City Council blasts Conlosh for latest flier statements

Torus Tammer

FOUNTAIN VALLEY -- Councilman Chuck Conlosh took a verbal beating from

his council colleagues Tuesday for material printed in his latest

campaign flier -- information that states the city hired an attorney who

was on probation for a felony at the time of a trial.

“As mayor, I have an obligation to comment on this situation,” Mayor

Guy Carrozzo said at the regular council meeting. “I have tried to stay

out of it, but have been pulled into it.”

He went on to explain the city’s procedure for selecting a trial

attorney.

“The city belongs to California Joint Powers Insurance authority, a

group of 84 cities that have joined together to provide a self-insurance

pool,” Carrozzo said. “Just like any other insurance company, they

provide attorneys on a case-by-case basis and choose, retain and pay for

those attorneys without approval or input from the city.”

Carrozzo, who called Conlosh’s claims “demeaning” and “degrading,”

added that the attorney assigned to the case in question was one of the

most successful trial attorneys in the insurance authority group, having

the highest rating for legal ability and professionalism given by the

independent rating service of Martindale-Hubble.

Councilman John Collins asked Conlosh to name the trial attorney from

his flier, but Conlosh declined to do so.

Conlosh said it was an inappropriate time or place for that discussion

but told the other council members it was not City Atty. Alan Burns.

Councilwoman Laurann Cook asked Conlosh how he obtained documentation

regarding the attorney’s probation record.

“It’s a matter of public record,” Conlosh said. “I’m sure the city

attorney knows how to pull public records.”

The mayor criticized Conlosh, who sat stone-faced throughout these

comments, saying information in his flier about how long three council

members have served was inaccurate. The flier, which does not state who

the council members are, was distributed to residents last weekend.

“Three current council members have been serving for more than 12

years according to Chuck,” Carrozzo said. “This coming November, we, two

of us, will be completing our 10th year. Where do these facts come from?”

Conlosh, who did not comment through most of the evening, responded to

Carrozzo by acknowledging his blunder.

“If I misstated that you have been on council for 12 years, then I apologize,” he said.

However, that didn’t stop the remaining council members from firing

off their own barrage of questions and opinions.

Councilman Larry Crandall, who is up for reelection with Conlosh next

month, accused his colleague of being uninformed and suggested he pay

more attention to his agenda and to council meetings.

Carrozzo said the criticism was not an attempt to “gang up” on anyone

but merely an “attempt to set the record straight.”

After the meeting, Conlosh said he understands his colleagues have

opinions that differ from his own, but he also added that he was upset

about his colleagues’ reactions to his own investigations.

“I don’t see how anybody could be upset about information that one of

the attorneys representing the city was on criminal probation and me

trying to hold such outside employees to the same standard as our police

officers and firefighters,” he said.