.

4/21/17 – As it was made public two months ago, the Banning City council had unanimously found City manager Michael Rock to be in violation of his professional ethics, after it was discovered that he had attempted to manipulate Banning’s 2016 City council elections ( see previous article and announcement here).

Since then, further facts have come to light that suggest Rock may have been involved in other actions that could have violated his professional ethics.

.
.

COUNCILMEMBER DON PETERSON CALLS FOR SECOND INVESTIGATION

As a previous victim of City manager Rock’s previous actions, councilmember Don Peterson has made a call for a second investigation. Peterson describes three incidents, each of which – if confirmed – could constitute further ethics violations.

.

.
.

ATTEMPTED INSTALLATION OF A DEVELOPER PUPPET ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION ?

Peterson points to a Facebook exchange between former councilmember Bob Botts and School Board Trustee Jan Spann. After resigning from the City Council in 2013 under dubious circumstances, Botts became a paid lobbyist for developer Diversified Pacific, who just received approval for a controversial 3,400 home development in Banning, named Rancho San Gorgonio.

Spann has long been a cheerleader for anything that Diversified Pacific proposes in Banning, which makes her a natural candidate of choice for the developer.

On March 19, both Spann and Botts communicated on Facebook how to best go about Spann’s appointment to the Planning Commission. The post has since been deleted, but a screenshot was captured prior to deletion :

.

.

.

 

.

The post implies that Michael Rock has an active involvement in the appointment process, even though he is not an election official for the City. The post further names councilmembers Art (Welch), Debbie (Franklin), and George (Moyer) as the “go-to” politicians to secure Spann’s appointment. This only makes sense, as all of these three councilmembers have benefitted from campaign donations that can be traced back to Diversified Pacific or its affiliates.

The post implies that there may have been a concerted effort, maybe even a conspiracy, to rig the appointment process in favor of Spann.

.
.

ALLEGED ATTEMPT TO UNDERMINE THE 2016 ELECTION OF DANIELA ANDRADE

Peterson also points out that City manager Rock may have attempted to undermine the 2016 candidacy of councilmember Daniela Andrade.

An email by interim City Attorney John Cotti to Rock suggests that Rock was looking for reasons to disqualify Andrade, because her husband is currently a Banning School Board Trustee.

The full text of the email can be found by clicking here.

.

.

.

USE OF TAXPAYER RESOURCES TO FOMENT A LAWSUIT AGAINST THE BANNING INFORMER

Another disturbing email by Michael Rock suggests that he is trying to find reasons to bring a lawsuit against this publication, The Banning Informer.

In the email to the City Attorney (click here to view), Rock refers to The Banning Informer as an “illegitimate news service” and proceeds to ask for a legal opinion whether the content of this website constitutes “slander” against any councilmember or staff.

Rock further states that The Banning Informer appeared on the scene at the same time as Councilmembers Peterson and Miller were elected, suggesting the publication was created to support these councilmembers.

However, had Rock done his homework on the issue – instead of talking out of his ass – he would have realized that such a suggestion is beyond ridiculous. Both Miller and Peterson began to take office in January 2013, and a quick look at our website would have revealed that the The Banning Informer began publishing in October of 2009, over 3 years prior, and at a time when councilmember Peterson did not even live in Banning,

The offensive and derogatory remarks by Rock may have again violated his professional ethics, since taxpayer resources were used to further a personal vendetta against The Banning Informer, as well as the First Amendment and Freedom of the Press as a whole. To use public resources in such fashion may not only be unethical, but is also not authorized by law. Therefore, Rock’s actions may also violate criminal law, see CA Penal Code Sec, 424 (a), 2 PC.

.
.

CONCLUSION

The results of the first investigation showed that Michael Rock violated his professional ethics by involving himself in election manipulation, while “lacking credibility” in parts of his testimony he gave to the investigator (see pg. 7 of heavily redacted full report).

Now more issues are coming to light that raise even more questions about Michael Rock’s integrity. When will this menace finally be shown the door?

.

If you would like to comment or discuss this – or any other – article,  please visit us on FACEBOOK