Sheridan Fine Based on Technicality

I believe it is important to set the record straight in the matter of Petracca vs. Sheridan (“Irvine Mayor to Pay $2,000 Political Fine,” Aug. 17). Mayor Sally Anne Sheridan, my ex-wife, has respected Paul O. Brady Jr., city manager of Irvine, for many years. On a number of occasions over the past decade or more, I recall her comments commending him for his work as assistant city manager.

Her vote to appoint him as city manager was clearly not influenced by his utilization of the Sheridans as real estate advisers or agents, nor by whatever commission may have been paid her then future husband and shared with her.

Whether that business relationship should have been disclosed prior to the vote, or whether she should have disqualified herself as an ineligible voter, is another matter. But clearly the latter position would have posed a true ethical dilemma since she believed Mr. Brady to be the best person for the job. Thus, he deserved her vote and the city of Irvine deserved her vote, which clearly was based on knowledge of, and experience with, the candidate for city manager.

Although I do not know, I suspect all of this may have been known to Mark Petracca, and if so, his actions are clearly an attempt to catch Mayor Sheridan by a legal technicality rather than to see that a conflicted vote was brought to public attention. Furthermore, suggestions of impropriety and conflicts of interest at least indirectly implicate both parties. I cannot imagine Mr. Brady would select his real estate agents based upon a desire to influence a future vote (which I suspect may not even have been contemplated at that point in time).

While it is essential to the health of a democracy that dissident opinions be heard, I would much prefer a world in which we debated the real issues, not legal technicalities based on personality conflicts or a puerile desire for retribution.

RONALD B. MILLER

Anaheim Hills