ORANGE COUNTY PERSPECTIVE : Who Should Foot Bill in Brea?

The Brea City Council should not have agreed to pay $20,000 in legal expenses for Councilman Wayne D. Wedin, who will go to trial Thursday on five misdemeanor conflict-of-interest charges.

The trial, of course, could result in a not guilty verdict. But the expenditure of city funds gives an appearance that Brea is willing to provide a public safety net for someone who may have violated government ethics codes.

The district attorney has accused Wedin of violating the state’s Political Reform Act by helping Keith Cos. of Costa Mesa win a $320,000 city contract while he was working for the company as a consultant.

Wedin is also accused of failing to disclose $37,562 in income from Keith Cos. in his 1990 statement of economic interest.

Under state law, government agencies are authorized to pay an employee’s legal bills if he or she is accused of a violation committed in the performance of official duties. An agency must determine whether the person acted without malice and whether what the person was accused of was done in the best interest of the agency.

Although Wedin clearly was acting in an official capacity, he was walking an ethical tightrope. He lobbied for Keith Cos. in opposing a recommendation of the city planning staff in favor of other firms. The City Council is hardly in a position to know now whether malice was involved or whether he acted in the city’s interest. The council made a stab at such a determination and then voted 3 to 0 to grant Wedin’s request for the funds. But only a court can decide whether he broke the law.

Mayor Burnie Dunlap, who was one of three voting to pay the $20,000 bill, conceded that it was difficult for the council members not to picture themselves unfairly accused of a conflict of interest--as they believe Wedin has been--and thus in need of similar support from the city.

But the council should have been mindful that its action could be perceived as obligating taxpayers to pay legal expenses for someone whose actions might be proven to be not in the city’s best interest.