Gallo wants McElhaney to publicly address ethics allegations against her

Councilmember Noel Gallo wants Council
President Lynette Gibson McElhaney to
address newpaper’s allegations against her.

OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL | At least one member of the Oakland City Council is willing to speak publicly on the multiple controversies surrounding council President Lynette Gibson McElhaney detailed recently in a series of investigative reports in the Express.

At the start of a special meeting on Thursday afternoon, Councilmember Noel Gallo attempted to schedule an agenda item in early March that would require Gibson McElhaney to answer to the ethical and legal issues raised in the Express reports.

In fact, Gallo said in an interview that his first inclination was to schedule the item using the city’s censure policy, which he introduced in December 2013 following hearings earlier that year involving alleged violations by Councilmembers Desley Brooks and Larry Reid of the city’s non-interference laws.

Council President Lynette Gibson McElhaney

The City Attorney’s Office, however, told Gallo that his requested agenda item had to be noticed 48 hours beforehand and needed to include a list of allegations against Gibson McElhaney.

Instead, Gallo suggested during Thursday’s meeting that the city council schedule a closed session agenda item allowing for Gibson McElhaney to address the Express report that she used her personal nonprofit to flip homes in Oakland despite her own calls for limiting gentrification.

Another article revealed the first term councilmember appears to have used a developer contracted with the city for the sprawling Coliseum City project to combat a proposed housing development next to her home. However, the City Attorney’s Office said that a council closed-door discussion of the Express reports would violate the Brown Act — the state’s open meetings law.

“All I wanted is for Lynette to come before the council and explain what’s going on — that’s all,” Gallo said. However, when Gallo broached the subject on Thursday during a council meeting, Gibson McElhaney momentarily left her seat at the dais.

If one councilmember breaks the public’s trust, it reflects not only on that person, but on the entire council, said Gallo. However, he does not believe any of his colleagues currently have an appetite for dealing with the issue. “So, for me to sit there silent, and, I’ve given them plenty of time to come forward. I’ve checked with my colleagues and it’s not going to happen so that’s why I brought it forward.”

Gallo said he has an issue primarily with the Express report that Gibson McElhaney used her city staff to interfere with the details of the housing project proposed in her neighborhood. He took umbrage with comments made by the architect in the article who suggested he had donated his time to help Gibson McElhaney because he believed in the cause.

“That’s BS,” said Gallo. “Why doesn’t he do my house, too? You can’t do that. I represent the public’s trust. Is there a conflict of interest? If you look at the policy, it is very clear that you can’t interfere with staff.”

Incidentally, Gallo was the only member of the council to vote against Gibson McElhaney’s appointment last month to become council president. Brooks abstained. At the time, he expressed concern over some of the earlier Express reports on her, while also questioning her lack of experience. Gallo, instead, nominated Reid for the post, but Reid declined.


4 thoughts on “Gallo wants McElhaney to publicly address ethics allegations against her

  1. By MW:

    Those who believe McElhany has defective ethics are probably wrong, since I doubt she actually has any ethics.

    However since this is the Bay area, in other words the world's number one capital for politicians who are phonies, demagogues, charlatans, parasites, crooks, scam artists, big sleazy windbags, and blood sucking leeches but who pretend to be great liberals and wonderful humanitarians, therefore if it can be proven that she is totally lacking in ethics, then we should promote her to a higher ranking, higher paying, and bigger and more powerful job, and such as to represent the East Bay in Congress or perhaps even to be a US Senator.


  2. Schaaf and Kaplan are much better Brooks and McElhaney. At least they haven't been charged with corruption in the papers. Gallo's no prince himself.


  3. Many of Oakland's corrupt pols are indeed lawyers. Most of whom have practiced law only very briefly. Brooks, Kaplan, Schaaf.

    As liars they all have an abundance of experience, however.


  4. By MW:

    I suspect we should be ashamed of Lynette McElhaney. In other words it seems she might be a phony, weasel, embezzler, sleazy scoundrel, pathological liar, and in general an all around crook, and yet I believe she is not even a lawyer.

    In other words if it should eventually be proven that she is all those things I have just mentioned, then I am going to report her to the California State Bar for “practicing law without a license,” and which by the way is not only a felony but also basically unethical, since she would be unfairly stealing business from lawyers.

    More specifically, if someone wants to be a world class parasite, thief,, embezzler, money launderer, parasite, professional pathological liar, and all around scumbag, the “proper” procedure is to first go to law school and then take and pass the CSB's exam so as to be licensed as a lawyer. Then all of the criminal activities you engage in are generally allowed and considered to be “legal” and “proper.”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s