Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Trees Ethics topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents press council over tree removals, ethics and alleged conflicts during heated public comment session
Summary
Dozens of residents urged the council to protect Uptown trees, demanded a code of ethics and raised allegations about a pending FPPC investigation into Mayor Vinatieri; the public comment period occupied a large portion of the Feb. 24 meeting.
A prolonged public comment session at the Whittier City Council meeting on Feb. 24 featured competing appeals over tree removals in Uptown Whittier, calls for a formal code of ethics and multiple allegations that election‑period conduct and municipal appointments merit review.
Connie McCormick, identifying herself as a 30‑year Whittier resident and former Los Angeles County registrar‑recorder, told the council a statewide investigation by the California Fair Political Practices Commission is active against Mayor Vinatieri and cited case number 2024‑00927. "The chief of the FPPC's enforcement division found sufficient videotaped evidence substantiating the sworn complaint against mayor Vinatieri to open an investigation on 09/10/2024," McCormick said. No city response to that claim was recorded during the public comment period.
Multiple speakers urged the council to retain ordinance ZCA 24‑03 relating to short‑term rentals on the consent calendar and to vote to protect properties in high‑fire zones. One commenter who identified a petition in opposition to tree removals said, "Over... 8,000 petitioners don't wanna see [the trees] cut down," describing the petition at two different points as about 8,000 signatures and later as 8,148.
Other commenters raised broader complaints about council conduct, alleging Brown Act violations, suppression of public protest, and inappropriate behavior by appointed commissioners. One public commenter described an alleged confrontation with a councilmember and said the council had enacted ordinances that "silence us" during public comment. Several speakers called for a comprehensive code of ethics and conduct for elected officials and appointed board and commission members.
Council members did not take formal action on the allegations during the meeting. The public comment period concluded after 26 speakers (23 in person and three on Zoom) addressed the council; the clerk closed the comment period and the meeting proceeded to staff reports and the consent calendar vote.
What happens next: several speakers asked staff to complete ongoing investigations and to post meeting materials and HRC (Historic Resources Commission) progress reports; the council did not schedule immediate follow‑up actions on the allegations reported during public comment.
