuant to Section 8.3 of the Censure Policy, “any member of the City Council may
submit, in writing to the Chair of the Personnel Board, a complaint and request for a
censure hearing concerning an alleged violation of law or serious violation of City policies
by another member.” Furthermore, as noted in Section 8.3.3 of the Censure Policy, within
thirty (30) business days of receipt of the Complaint, the Personnel Board shall review the
record and either: 1) issue an advisory opinion to the Council; or 2) conduct further
investigation and/or a hearing on the matter. Whether the Personnel Board proceeds with
option 1 or option 2, it is ultimately tasked with determination as to whether “there is
sufficient evidence to believe or not believe that the alleged violation of law or serious
violation of adopted City policy occurred.” If there is sufficient evidence of an alleged
violation of law or serious violation of adopted City policy, the Board shall recommend to
the Council to hold a censure hearing. Alternatively, if there is not sufficient evidence to
reach the conclusion that a violation has occurred, the Board shall recommend that a
Council censure hearing is unwarranted.
The purpose of this meeting (July 27, 2026) is for the Personnel Board to review the
Complaint and the exhibits submitted and determine if, collectively, there is sufficient
evidence currently in the record to allow the Board to conclude whether the alleged
violation of law or policy did or did not occur. If the Board concludes the evidence
presented is sufficient, the Board should provide input to staff to prepare an advisory
opinion for the Council (to be brought back to the Board for review and final consideration).
If the Board determines the evidence currently in the record is insufficient or requires
1 Section 933.05(f) of the California Penal Code provides: “A grand jury shall provide to the affected
agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days
prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or
governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of
the final report.”
2 Section II(D) of the City of San Luis Obispo’s Code of Ethics (Use of Confidential Information) provides:
“Employees should not disclose confidential information acquired by or available to them in the course of
their employment with the City or use such information for personal gain. This applies to improper
disclosure within the organization as well as to the pub lic.” A copy of the City’s Code of Ethics is attached
as Attachment C.
Page 10 of 162
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR CENSURE HEARING REGARDING MAYOR ERICA A. STEWART Page 3
further investigation, the Board may appoint an ad hoc committee to gather additional
information or to conduct additional investigation and/or hold a hearing to gather
additional evidence to enable it to reach such conclusion. (See Step 3 below; Censure
Policy Section 8.3.3.)
For the Board and the public’s awareness, the Council Censure Procedure as
detailed in the Censure Policy is summarized as follows:
Step 1: Any Councilmember may submit, in writing, to the Chair of the Personnel Board,
a complaint and request for censure hearing concerning an alleged violation of law or
serious violation of City policies by another member. The complaint must contain specific
factual allegations and any supporting evidence of specific conduct alleged to violate
existing law or adopted City policies. Here, the complaint and request for censure was
provided in writing to Chair of the Personnel Board on July 13, 2026.
Step 2: Provide a copy of the complaint to the accused Council member ASAP, but no
later than 72 hours prior to the Personnel Board meeting as required by Step 3 .
Step 3: Within 30 business days of receipt of the complaint (here, no later than August
24, 2026), the Personnel Board shall review the record and either:
1) issue an advisory opinion to the Council; or
2) conduct further investigation and/or hearing on the matter, and if so,
appoint an ad hoc committee to complete the necessary investigation
and make a written report of the investigation to the full Board. If
necessary, the Personnel Board and ad hoc committee shall be staffed
by the Assistant City Attorney and such other admin support staff as may
be necessary to assist.
Step 4: Upon completion of its review of the complaint and any additional investigation,
the ad hoc committee shall determine if, considering all the facts and evidence, there is
sufficient evidence to believe or not believe that the alleged violation of law or policy
occurred and prepare a written report of the investigation for the full Board. The full Board
could direct the ad hoc committee to also prepare a draft of the report required in Step 5
to be brought back to the Board for review and finalization .
Step 5: The Board shall then make a written report to the Council stating the specific law
or policy alleged to have been violated, and summarizing the complaint, evidence, and
results of any additional investigation. The Board shall also include a recommen dation to
the Council as to whether there is sufficient evidence that a violation of law or policy
occurred to warrant a censure hearing. Regardless of the recommended next step by the
Board, this report shall be provided to the entire Council, including the accused member.
Step 6: If the Personnel Board does not recommend a censure hearing, no further action
will be taken, unless a majority of the Council directs the matter to be placed on an
agenda.
Page 11 of 162
City of San Luis Obispo, Title, Subtitle
COMPLAINT AND REQUEST FOR CENSURE HEARING REGARDING MAYOR ERICA A. STEWART Page 4
Step 7: If the Personnel Board recommends a censure hearing, it shall be set by the Clerk
before the City Council at least 14 days, but no longer than 30 days, following the Board’s
recommendation.
Step 8: At the censure hearing, the subject member shall have an opportunity to make
an opening statement, a closing statement, and to question his or her accusers. The
hearing is not a formal adversarial hearing, and the Rules of Evidence do not apply.
Step 9: A City Council decision to censure requires the adoption of a Resolution making
findings, based on substantial evidence that the member has engaged in conduct that
constitutes a violation of law or a serious violation of an adopted City policy. The
Resolution must be affirmed by at least three votes of the Council.
ATTACHMENTS
A – City of San Luis Obispo’s Censure Policy
B – Councilmember Jan Marx’s Complaint and Request for Censure Hearing Against
Mayor Erica A. Stewart
C – Mayor Erica A. Stewart’s Letter to the Personnel Board, dated July 23, 2026
D – City of San Luis Obispo’s Code of Ethics
Page 12 of 162
Council Policies & Procedures Manual (rev. 05/05/2026) Page 54
CHAPTER EIGHT
COUNCIL CENSURE POLICY
8.1 PURPOSE OF CENSURE POLICY
In order to deter violations of law and serious violations of adopted City policies,
the City Council may take formal action against its members for such misconduct
in the form of censure.
8.2 DEFINITIONS
8.2.1 CENSURE
Censure is a formal Resolution of City Council reprimanding one of its own
members for specified conduct, generally a violation of law or of City policy
where the violation of policy is considered to be a serious offense. Censure
should not follow an occasional error in judgment, which occurs in good faith
and is unintentional. Censure carries no fine or suspension of the rights of
the member as an elected official, but a censure is a punitive action that
serves as a punishment for wrongdoing.
8.3 CENSURE PROCEDURE
8.3.1 Any member of the City Council may submit, in writing to the Chair of the
Personnel Board, a complaint and request for a censure hearing concerning
an alleged violation of law or serious violation of City policies by another
member.
8.3.2 Prior to any formal action by the City Council to censure a member, the
person against whom censure is sought is entitled to due process of law,
which requires notice and the opportunity to be heard and to refute the
evidence against him or her, by means of a censure hearing.
8.3.3 The complaint shall contain specific factual allegations and any supporting
evidence of specific conduct alleged to violate existing law or adopted City
policies. The Personnel Board within 30 business days shall review the
record and either (1) issue an advisory opinion to the Council; or (2) conduct
further investigation and/or a hearing on the matter.
8.3.4 A copy of the complaint and request for censure shall be provided to the
accused Council Member as soon as possible following receipt, but in no
event less than 72-hours prior to the meeting of the Personnel Board at
which the complaint and request for a censure hearing will be considered.
8.3.5 The Personnel Board shall consider whether additional investigation is
necessary and, if so, shall appoint an ad hoc committee to complete the
necessary investigation and make a written report of the investigation to the
full Board.
Page 13 of 162
Council Policies & Procedures Manual (rev. 05/05/2026) Page 55
8.3.6 The ad hoc committee will determine the process by which statements are
taken. Witnesses may choose to provide a signed declaration under penalty
of perjury attesting to his or her knowledge of the facts surrounding the
allegations. If a witness is unwilling to submit such a declaration, the Council
may issue a subpoena to compel the witness testimony before the
Personnel Board, consistent with its subpoena power granted under the City
Charter.
8.3.7 The Personnel Board and ad hoc committee, if necessary, shall be staffed
by the Assistant City Attorney and such other administrative support staff
as may be necessary to assist in its investigation and report to the Council.
8.3.8 Upon completion of its review of the complaint and any additional
investigation the committee shall determine if, considering all the facts and
evidence, there is sufficient evidence to believe or not believe that the
alleged violation of law or serious violation of adopted City policy occurred.
The Personnel Board shall make a written report to the Council stating the
specific law or policy alleged to have been violated, and summarizing the
complaint, evidence, and the results of any additional investigation. The
Board shall also make a recommendation to the Council that the complaint
is supported by sufficient evidence of a violation of law or serious violation
of adopted City policy to warrant a censure hearing, or, alternatively, that
the complaint is not supported by sufficient evidence of a violation of law or
serious violation of adopted City policy to warrant a Council censure
hearing.
8.3.9 If the Personnel Board determines that the allegations are supported by
sufficient evidence and a censure hearing is warranted, the City Clerk shall
be notified and shall set the matter for a public censure hearing before the
City Council; if the Personnel Board concludes that the allegations are not
supported by sufficient evidence and a censure hearing is not warranted,
the Board’s recommendation will be forwarded to the City Council and no
further action taken, unless the City Council directs, by a majority
consensus of the City Council during Council Communications, the matter
to be placed on its agenda for further consideration. In either case, a copy
of the final report shall be provided to the accused member at the same time
it is provided to the City Council.
8.3.10 If a public hearing is set before the City Council, it shall be at least 14 days
following the Personnel Board’s recommendation in order to give the
member subject to censure adequate time to review the allegations and
evidence against him or her and prepare a defense, but no longer than 30
days from the date of the Personnel Board’s recommendation.
Page 14 of 162
Council Policies & Procedures Manual (rev. 05/05/2026) Page 56
8.3.11 At the hearing, the subject member shall be given an opportunity to make
an opening statement, closing statement, and to question his or her
accusers. The hearing shall not be a formal adversarial hearing and the
Rules of Evidence shall not apply to the proceeding. The subject member
may choose to be represented and to designate his or her representative to
speak on his or her behalf.
8.3.12 A City Council decision to censure requires the adoption of a Resolution
making findings, based on substantial evidence that the member has
engaged in conduct that constitutes a violation of law or a serious violation
of an adopted City policy. The Resolution must be affirmed by at least three
affirmative votes of the Council. The accused Council Member shall not
participate in the City Council’s deliberations after the public hearing is
closed or in any vote by the City Council on the proposed censure.
Page 15 of 162
Page 16 of 162
Revised by Council Member Marx on 7/21/2026
Page 17 of 162
Page 18 of 162
Page 19 of 162
Page 20 of 162
Page 21 of 162
Page 22 of 162
Page 23 of 162
Page 24 of 162
Page 25 of 162
Page 26 of 162
Page 27 of 162
Page 28 of 162
Page 29 of 162
Page 30 of 162
Page 31 of 162
Page 32 of 162
Page 33 of 162
Page 34 of 162
Page 35 of 162
Page 36 of 162
Page 37 of 162
Page 38 of 162
Page 39 of 162
Page 40 of 162
Page 41 of 162
Page 42 of 162
Page 43 of 162
Page 44 of 162
Page 45 of 162
Page 46 of 162
Page 47 of 162
Page 48 of 162
Page 49 of 162
Page 50 of 162
Page 51 of 162
Page 52 of 162
Page 53 of 162
Page 54 of 162
Page 55 of 162
Page 56 of 162
Page 57 of 162
Page 58 of 162
Page 59 of 162
Page 60 of 162
Page 61 of 162
Page 62 of 162
Page 63 of 162
Page 64 of 162
Page 65 of 162
Page 66 of 162
Page 67 of 162
Page 68 of 162
Page 69 of 162
Page 70 of 162
Page 71 of 162
Page 72 of 162
Page 73 of 162
Page 74 of 162
Page 75 of 162
Page 76 of 162
Page 77 of 162
Page 78 of 162
Page 79 of 162
Page 80 of 162
Page 81 of 162
Page 82 of 162
Page 83 of 162
Page 84 of 162
Page 85 of 162
Page 86 of 162
Page 87 of 162
Page 88 of 162
Page 89 of 162
Page 90 of 162
Page 91 of 162
Page 92 of 162
Page 93 of 162
Page 94 of 162
Page 95 of 162
Page 96 of 162
Page 97 of 162
Page 98 of 162
Page 99 of 162
Page 100 of 162
Page 101 of 162
Page 102 of 162
Page 103 of 162
Page 104 of 162
Page 105 of 162
Page 106 of 162
Page 107 of 162
Page 108 of 162
Page 109 of 162
Page 110 of 162
Page 111 of 162
Page 112 of 162
Page 113 of 162
Page 114 of 162
Page 115 of 162
Page 116 of 162
Page 117 of 162
Page 118 of 162
Page 119 of 162
Page 120 of 162
Page 121 of 162
Page 122 of 162
Page 123 of 162
Page 124 of 162
Page 125 of 162
Page 126 of 162
Page 127 of 162
Page 128 of 162
Page 129 of 162
Page 130 of 162
Page 131 of 162
Page 132 of 162
Page 133 of 162
Page 134 of 162
July 22, 2026
To: Personnel Board
From: Erica A. Stewart
Re: Revised Complaint and Request for Censure
Dear Members of the Personnel Board,
Thank you for your time and diligence on this matter. I understand there has been a request for
my censure as Mayor from Councilmember Marx. I submit this statement to you to provide
additional information regarding the circumstances surrounding my sharing of the San Luis
Obispo County Civil Grand Jury's Town-Gown report with Cal Poly.
The role I serve as Mayor of San Luis Obispo is something I hold dear, and I understand it to be
a vital responsibility to the people of our town. It is in that spirit, and with full respect for this
process, that I ask the Board to consider the facts and circumstances set out below.
As you may know, there has been a long-standing tension between student behaviors in the
neighborhoods, the city’s housing and noise enforcement, and the university’s student discipline
and response to the community. The effort to improve outcomes has remained a joint effort of
the City of San Luis Obispo and Cal Poly for many years. Much has been accomplished to
lessen the harmful impacts, but much more needs to be done to improve the community's
quality of life.
Based on community reports of disruptive student behavior in the neighborhoods, the Grand
Jury investigated the challenges and struggles associated with Cal Poly that have long existed
in San Luis Obispo. Throughout the Grand Jury's investigation, both the City and Cal Poly
served as information contributors, helping the Grand Jury understand the issues that remain.
This was not a matter in which Cal Poly stood on the outside; the university was one of the two
primary stakeholders whose cooperation the report itself acknowledges, and whose participation
the report's recommendations depend upon.
With that background, I turn to the report and the terms on which I received it. The Grand Jury
distributed its completed report to me, titled Round & Round with Town & Gown, on June 13,
2025. The cover letter stated that its distribution was “two days in advance of its public release”.
I want to be candid with you about what the transmittal said. The Foreperson's letter set out the
text of Penal Code section 933.05(f), including both its requirement that the Grand Jury provide
the report to the affected agency two working days before release, and its direction that no
public agency “shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release.” I took this
request seriously.
Cal Poly had been fully involved in the collaborative effort to provide information to the Grand
Jury. They were clearly a stakeholder in the “Town-Gown” process. The Grand Jury described
the report as “completed” and said it was seeking feedback only on the conclusions it offered to
affect public policy going forward. If the facts in the report were in error, the identified feedback
Page 135 of 162
period was the preferred place to offer corrections from the affected agency or entity. With the
expectation that the City and University needed to provide feedback in two days, I cut through
the bureaucracy and connected with Courtney Kienow, who was the Cal Poly Community
Relations Director. She has been the direct contact between the University and the City since I
started on the council.
The legitimacy of my purpose and state of mind in sharing the report is made evident when, in
the text chain on June 13, the report is freely and openly offered. Courtney Kienow commented,
“Thank you so much for sharing it. I’d hope they’ll be sharing [it] with me soon too!”
In response to that observation, I texted:
“They may have only sent it to Geoff and then it will eventually get to you. who knows” (Please
note: “Geoff” was referring to Jeff Armstrong, President of the University.)
At the time on June 13, I believed the report was already distributed by the Grand Jury to Cal
Poly as a stakeholder and that my sharing of the report, when done, was to an approved and
authorized recipient who was a qualified “affected agency” or “entity” entirely entitled to the
report at the time. My good-faith understanding, in that moment, was that providing the report to
Cal Poly was not a disclosure to an outsider, but a sharing among those the statute itself
contemplates as entitled to review it, for the very purpose that brought it to me: to ensure the
accuracy of the findings before they became final.
The letter did not identify who else was receiving the report; it named its recipients only by those
general terms and, unlike many transmittals, listed no copied parties. Cal Poly is a central
subject of this report; its own pages record the Grand Jury's appreciation for Cal Poly's
cooperation, and I understood Cal Poly to fall within that class. There was no personal gain or
other purposes behind this train of thought. Providing the report would purely help the City and
University provide thorough feedback to the Grand Jury and, therefore, the public.
These facts matter because of the standard this Board applies. As you know, the Manual sets a
deliberately high bar for censure. Section 8.2.1 reserves censure for a violation of law or a
serious violation of adopted City policy, and it states expressly that censure “should not follow
an occasional error in judgment, which occurs in good faith and is unintentional.” Measured
against that standard, the complaint falls short in several respects.
As to the penal code, section 933.05(f) contemplates the pre-release distribution of a Grand
Jury report to affected agencies and entities for comment. Cal Poly had been fully engaged in
the collaborative work that informed this report and was plainly a stakeholder in the Town-Gown
issues it examined. Providing the report to Cal Poly, within the comment window and for the
purpose of ensuring accurate feedback, reflects a reasonable understanding of a report that the
statute permits to be shared with affected agencies and entities.
The complaint also invokes Section D of the City's Code of Ethics, concerning the use of
confidential information. That provision, by its terms, addresses the conduct of employees and
the disclosure or use of information “for personal gain.” There was no personal gain of any kind.
I shared the report to improve the accuracy of a public document. With respect, the provision
does not fit these facts.
In addition, I told the City Manager the day that I sent the report to Cal Poly. No concern was
raised at that time or otherwise. I was not hiding anything on that day or during the request for
Page 136 of 162
public records. The records request seeking my communications was made on March 23, 2026,
with a production deadline of April 2, 2026. I produced my records on March 24 and 25, 2026,
within two days of the request, and more than a week before the deadline. I withheld nothing.
I also recognize that the Grand Jury's April 2026 compliance report observed that Cal Poly's
receipt of an advance copy was “not in compliance with the procedure prescribed in the Penal
Code.” I want to be candid about how I understood that report at the time. It named no one and
made no finding about anyone's intent. Because I had shared the report in the good-faith belief
that Cal Poly was entitled to receive it. I did not believe this was related to me or the city and did
not think there was action needed. I did not perceive a violation to address, nor did the City
Manager or City Attorney. If my underlying assumption about Cal Poly's entitlement was
mistaken, it was a mistake of fact made in good faith, not a knowing violation.
I would also like to address a statement that I made in a public setting. On the Dave Congalton
radio program, I said that I did not believe I had violated the law and that I would make the same
decision again. Offered in a brief broadcast exchange, that was shorthand for the fuller
reasoning I have set out here: my understanding that Cal Poly, as an affected entity, was
entitled to review the advance copy, and my purpose of ensuring timely and accurate
consideration of the report during the comment period. It was not a statement of indifference to
confidentiality, and I would ask that it not be considered as one. I wish I had requested the time
to revisit my comment on the radio program, but did not think to make the request at that time.
I respectfully ask that the Board so find under Sections 8.3.8 and 8.3.9 of the Manual that my
decision to share the report, in the context in which it occurred, reflects a reasonable and
good-faith understanding of a report that the governing statute allows to be shared with affected
agencies and entities, a decision made in service of our community, the Grand Jury's process,
and Cal Poly. I sincerely apologize for my misunderstanding and distribution of the report.
I remain available to answer any questions you may have, and I thank you again for your care
and attention to this matter.
Respectfully submitted,
Erica A. Stewart
Page 137 of 162
Page 138 of 162
CODE OF ETHICS
“The measure of a man’s real character is
what he would do if knew he would never
be found out.”
Thomas Babington Macauly,
Historian
Page 139 of 162
CODE OF ETHICS
Contents
I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1
II. CODE OF ETHICS ............................................................................................................... 1
III. EXHIBITS ............................................................................................................................. 9
Exhibit A ............................................................................................................................... 9
Personnel Rules: Ethical Regulations, Municipal Code 2.36.380 ...................................... 9
Exhibit B ............................................................................................................................. 10
Personnel Rules: Outside Employment, Municipal Code 2.36.390 ................................. 10
Exhibit C ........................................................................................................................... 111
Anti-Discrimination and Unlawful Harassment Policy ...................................................... 11
Exhibit D ............................................................................................................................. 17
Drug-free Workplace Policy ............................................................................................ 17
Drug-free Workplace Notice to Employees ..................................................................... 18
Exhibit E ............................................................................................................................. 17
Ethical Standards Of Conduct ........................................................................................ 19
Overview ........................................................................................................................ 19
Standards Of Conduct .................................................................................................... 19
Prohibited Practices ........................................................................................................ 19
Responsibility ................................................................................................................. 20
Exhibit F ............................................................................................................................. 21
Travel Guidelines ........................................................................................................... 21
Overview ........................................................................................................................ 21
General Standards ......................................................................................................... 21
Page 140 of 162
- 1 -
I. INTRODUCTION
We, as officials and employees of the City of San Luis Obispo, whether elected,
appointed or employed, are guided by the following value statement:
"Ethical behavior is critical to this organization's ability to achieve its
mission, goals, and objectives. The community's perception
of and confidence in City employees and officials are
fundamental to quality government. As public servants, we
are accountable for high standards of conduct."
The Code of Ethics is an attempt to explain this value sta tement as it applies to our daily
activities as City employees. In using this Code, several factors should be considered:
A. The Code of Ethics is an official administrative policy.
B. The use of the term "employee" in this document is intended to apply t o all
employees and officials whether elected, appointed, or employed.
C. The Code of Ethics is not the only policy related to employee conduct. Some
conduct may be ethical without being efficient, safe, or practical. Therefore, the
Code of Ethics may not be the only standard to which an employee is held.
D. Existing law and policy already address many areas of ethical conduct. Attached
as Exhibits to this document are several of those additional laws and policies. (See
excerpts from the City's Personnel Regulations, Anti-Discrimination and Unlawful
Harassment Policy, Drug Free Workplace Policy, Purchasing Policy, and Travel
Guidelines.) The Code of Ethics is not intended to supersede these other sources
of guidance.
E. Not all conduct fits neatly under the Code of Ethics. The standards and examples
are designed to clearly guide conduct in common situations. Special
circumstances may not be easily resolved by simply referring to the Code of Ethics.
Your supervisor, department head, or the Human Resources Department can
provide specific interpretation if necessary.
II. CODE OF ETHICS
A. General Rule with Respect to Conflicts-of-Interest. As a general rule,
employees should not engage in or hold any direct or indirect interest in any business or
transaction which may conflict with their official duties. This includes any obligations (real
or perceived) which may impair their independence of judgment in the discharge of their
Page 141 of 162
- 2 -
duties. Furthermore, employees should not engage in conduct which could reasonably
give rise to the appearance of wrong-doing.
B. Actions and Conduct Designed to Build Public Confidence. Employees
should be impartial and dedicated to the best interests of the City. They should conduct
themselves, both inside and outside the City's service, so as not to cause distrust of their
impartiality or of their dedication to the City's best interests.
Perceived conflicts are actions of an employee that the public may consider preferential
service or a lack of neutrality in dealing with department clientele.
Employees should avoid perceived conflicts of interest.
Examples: The Code Enforcement Officer should not offer to do code compliance
checks for his/her bowling partner.
A department head should not provide exceptional notification to a friend who has a
project being reviewed by the department.
Planners should not coach their friends on how to critique a City project at a public
hearing.
C. Acceptance of Favors and Gratuities. Employees should not accept money or
other consideration or favors from anyone other than the City for an act which they would
be required or expected to perform in the regular course of their duties nor should
employees accept any gifts, gratuities, including meals, or favors of any kind from
individuals or firms doing business or proposing to do business with the City if,
considering all the circumstances involved in a given situation, acceptance of said gifts,
gratuities or favors would give the impression that possible preference or special privilege
is being sought or given.
1. Individual employees should not accept gifts from department clientele. Gifts are
objects or services that have a material value.
Example: Individual employees should not accept gifts such as candy, flowers, food or
liquor from people who deal with their department.
2. The department or division may accept small gifts when they can be consumed at
the work place, are in keeping with the occasion and are made available to all personnel.
Examples: The department could accept a box of candy at Christmas.
The Fire Department could accept cake, fruit or candy from a citizen thanking the
personnel for their response to a medical emergency (alcoholic gifts cannot
be accepted because they cannot be consumed on the job or in the work
place.)
3. Employees should not accept services from department clientele in return for
providing exceptional levels of service.
Page 142 of 162
II. Code of Ethics
- 3 -
Example: The Assistant CAO should not accept preferential seating at a
local concert in return for rapidly processing a permit for the activity.
4. Employees should not attend events or functions paid for by department clientele
unless the event is of a public nature.
Example: It is all right to attend a grand opening lunch sponsored by a client if City
Council, the press, or the general public is invited.
5. When in doubt, thank the person for the kind thought and explain that it is
department policy not to accept gifts.
Example: "It was kind of you to offer me a discount at your business-- but it is our
department's policy not to accept gifts. And it really was not necessary. We
are here to provide the service."
D. Use of Confidential Information. Employees should not disclose confidential
information acquired by or available to them in the course of their employment with the
City or use such information for personal gain. This applies to improper disclosure within
the organization as well as to the public.
Examples: A records clerk should not discuss a police report with friends.
A planner should not disclose or use information obtained in discussion with a developer
except as pertinent to the public review of a project.
The accounting manager should not disclose payroll information to another City
employee or to the public unless complying with a lawful request for such
information.
E. Use of City Employment and Facilities for Private Gain. Employees should not
use, for private gain or advantage, their City time or the City's facilities, equipment or
supplies, nor should they use or attempt to use their position to secure unwarranted
privileges or exemptions for themselves or others.
Page 143 of 162
II. Code of Ethics
- 4 -
1. Employees may not be given priority use of City facilities and programs unless it is
an explicit perquisite of employment (e.g., provided for by an employee group's MOA or
an individual employee's contract).
Example: Employees may not be assigned a preferential tee-off time at the Municipal
Golf Course. They may be assigned parking spaces according to
established policy or practice.
2. Employees should not use heavy equipment for purposes unrelated to their official
duties. Employees may be allowed limited use of office equipment or hand tools during
off-duty hours for non-business purposes provided it does not conflict with any City use
or represent a direct cost to the City and is done with supervisor approval. Equipment
should not be taken out of City facilities for non-City purposes. All equipment used away
from the City work place for City business must be authorized. Employees on 24 -hour
duty may use office and other light equipment during their assigned recreational periods
with departmental approval.
Examples: A treatment plant operator should not use his City vehicle to transport
firewood on the weekend.
An employee may type a personal letter on his or her lunch break.
Employees may use City copiers to make a few copies if they pay for
the copies.
Employees may use City phones for limited personal calls and they must pay for the
phone charges.
3. In general, employees should use lunch time to do personal business, m ake phone
calls and run errands. However, limited personal business may be conducted during
normal working hours if it is approved, in advance, if the time involved is made up and if
it does not detract from job performance.
Example: During breaks, an employee could make arrangements for some upcoming
auto maintenance, provided the time for making the arrangements is short,
does not detract from official duties and any phone charges are paid.
4. With supervisor approval, employees may take, for personal use, discarded or
unnecessary materials that would otherwise be wasted. Employees may purchase
surplus equipment like the general public if they have not been involved in the decision
to declare it surplus.
Page 144 of 162
II. Code of Ethics
- 5 -
Examples: A secretary may take used computer paper for personal scratch
paper.
A secretary should not take an old stapler even if it is of no use to the department. Old
equipment should be declared surplus.
An employee may purchase surplus equipment, but an employee who was
involved in the decision to surplus the equipment should not.
F. Contracts with the City. City officers and employees cannot be involved, in any
way, with any contract or sale in which they have a financial interest. Government Code
Section 1090 expressly prohibits such involvement, and a violation of this statute can be
punishable as a felony. (See Government Code Section 1097.) This means that an
employee shall not exercise any discretionary powers for, nor make any
recommendations on behalf of or to the City or any City Department with respect to any
contract or sale involving the City if that employee is directly or indirectly financially
interested in the contract or sale. If you have questions about this issue, you should
consult with the City Attorney.
G. Outside Employment. Employees should not engage in outside employment or
business activities which involve such hours of work or physical effort that it would or
could be reasonably expected to reduce the quality or quantity of such person's services
to the City. Employees should not be engaged in any outside employment which involves
the performance by them of any work which will come before them as officers or
employees of the City, or under their supervision, for approval or inspection. Employees
should not accept employment that is in conflict with provisions of Government Code
Section 87000 (Conflict of Interest). Before accepting outside employment, an employee
must review and comply with City Personnel Regulation 2.36.390, which is attached to
this document as Exhibit B.
1. With approval of the CAO and Department Head, employees may be employed or
conduct business outside City employment consistent with the limitations above.
Examples: With approval, an engineering technician could draw maps for
developers who only work outside the City.
A building inspector could work for sponsors of projects in Paso Robles.
An accounting assistant could do the bookkeeping for a store in Paso
Robles.
The planners can file a zone change application for a friend in Morro Bay.
Page 145 of 162
II. Code of Ethics
- 6 -
A firefighter could service commercial fire extinguishers, but not within the
City.
A secretary could work as a sales clerk at a retail store located in the City of San Luis
Obispo.
2. Employees should not make decisions nor participate in decisions affecting
projects sponsored in whole or in part by people or companies they have contracted or
subcontracted with. Employees should not make decisions or participate in decisions
concerning projects sponsored (in whole or in part) by people they have worked for within
the past 12 months, are currently working for, or anticipate working for in the future.
Examples: Fire inspectors should not inspect projects when they have
worked for the project's owner, developer, primary contractor or
subcontractors within the past 12 months.
The Engineers should not accept an assignment for reviewing a project (any type of
discretionary review including counter counseling) when they are working
for the project's sponsor, owner, developer, real estate broker or contractors
in any capacity.
Building inspectors should not inspect the work of people that they have previously hired
as contractors or subcontractors for their own outside projects.
H. Personal Investments. Employees should not make personal investments which
could be expected to create a substantial conflict between their private interests and the
public interests. If an employee has a financial interest in a matter coming before him, or
before the department in which he is employed, he should disqualify himself from any
participation in the matter.
1. Employees should not make decisions or participate in decisions affecting projects
that may affect (either positively or adversely) their personal property.
Example: Planners or building officials should not critique or inspect construction
projects that are in close proximity to their residences.
2. Conflicts of interest, as defined by state law and presented below, focus on public
decision making and measurable "financial interests." Government Code Section 87100
states the following:
"No public official [which includes many City employees] shall make,
participate in making or in any way attempt to use his official
Page 146 of 162
II. Code of Ethics
- 7 -
position to influence a governmental decision in which he
knows or has reason to know he has a financial interest."
Government Code Section 87103 further defines "financial interest" as follows:
"An official has a financial interest within the meaning of
Section 87100 if it is reasonably foreseeable that the decision
will have a material financial effect, distinguishable from its
effect on the public generally, on the official or his or her
immediate family, or on:
"a. Any business entity in which the official has a direct or indirect investment
worth $1,000 or more;
"b. Any real property in which the official has a direct or indirect interest worth
$1,000 or more;
"c. Any source of income of at least $250 received or promised within 12 months
prior to the decision;
"d. Any business entity in which the public official is a director, officer, partner,
trustee, employee, or holds any management position;
"e. Any donor of or any intermediary or agent for a donor of, a gift or gifts
aggregating $250 or more received or promised within 12 months
prior to the decision."
3. Employees should not participate in decisions that may significantly affect relatives or
close personal friends.
Example: A planner should not review a subdivision proposal sponsored by her uncle.
I. Behavior in the Workplace. Employees are responsible for conducting themselves
professionally and lawfully in the workplace. Employees are expected to be aware of and
conduct themselves in accordance with the following policies of the City of San Luis
Obispo:
1. Anti-Discrimination and Unlawful Harassment Policy (see Exhibit C).
2. Drug Free Workplace Policy (see Exhibit D).
3. Purchasing Policy Ethics (see Exhibit E).
4. Travel Guidelines (see Exhibit F).
Page 147 of 162
II. Code of Ethics
- 8 -
J. Responsibility. Ethical behavior, consistent with the foregoing Value Statement
and Code of Ethics, is the responsibility of each employee. Moreover, each employee is
responsible for reporting ethical violations committed by fellow employees to a supervisor,
department head, or the Human Resources Department. Any employee who violates this
Code of Ethics will be subject to disciplinary action in accordance with the City Personnel
Regulations. If you have any questions about the appropriateness of an action, you
should consult with your supervisor, department head or the Human Resources
Department or the City Attorney.
Page 148 of 162
- 9 -
III. EXHIBITS
Exhibit A
Personnel Rules: Ethical Regulations, Municipal Code 2.36.380
2.36.380 Employee responsibilities benefits - Code of ethics.
A. An official or employee of the city shall not engage in conduct which would tend to
discredit or dishonor his/her position with the city. Such elected or appointed officials and
employees must avoid conflicts of private interests with public duties and responsibilities
and shall not do indirectly what may not be done directly.
B. Disciplinary action generally does not follow an occasional error in judgment which
occurs in good faith and is unintentional. However, misconduct, dishonesty and fraud
shall be the basis for severe disciplinary action, including removal for cause.
C. Officials and employees occupying designated positions are required to file an
annual statement of financial interests with the city clerk as prescribed by the Conflict of
Interest Code as adopted by the city.
D. Each new employee must be informed of the obligation to submit a statement of
financial interests if he/she falls within the listed designated position categories.
E. Any employee whose job performance is adversely affected by the taking of
alcohol, drugs, or other stimulants shall be subject to disciplinary action.
F. Each employee is required to be familiar with city standards and statutory
provisions relating to ethical and other standards of conduct. Each employee is expec ted
to secure the advice of his/her superior or the personnel director or other appropriate
officials, when in doubt about the meaning or application of any conduct requirement
applying to his/her particular situation.
G. The political activities of city employees shall conform to pertinent provisions of
state and federal laws. (Prior code § 2708.1)
Page 149 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 10 -
Exhibit B
Personnel Rules: Outside Employment, Municipal Code 2.36.390
2.36.390 Employee responsibilities and benefits - Outside employment.
A. City employees filling line-item positions may engage in part-time or occasional outside
employment outside of their regular working hours if such employment is approved in
advance by the city administrative officer or delegated representative, or in the case of
council appointees, by the council. The city administrative officer may establish a
minimum time period worked on such outside employment and a minimum number of
hours of outside work per week before requiring advance written approval.
B. “Incompatible employment” includes, but is not limited to:
1. Work which tends to impair mental or physical capacity to perform city duties
efficiently and effectively;
2. Work which takes the employee’s time and attention during his/her official
working hours;
3. Activities which create a conflict of responsibility or duty between the employee’s
city work responsibility and the proposed outside employment. This includes
work, which would, by its nature, tend to reduce the ability of the employee to
exercise completely independent and unfettered judgment with respect to
effectively discharging city work responsibility;
4. Employment in another city department for full-time city employees.
C. Any employee who engages in employment outside regular working hours shall be
subject to perform regular city duties first. (Prior code § 2708.2)
Page 150 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 11 -
Exhibit C
Anti-Discrimination and Unlawful Harassment Policy
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
ANTI-DISCRIMINATION AND UNLAWFUL HARASSMENT POLICY
All covered individuals are encouraged to report any conduct that is believed to violate
this policy as soon as possible. It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo that al l
employees should be able to enjoy a work environment free from all forms of
discrimination, including unlawful harassment. In accordance with Federal regulations
requiring employers to adopt clear policies prohibiting harassment and discrimination in
employment, the City Council has adopted the policy statement set forth in full below:
Policy:
It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo that employees have a working
environment free of unlawful discrimination and harassment. Discrimination against or
harassment of an employee, job applicant, contractor, advisory body member, elected
or appointed official or a member of the public by an employee, job applicant,
contractor, advisory body member, elected or appointed official or member of the public
on the basis of race, religion, sex (including gender, gender identity, gender expression,
transgender, pregnancy and breastfeeding), national origin, ancestry, disability, medical
condition, genetic characteristics or information, marital status, age (40 years and
older), or sexual orientation (including homosexuality, bisexuality, or heterosexuality),
military or veteran status, denial of family and medical care leave or any other protected
category as defined below, is strictly prohibited and will not be tolerated. The work
environment should be business-like and assure fair, courteous treatment for
employees and the public we serve. Discrimination and harassment may violate both
State and Federal law, but conduct need not arise to the level of violation of law to
violate this Policy. This type of employee misconduct could decrease work productivity,
undermine the integrity of employment relationships, decrease morale and cause
severe emotional and physical stress.
All employees will be informed of the harassment and discrimination complaint process
and be assured of their right to file complaints without fear of reprisal. All employees are
strongly encouraged to attend, and supervisors shall attend training every two ye ars
regarding behavior that constitutes prohibited workplace harassment and discrimination.
In addition, employees appointed as a new hire or promoted from a non -supervisory
position to a supervisory position will be trained within 6 months of the appointm ent- or
promotion. Employees should also understand the importance of reporting incidents
promptly to assure that further incidents do not occur.
Page 151 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 12 -
Department Heads will convey to their employees strong disapproval of discrimination
and harassment. All employees, including supervisors and managers, should be clearly
informed regarding behavior that constitutes prohibited harassment or discrimination or
creates the perception of harassment or discrimination and the consequences of such
actions, including disciplinary action. Employees also should be aware that ignoring
harassment or discrimination complaints is also grounds for disciplinary action.
Retaliation against a person for filing or otherwise making a harassment or
discrimination complaint in good faith, or other good faith involvement in a harassment
or discrimination investigation, is prohibited. Employees found to be retaliating against
another employee shall be subject to disciplinary action.
Definition:
A. Protected Category: includes race, religion, color, sex (including gender, gender
identity, gender expression, transgender, pregnancy and breastfeeding), sexual
orientation (including heterosexuality, homosexuality, and bisexuality), national
origin, ancestry, citizenship status, marital status, pregnancy, age (40 years and
older), medical condition, genetic characteristics or information, physical or
mental disability, military or veteran status, or denial of family and medical care
leave.
B. Covered Individuals: This Policy prohibits the employer, employees, job
applicants, contractors, advisory body members, elected or appointed officials or
members of the public from harassing or discriminating against employees, job
applicants, contractors, advisory body members, elected or appointed offic ials or
members of the public because of: 1) an individual’s protected category or
characteristic; 2) the perception that an individual is a member of a protected
category or has a protected characteristic; or 3) the individual associates with a
person who has or is perceived to have a protected category.
C. Discrimination: Treating covered individuals differently because of the
individual’s protected category as defined in this Policy.
D. Harassment may include, but is not limited to, the following types of behavior that
is taken because of a person’s protected category. Note that harassment is not
limited to conduct that employees take. Under certain circumstances,
harassment can also include conduct taken by those who are not employees,
such as persons providing services under contracts or even members of the
public:
♦ Speech, such as epithets, derogatory comments or slurs, and propositioning
on the basis of a protected category. This includes, without limitation,
inappropriate comments on appearance, including dress or physical features,
or dress consistent with gender identification and race -oriented stories or
jokes.
♦ Physical acts, such as assault, impeding or blocking movement, offensive
touching, or any physical interference with normal work or movement when
directed at an individual on the basis of a protected category. This includes
Page 152 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 13 -
pinching, grabbing, patting, propositioning, leering, or making explicit or
implied threats or promises in return for submission to physical acts.
♦ Visual acts, such as derogatory posters, cartoons, drawings, pictures,
emails, text messages, or other electronic means of communication related
to a protected category.
♦ Unwanted sexual advances, requests for sexual favors and other acts of a
sexual nature, where submission is made a term or condition of employment,
where submission to or rejection of the conduct is used as the basis for
employment decisions, or where the conduct is intended to or actually does
unreasonably interfere with an individual’s work performance or create an
intimidating, hostile, or offensive working environment.
♦ Adverse employment actions carried out on account of a protected
category.
♦ Adverse employment actions carried out in retaliation for good faith
submission of harassment or discrimination charges, or good faith
participation in an investigation made pursuant to this policy.
E. Retaliation: Any adverse conduct taken because an employee, job applicant,
contractor, advisory body member, elected or appointed official o r member of the
public has reported harassment or discrimination, or has participated in the
complaint and investigation process described herein, is prohibited. “Adverse
conduct” includes but is not limited to: taking sides because an individual has
reported harassment or discrimination, spreading rumors about a complainant or
investigation participant, shunning and avoiding an individual who reports
harassment or discrimination, or real or implied threats of intimidation to prevent an
individual from reporting harassment or discrimination. The following individuals
are protected from retaliation: those who make good faith reports of harassment or
discrimination or who participates in the complaint or investigation process, and
those who associate with an individual who is involved in reporting harassment or
discrimination or who participates in the complaint or investigation process.
Complaint Procedure:
A. Any employee, job applicant, contractor, advisory body member, elected or
appointed official, or member of the public who feels he/she has been the victim
of harassment or discrimination as defined above should contact, either verbally
or in writing, any of the following. (There is no need to follow the chain of
command):
1. Immediate supervisor;
2. Any supervisor or manager within or outside of the department;
3. Department Head; or
Page 153 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 14 -
4. Director of Human Resources.
The initial complaint can be verbal or written, but a written and signed complaint
should be submitted by the complaining employee within five (5) working days of
the initial complaint so an investigation can begin promptly. The written complaint
should include as much detail a possible, such as name s of those involved,
witnesses, nature of the problem as well as the desired resolution.
The City discourages anonymous complaints, because anonymity may
compromise the City’s ability to conduct a thorough investigation. However, any
covered individual who is uncomfortable disclosing his or her identity may file a
complaint anonymously.
B. Any supervisor or department head who receives a complaint should notify the
Director of Human Resources immediately, unless the Director is the subject of
the complaint in which case the department head should notify the City Manager
or City Attorney immediately. The Director of Human Resources will advise the
City Manager of the receipt of all harassment or discrimination complaints.
C. Upon receipt of the written complaint, the Department of Human Resources, or
other authority receiving notice, will conduct (or refer to others to conduct) an
investigation of the charges, including contacting the person who allegedly
engaged in the prohibited behavior, informing him/her of the basis of the
complaint, and providing him/her an opportunity to respond. The Department of
Human Resources may attempt an informal resolution of the complaint. If the
complaint is incomplete or contains insufficient information to conduct an
investigation, the Department of Human Resources will ask for more information
from the claimant, or find that the claim is unfounded.
D. All City employees must cooperate fully, and be truthful and forthright when
providing information in response to a City investigation under this policy.
E. The Department of Human Resources, , or other authority receiving notice, shall
notify the complainant(s) and respondent(s), Department Head, the City
Manager, and other appropriate persons, regarding the disposition of complaints
made pursuant to this policy. If discipline is imposed, the level of discipline will
not be communicated to the complainant.
F. Every possible effort will be made to assure the confidentiality of complaints
made under this Policy. Complete confidentiality cannot occur, however, due to
the need to fully investigate and the duty to take effective remedial action. As a
result, confidentiality will be maintained to the extent possible. An individual who
is interviewed during the course of an investigation is prohibited from discussing
the substance of the interview, except as otherwise directed by a supervisor or
the Human Resources Director. Any individual who discusses the content of an
investigatory interview will be subject to discipline or other appropriate sanction.
Page 154 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 15 -
The employer will not disclose a completed investigation report e xcept as it
deems necessary to support a disciplinary action, to take remedial action, to
defend itself in adversarial proceedings, or to comply with the law or court order.
G. Regardless of whether a formal complaint is submitted, the City will take a
proactive approach to potential Policy violations and will conduct an investigation
if its officers, supervisors, or managers become aware that harassment,
discrimination, or retaliation may be occurring.
H. Option to Report to Outside Administrative Agencies: An individual has the
option to report harassment, discrimination, or retaliation to the U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) or the California Department of
Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH). These administrative agencies offer
legal remedies and a complaint process. The nearest offices are listed in the
government section of the telephone book or employees can check the posters
that are located on City bulletin boards for office locations and telephone
numbers.
Remedial Action:
1. If harassment or discrimination is found to have occurred in violation of this
policy, the City shall take action to ensure or confirm that the harassment or
discrimination at issue is stopped. The City may take whatever measures are
appropriate to ensure its workplaces remain free of unlawful discrimination or
harassment.
2. Employees found to have engaged in discrimination or harassment covered by
this policy may be subject to disciplinary action up to and including termination of
employment. The severity of the discipline will be determined by the severity
and/or frequency of the offense.
3. Employees found to have been dishonest or uncooperative during an
investigation made pursuant to this policy may be subject to disciplinary action up
to and including termination of employment.
Appeal:
1. Disciplinary action taken under this procedure may be appealed with or without
representation subject to appeal or grievance procedures indicated in the
appropriate Memorandum of Agreement or Personnel Rules and Regulations.
2. If the employee who submitted the complaint is not satisfied with the disposition
of the investigation, he or she may submit an appeal to the City Manager within
Page 155 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 16 -
ten (10) calendar days from receipt of the conclusion of the Director of Human
Resources, , or other authority. The appeal shall be in writing, verified under
penalty of perjury, and contain an explanation why the complainant believes the
pending disposition is incorrect. Failure to appeal within the ten day period
means that the earlier disposition is final. The City Manager (or his/her designee)
shall respond in writing after considering the appeal.
3. Complainants may appeal the City Manager’s disposition of the investigation to
the Personnel Board within ten (10) calendar days from receipt of the conclusion
of the City Manager (or his/her designee). Failure to appeal within the ten day
period means that the City Manager’s disposition is final.
Dissemination of Policy:
This policy shall be disseminated to all City employees. The City may require
employees to sign an acknowledgment of the policy’s receipt, which may be
maintained in the employee’s personnel file.
Page 156 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 17 -
Exhibit D
Drug Free Workplace Policy
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE POLICY
PURPOSE
It is the policy of the City of San Luis Obispo to maintain a safe, healthful and productive
work environment for all employees. To that end, the City will act to eliminate the unlawful
use of drugs and other controlled substances including, but not limited to, alcohol and
prescription drugs, which could impair an employee’s ability to safely and effectively
perform the functions of his/her job an/or threaten the safety of co -workers. All City
employees, regardless of their employment status (i.e. regular, temporary, contract, etc.),
are subject to this policy.
POLICY
1. Employees are expected and required to report to work in appropriate mental and
physical condition to perform their jobs. The unlawful manufacture, distribution,
dispensation, possession or use of drugs or other controlled substances, including
alcohol, on City premises or while conducting City business off premises is absolutely
prohibited.
2. The City will establish a drug-free awareness program to inform employees about:
a. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace;
b. The City’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace;
c. Available drug counseling, rehabilitation and employee assistance programs; and
d. The penalties that may be imposed on employees for drug abuse violations.
3. This policy is intended to assure that no employee with an alcohol or drug problem will
have his or her job security or promotional opportunities jeopardized by a request for
help.
4. Employees will, as a condition of employment, abide by the terms of this policy and
notify the City, within five (5) days, of any criminal drug statute conviction which he/she
receives for a violation occurring in the workplace.
5. The City shall notify any appropriate federal granting agency of any criminal
convictions of an employee for illegal drug activity in the workplace within 10 days of
the City’s notification of such conviction.
Page 157 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 18 -
Otherwise, the individual’s rights to confidentiality and privacy are recognized. The
pertinent information and records of employees with an alcohol or drug problem will
be preserved in the same manner as all other confidential records.
6. The City shall initiate action after receiving notice of conviction of an employee which
may result in required participation in a treatment program and/or progressive
discipline, up to and including termination.
7. The City shall make a good faith effort to continue maintaining a drug -free workplace
through implementation of this policy.
8. Implementation of this policy will not require or result in any special regulations,
privileges, or exemptions from the standard administrative practices applicable to job
performance requirements.
DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE NOTICE TO EMPLOYEES
All employees are hereby notified that it is a violation of the City of San Luis Obispo's
Drug-Free Workplace Policy for any employee at the workplace to unlawfully
manufacture, distribute, dispense, possess or use any narcotic drug, hallucinogenic drug,
amphetamine, barbiturate, marijuana or other controlled substance including, but not
limited to, alcohol and prescription drugs, as defined in the Drug-Free Workplace Act of
1988. Violations of this policy by employees may result in discipline, up to and including
termination.
"Workplace" is defined as any place where City work is performed, including a City
building or site, or any City-owned vehicle.
As an employee, you will, as a condition of employment, abide by the terms of this policy
and notify the City, within five (5) days, of any criminal drug statute conviction which you
receive for a violation occurring in the workplace.
The following are among the drug counseling, rehabilitation and/or other agency
assistance programs available locally:
City of San Luis Obispo Employee Assistance Program (800) 227-1060
San Luis Obispo County Drug Program (805) 781-4753
San Luis Obispo County Alcohol Services (805) 781-4275
Narcotics Anonymous (805) 549-7730
Alcoholics Anonymous (805) 541-3211
Page 158 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 19 -
Exhibit E
Excerpt from Purchasing Guidelines
Section 205
ETHICAL STANDARDS OF CONDUCT
OVERVIEW
The purpose of this policy is to set forth the ethical standards of professional behavior
expected of all officials and employees conducting purchasing activities on behalf of the
City.
STANDARDS OF CONDUCT
Any employee or official engaging in purchasing activities on behalf of the City is
required to employ the following standards of conduct:
▪ Consider, first, the interests of the City in all transactions.
▪ Carry-out the established policies of the City.
▪ Buy without prejudice, seeking to obtain the maximum value for each expenditure
of public funds.
▪ Subscribe to and work for honesty and truth in buying and selling, and to
denounce all forms and manifestations of commercial bribery.
▪ Cooperate with all organizations and individuals engaged in activities designed to
enhance the development of purchasing practices.
▪ Respect obligations to others, and require the same respect from others for their
obligations.
PROHIBITED PRACTICES
The following practices are specifically prohibited in performing purchasing activities on
behalf of the City:
▪ Having a financial or personal beneficial interest (directly or indirectly) in any
contract or purchase order for supplies, equipment, services, or projects
furnished to the City.
Page 159 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 20 -
▪ Accepting or receiving (directly or indirectly) from any person, firm, or corporation
to whom any contract or purchase order may be awarded (by rebate, gift or
otherwise) any money or anything of value, or any promise, obligation or contract
for future reward or compensation. Inexpensive advertising items bearing the
name of the firm—such as pens, pencils, paperweights or calendars—are not
considered articles of value or gifts in relation to this policy.
▪ Using information available to officials and employees, solely because of their
City position, for personal profit, gain, or advantage.
▪ Directly or indirectly furnishing services or information not available to all
prospective bidders to any person or firm bidding on, or who may reasonably be
expected to bid on, a contract with the City.
▪ Providing confidential information to persons to whom issuance of such
information has not been authorized.
▪ Using a position or status in the City to solicit (directly or indirectly) business of any
kind; or to purchase products at special discounts or upon special concessions for
personal private use from any person or firm who sells or solicits sales to the City.
▪ Serving the interests of any organization (either as an officer, employee, member
of the board of directors, or in any capacity for consideration) which transacts or
attempts to transact business with the City for profit when such employee holds a
City position of review or control—even though remote—over such business
transactions.
RESPONSIBILITY
▪ Employee. Each employee is responsible for following these practices.
Violation of this policy may result in disciplinary action, termination of
employment, or criminal prosecution.
▪ Department Heads. Department heads are responsible for ensuring that all
employees of their department who conduct purchasing activities possess a
thorough understanding of the above standards of ethical conduct and prohibited
practices.
Page 160 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 21 -
Exhibit F
Excerpt from Travel Guidelines
Section 301
TRAVEL GUIDELINES
OVERVIEW
These guidelines establish the basic policies and procedures for travel on City business
by all employees and officials. Everyone who travels on City business —or supervises
someone who travels—is responsible for knowing and following these guidelines. These
guidelines are organized into seven sections:
▪ General standards
▪ Planning an official trip
▪ Submitting travel authorizations and cash advance requests
▪ Making the trip
▪ Incurring non-travel expenses
▪ Accounting for expenses
▪ Completing travel authorizations/expense reports
The key document in the administrative process is the Travel Authorization/Expense
Report (TA). Besides ensuring that travel by City employees and officials is conducted in
accordance with adopted policies, the TA summarizes the total cost of attending
conferences, meetings, and seminars and provides documentation for cash advances and
vendor payments. General instructions for completing and processing this form are also
included in these guidelines.
GENERAL STANDARDS
These guidelines do not require you to take a bus, stay in a cheap motel, or eat only in
fast food restaurants. A bus or a train may cost less than a plane, but the added time
away from work can make these slower options more expensive to the City overall . The
meal allowances established in these guidelines allow you to eat in moderately priced
restaurants.
In all areas, not just economy, you are responsible for exercising good judgment in
requesting, arranging and making a trip. It should be thoroughly planned, well in advance.
Personal business should not be mixed with official business if it will cost the City anything
in dollars or lost time, or if it will harm the City's interests in any way.
Page 161 of 162
III. Exhibits
- 22 -
These guidelines are not intended to address every issue, exception or contingency that
may arise in the course of City travel. Accordingly, the basic standard that should always
prevail is to exercise good judgment in the use and stewardship of the City's resources.
Page 162 of 162