ORANGE COUNTY PERSPECTIVE : Send Back the Legal Bill

No one could ever accuse former Costa Mesa City Councilman Orville Amburgey of lacking chutzpah. Having been accused of conflict of interest because of a vote he made while on the council, Amburgey now is asking the city to pay his legal bills. The City Council should refuse his request.

Amburgey, who was defeated last November after one term, gained a reputation for arrogance, seeming never to worry about whether his council votes appeared improper. At one point, for example, he voted in favor of a building project proposed by his son, saying he didn’t have a financial interest in his son’s business. While legal, the vote left a bad taste.

In the case now being litigated, the district attorney’s office is accusing Amburgey of voting on June 1, 1987, to amend the city’s franchise with Copley-Colony Cablevision of Costa Mesa Inc., even though his electrical firm had received more than $900 from the cable company during the preceding year. Amburgey and his attorney, Lawrence Harvey, argue that Amburgey acted within the scope of his responsibilities as a council member.

Voting is, indeed, the duty of a council member, but by what stretch of Amburgey’s imagination would such an obvious conflict be acceptable? The state Political Reform Act clearly requires public officials to abstain from votes that would affect any income source that provides them with more than $250 within 12 months of the vote.

Amburgey has maintained that the minutes of the council meeting in question--minutes that he voted to certify at the next meeting--were inaccurate, and that he didn’t actually vote on the cable franchise issue. But if wronged, he can pursue redress in the courts and pay his own legal bills.

The City Council last week delayed acting on Amburgey’s request. But at its next meeting, the council should refuse it. A councilman bears his own responsibility to avoid conflicts; it is difficult to imagine why the city would be obligated to pay for Amburgey’s defense.