General (10)
Susana Barrios
From:Better Anaheim <betteranaheim@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, July 11,
To:Public Comment
Subject:\[EXTERNAL\] Public Comment - JL Group Investigation
Warning: This email originated from outside the City of Anaheim. Do not click links or open
attachments unless you recognize the sender and are expecting the message.
This is a quote from the following OC Register article, regarding the JL Group Anaheim Corruption
Investigation Report currently being redacted due to privacy concerns prior to public release:
“Councilmember Natalie Rubalcava, who was elected in November, said she’s heard that one possible
recommendation could be how the city handles ticket transparency for events.”
This statement from Councilmember Rubalcava led us to question where exactly it was she “heard” about this
possible recommendation.
Better Anaheim contacted the Register who informed us that per notes from their interview with Rubalcava, the
Councilmember had stated she “heard” this information from individuals interviewed by the JL Group during
the investigation.
By openly discussing potential findings prior to public release with the OC Register, Councilmember Rubalcava
fails to abide by the same instruction she placed on the JL Group not to give information to the media. This
hypocritical “do as I say, not as I do” behavior by an elected official is ethically problematic for several reasons:
1)Because Rubalcava has engaged in attempted influencing of public opinion with poorly-timed, incoherent,
conflation arguments during public meetings while the investigation was still ongoing as reported by Better
Anaheim.
2)Because Rubalcava may have contributed to the creation of biased narratives based on incomplete
information as a result, potentially making it difficult for investigators to conduct their work objectively and
without undue pressure.
3)Rubalcava could have compromised the integrity of the process. Suspects or witnesses could have altered
their testimonies or behavior once becoming aware of details being discussed, potentially hindering the ability
of investigators to reach a fair and accurate conclusion.
4)Considering the steps currently being taken to ensure sensitive and private information about individuals
involved in the investigation is protected, it is now possible that Rubalcava discussing these interviews
prematurely could have created a breach of confidentiality and violation of the privacy rights of those involved.
The potential harm caused by Rubalcava discussing investigation interviews before findings are released, then
sharing hearsay interview information with the OC Register should be scrutinized further by both the Anaheim
City Council and the public, and steps should be taken to ensure that the principles of due process, fairness, and
privacy are being upheld before residents can even consider if the public release of the redacted JL Group
Investigation report constitutes a just and unbiased outcome.
1
https://www.ocregister.com/2023/07/01/independent-anaheim-corruption-investigation-due-monday-redacted-
version-will-take-weeks-to-be-released/
2