Councilwoman denied chance to rescind vote
By Sophia Fischer

She voted yes along with the rest of the Thousand Oaks City Council, but shortly afterward, Councilmember Claudia Bill-de la Pea changed her mind. Last week she asked the council to allow a new vote, but was turned down by a 3-2 vote. Only Councilmember Jacqui Irwin sided with Bill-de la Pea.

The council voted on May 9 to send a letter to Ventura County requesting reimbursement for county services subsidized by Thousand Oaks. Newspaper ads soon appeared in which Joe Gibson, a candidate for District 2 county supervisor, made negative statements about his opponent, Linda Parks. The ad included an endorsement from all of the city council members except Bill-de la Pea.

"I felt very uncomfortable with the timing, right before an election, to take such action," Bill-de la Pea said.

She supports working with the county to develop solutions to funding issues; but felt that the issue had been politicized-a campaign tactic to smear Parks.

"I believe this sort of request could have been done administratively," Bill-de la Pea said.

Both Mayor Dennis Gillette and City Manager Scott Mitnick denied that the timing of the request had anything to do with the June 6 election.

"I must confess I completely forgot that that election was taking place," Mitnick said. "It was not part of the thought process."

The timing had to do with the county budget hearings that were going on at the time, said Mayor Dennis Gillette. If the city had waited, it would have been too late.

"I resent that we did anything other than what we are tasked with-to look out for the assets and revenues of the residents of the city of Thousand Oaks," Gillette said.

In addition, he said that all five council members had expressed support for political candidates.

"I did not give up my right to express my opinion on who should run for office when I took this office," Gillette said.

Nothing new has happened that would give the council a reason to change its vote, said Councilmember Andy Fox.

"On May 9, this council, by unanimous vote, thought it was a good idea to send a letter and do what we could to protect city assets and . . . work with the county," Fox said. "There is no new information that would cause the council to revisit the issue."