News Stories Of Interest To Residents of Southern California
For news stories of interest from 2007, see below and here.
1. Ex-official teams up with ex-city attorney in lawsuit, December 9, 2007
2. Measure D back in spotlight; Lawyers: Proposal would allow Internet tax, December 8, 2007
3. As city's legal fees rise, confusion persists; Rosemead reviews law firms' contracts, November 26, 2007
4. City's views on new Wal-Mart improve, November 25, 2007
5. Pasadena women top area municipal pay list, November 12, 2007
6. Cities reconsider 30-day impounding of cars, November 1, 2007
7. Council OKs newsletter; Some say timing helps incumbents, October 31, 2007
8. Report: Release of pay stubs an error, October 19, 2007
9. Lawsuit alleges city is hostile, October 14, 2007
10. Council votes to report member, October 11, 2007
11. City attorney clarifies letter's intent; Carvalho says she didn't ask Claremont blog be shut down, October 10, 2007
12. Report: Workers in hostile setting; Councilman calling for expanded inquiry, October 9, 2007
13. City wants blog pulled; Officials ask Google to terminate Claremont Insider, October 4, 2007
14. Mario's Tow Truck Troubles; A state senator comes to the aid of a pal facing legal and political problems in Bell Gardens. But at what cost?, October 4, 2007
15. Lynwood voters oust mayor, three city council members, September 27, 2007
16. Justice in Lynwood; Voters move forward with election City Hall tried to block, September 27, 2007
17. Attorney fees remain high; Rosemead looking to trim spiraling costs, September 22, 2007
18. Council shoots down motion, September 21, 2007
19. U.S., Walnut reach settlement deal in voting rights lawsuit, September 21, 2007
20. Lynwood Residents Accuse Willoughby of Malpractice and Misrepresentation, September 20, 2007
21. Blog's pay stub post protected?; Expert says city employee information is public record, September 14, 2007
22. Claremont consider legal action in pay-stub leak, September 13, 2007
23. Council accused of Brown Act violation; The city attorney's office denies any wrongdoing, September 12, 2007
24. City disables access to online archive, September 12, 2007
25. Conflict of interest in school deal?, September 9, 2007
26. City looks into leak of pay stub, September 8, 2007
27. Huge legal fees dog attorney; Cities fired Garcia over bill excesses, September 4, 2007
28. Rosemead puts cap on legal fees; Move comes after city billed $100,000 in 3 months, September 4, 2007
29. Council district proposal fails; West Covina petition rejected by city, judge, August 30, 2007
30. Rosemead council puts cap on attorney fees, August 29, 2007
31. Recall election a go in Montebello, August 24, 2007
32. A political issue, August 19, 2007
33. Council decides on law firm, August 15, 2007
34. Power struggle over project; Firefighters oppose development plans, August 13, 2007
35. Attorney's bills prompt review, August 10, 2007
36. Council districts on ballot, August 8, 2007
37. Hawthorne councilman indicted in conflict case, July 27, 2007
38. Harrassment suit against Nunez fuels arguments, July 23, 2007
39. Beltran removed as city attorney, July 19, 2007
40. Judge Orders Lynwood Recall Election Forward, July 19, 2007
41. Rosemead council delays decision on law firm, July 19, 2007
42. DA won't charge Hernandez, July 3, 2007
43. Lynwood defies order to hold recall vote; The council strips the city clerk of her duties when she tries to certify petitions. And it refuses to set an election date. A judge gets the case today, July 3, 2007
44. Rosemead may seek second attorney, June 26, 2007
2
45. Developers contribute to council members, June 24, 2007
46. Glendora ordered to pay attorney's fees; Resident Aguirre won Public Records Act lawsuit, June 22, 2007
47. Bell Gardens councilman accused of conflict in backing city contract; Mario Beltran allegedly helped a towing firm linked to a friend get a $5-million job, June 22, 2007
+
48. Ex-city official to be arraigned; Thrasher faces perjury, interest conflict counts, June 17, 2007
49. DA again rejects filing charges in dispute over campaign signs, June 9, 2007
50. Recall efforts in Montebello persist; Signatures collected to oust 3 council members, June 6, 2007
For more news stories of interest from 2007, see here.
For news stories of interest from 2006, click here.
For news stories of interest from 2005 and before, click here.
For news stories of interest from 2001 and before click here.
Ex-official teams up with ex-city attorney in lawsuit
By Dan Abendschein, Staff Writer
MONTEBELLO - An official forced to resign by the City Council in 2006 is being represented by the former city attorney in a lawsuit against the city, a councilman and two former council members.
Ruben Lopez, the former community development director, is suing for breach of contract, defamation, invasion of privacy and infliction of emotional distress.
He is being represented by Arnold Alvarez-Glasman, the former Montebello city attorney who was ousted in a 3-2 vote by two of three council members he is suing on Lopez's behalf.
Lopez signed an agreement with the city when he left, stating that officials cannot "criticize, discredit, or otherwise disparage" him. He filed a legal complaint with the city in February saying council members and officials made "false and damaging statements" to the press and others.
Lopez requested $12 million as compensation for breach of the contract. The council rejected his complaint.
"The suit does not have merit," said Bob Bagwell, a former councilman named in the lawsuit.
Phone calls to Lopez and Alvarez-Glasman for comment were not returned.
Alvarez-Glasman is city attorney for several San Gabriel Valley cities, including West Covina and Pomona.
Lopez agreed to step down in July 2006 under threat of being voted out by a three-council-member majority of Bagwell, Jeff Siccama and Norma Lopez-Reid.
Siccama said Lopez was too attached to development projects that were not bringing in any tax revenue, and the city wanted to go in a new direction. He said both Glasman and Lopez were out to get the city.
"I think they want to get in their shots at the city," Siccama said.
Bagwell and Lopez-Reid lost their seats in November's election. Siccama is facing a recall election later this month.
All three were linked to the dismissal of Lopez, the head city administrator, and the fire chief. They were also accused of trying to scrap the Fire Department in order to bring in county fire services.
Alvarez-Glasman, who served on the Montebello City Council from 1985 to 1997, had his contract terminated by the city in 2005 by a three-member majority that included Bagwell and Lopez-Reid.
Bagwell said Alvarez-Glasman was too connected to developers, some of whom Lopez was initiating development deals with.
Bagwell and Lopez-Reid were joined by Councilman Bill Molinari in voting Alvarez-Glasman out.
Molinari later spoke out against the city pressuring Lopez to resign and opposed Siccama, Lopez-Reid and Bagwell when they voted to terminate the contracts of the city administrator and fire chief.
Bagwell said he never was entirely clear why Molinari voted against Alvarez-Glasman.
"I was surprised we got Molinari's vote," said Bagwell. "I think he and Alvarez-Glasman are back on the same page now."
Molinari said he did not have concerns about Alvarez-Glasman, but felt the alternate law firm "better fit the city's needs." He did not offer specific reasons.
As part of his severance package Lopez received 12 months of pay, benefits and accrued retirement benefits, according to city documents.
Patricia Macht, a spokeswoman for the state's Cal PERS public-employee retirement system, said that while she was not familiar with Lopez's agreement and could not comment on it, city employees are not generally allowed to continue to accrue retirement benefits after they leave.
"Severance packages are not meant to be used as a way to keep people on the payroll to accrue benefits," Macht said.
She said it was possible that Lopez might not be able to collect retirement benefits for the 12 months after his dismissal from the city.
The city has not been served with the lawsuit yet, officials said, so for now there are no court dates set.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, December 9, 2007
Measure D back in spotlight
Lawyers: Proposal would allow Internet tax
By Kenneth Todd Ruiz, Staff Writer
PASADENA - Approving Measure D would allow City Hall to enact an Internet-access tax at a future time without a vote of the people, according to the legal team that wrote the ballot measure.
Seeking to challenge "misleading" ballot statements filed by Measure D opponents, the law firm of Colantuono & Levin filed a motion in court Friday arguing the City Council-endorsed ballot measure would "allow," not "force," a tax on Internet access.
"Our basic point is Measure D authorizes an Internet tax, but it doesn't require it," Colantuono said in a telephone interview.
The measure is designed that way, he said, because technological strides might render telephone use unrecognizable in time.
"If you make it very clear that you're not taxing Internet access, you may limit your ability to tax what you and I consider telephone use when that migrates onto the Web," he said.
City officials insisted Friday that Pasadena will not tax Internet access without a vote.
Colantuono's office wrote Measure D and has also filed a lawsuit on behalf of City Clerk Jane Rodriguez challenging ballot statements made by blogger Wayne Lusvardi.
On Friday morning, Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Dzintra Janavs ruled that the city's legal action can go forward on an expedited schedule. Arguments will be heard Dec. 17.
Defending Lusvardi will be the first case for longtime schools critic Rene Amy, who was sworn in as a lawyer Tuesday.
"This is a clear and blatant attempt by the city to chill political discourse and punish those who don't speak the same way and use the same words City Hall wants everyone to use," Amy said of the city's legal challenge.
That Measure D includes a legal framework for an Internet-access tax seems to contradict weeks of statements by city officials that the measure would only maintain the status quo on the telephone portion of the city's 60-year-old Utility User Tax.
Most recently, proponents repeated that assertion in their rebuttal argument:
"Measure D deals only with continuing the current UUT on telephone service. It does not tax Internet access - now or in the future."
Several council members, including Mayor Bill Bogaard, were surprised Friday to hear Measure D could allow an Internet-access tax, saying it fit neither their understanding nor intent.
"We're not taxing the Internet, and we've made that clear," said Councilwoman Margaret McAustin. "We introduced an ordinance confirming it's not an Internet tax and the Internet will not be taxed in Pasadena."
Despite what Measure D may technically enable, the council's intent is affirmed by a companion ordinance approved last week to prohibit an Internet-access tax without a vote of the people, Bogaard said.
A future council would be unable to overturn that ordinance, he added.
Lusvardi called on Measure D proponents to change their ballot statements.
Citizens for Responsible Government "demands that the Pasadena City Clerk initiate litigation by Monday's deadline to strike from the mayor's ballot argument his false statement that Measure D does not tax Internet access," he said in a statement.
Working closely with Lusvardi and Amy is political consultant Martin Truitt.
Among its objections, the suit brought by Rodriguez disputes that language in Measure D would "force" the city to enact the tax should the federal moratorium on any Internet tax expire.
Officials will ask the judge to change the wording from "force" to "allow" or "permit" a tax on Internet access, according to court documents.
The Measure D language in question, Colantuono said, is designed to give city officials the option to expand the tax without having to hold another election.
"What this paragraph is intended to do is allow the city to shrink its tax, if federal and state law ever allows it to, and allow the city to expand its tax, if federal and state law allows it to, without having to go back to the voters," Colantuono said.
Kris Vosburgh, executive director of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association, said the interests of taxpayers are rarely in the thoughts of staffers at City Hall, who depend on public funds.
"I wasn't outraged that they'd be asking for an Internet tax but that they're not being honest about it," he said. "If this tax continuation looks more benign by denying there is any impact on the Internet, they're not likely to rush to correct the record."
If the public feels the city has misrepresented the City Council-approved ballot measure, he said people should want to know what their elected officials knew and when.
"Ultimately, the public can only hold the elected officials accountable because they are the ones that take advice from city staff and are responsible for hiring the lawyers," Vosburgh said.
The spectre of an Internet tax helped defeat a similar measure in Covina in the spring and could have implications for other cities.
Colantuono has written similar language into utility tax ballot measures throughout the state, including Los Angeles.
Voters in many more cities, however, have passed such utility tax measures.
Utility taxes are levied in more than 100 cities and four counties in California.
Pasadena Star News, December 8, 2007
As city's legal fees rise, confusion persists
Rosemead reviews law firms' contracts
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - The decision to hire two law firms for municipal work is proving costly and confusing, city officials said.
The law firm Garcia, Calderon and Ruiz was hired in April to take over as the city's and redevelopment agency's attorney. But half of the firm's work was taken away in September when Burke, Williams and Sorensen was hired to represent the redevelopment agency.
City officials said the move would help reduce attorney's fees. But since then, attorney's bills are higher than in past years, and officials can't agree on how to divvy up the responsibilities.
"As of today, there still needs to be more clarification," Mayor John Tran said.
Confusion remains on whether Garcia's firm will be representing the Planning Commission or if that duty should be passed on to Burke, Williams and Sorensen. The City Council on Tuesday requested to review both firms' contracts and to discuss it at a future meeting.
The Planning Commission handles issues related to land use, and Burke, Williams and Sorensen was hired to represent the city on those matters. But Garcia's firm is still representing the commission.
Councilwoman Margaret Clark is concerned the city is being overcharged by Garcia's firm.
City Attorney Bonifacio Garcia has charged the city nearly $164,000 for five months of work, including an August bill for $17,622, and a May bill for $56,440.
Burke, Williams and Sorensen charged $5,612 for the month of September.
"I've been disappointed in the billing and the performance," Clark said referring to Garcia's firm.
In the meantime, the city is also paying its former law firm, Wallin, Cress, Reisman and Kranitz, for several cases it is handling. During six months, the firm has charged nearly $30,000, including $1,862 a month for health insurance.
City Manager Oliver Chi said the council has addressed ways to control Garcia's attorney's fees, and they are beginning to see the effects now.
"We are at a better place today at our legal costs than several months ago," he said.
Garcia's high bills prompted the city to place a cap on his contract, limiting him to $30,000 a month.
"I am satisfied with the type of work and legal advice that his firm has provided," Tran said.
Rosemead has budgeted legal fees at $265,000 for the 2007-08 fiscal year, and Chi expects the fees to exceed the budget.
"It falls in line with what we have already set aside for what we've budgeted," Tran said. "We took action to decrease our legal bills, and I think that it is working."
Whittier Daily News, November 26, 2007
City's views on new Wal-Mart improve
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - It's been a little more than a year since the store that was the source of debates, lawsuits and a recall effort opened in the city.
But a topic that once drew hundreds of upset opponents only drew a handful of residents on Monday, who attended a meeting to complain about the Wal-Mart Supercenter on Walnut Grove Avenue.
Residents said at a Wal-Mart building review Monday that noise, run-away shopping carts and increased traffic are continual problems.
"The fact that people aren't here tonight is not an indication that all is well," said Yuki Fukumoto, a Wal-Mart neighbor and Rosemead resident. "We've gone from a quiet, residential neighborhood to a noisy street."
But officials say that business at the Wal-Mart Supercenter at 1827 Walnut Grove Ave. is meeting all expectations.
"It is doing better than I anticipated," Store Manager Jorge Lopez said.
Whether it was the dozens of satisfied building requirements or the promise of delivering groceries at low prices, Lopez said the store has "lived up to our end."
City records show that Wal-Mart has satisfied nearly all of its required conditions for approval. There are three outstanding conditions: electrical transformers need to go underground and there is confusion whether an existing sound wall is satisfactory.
Planning Administrator Matt Everling said the staff will follow up with these concerns and report the information back to the planning commission at a future date.
In Wal-Mart on Tuesday, women got their nails done, kids ate at the McDonald's, and shoppers walked out of the store, their carts full of groceries, baby clothes and toilet paper.
"I think that the community response has been overwhelmingly positive," Lopez said.
Monterey Park resident Betty Sarvegna shops at the Rosemead store about once a month.
"The prices for groceries are more affordable than compared to other stores," she said.
Financial targets have been hit, city building conditions have been met, and customers seem to be happy, Lopez said.
Tiffany Moffatt, community spokeswoman for Wal-Mart, said that the company "typically doesn't release specific sales and performance numbers."
"But I can tell you we are extremely pleased with the fact that it has been very well received in the market," Moffatt said. "It's exceeded our expectations."
City Manager Oliver Chi did not release how much money in sales-tax revenue has been produced from Wal-Mart because that information is "privileged and confidential."
The Singtao Daily reported on Sept. 9, that Councilman John Nunez released a "classified document" stating that the first quarter of the year Wal-Mart paid $160,000 in sales-tax revenue, which is $60,000 more than expected.
On Monday, about six residents voiced their concerns.
"For some of the residents that live close by, there is still a concern, especially with noise," said Mayor John Tran.
Tran, who voted against the approval of Wal-Mart, said the store has become more integral to the community. The store has sponsored several schools, city events and local clubs.
"I think that people have a little bit different perception of the Wal-Mart today," Lopez said.
Marlene Shinen, a San Gabriel resident, said she was upset that Wal-Mart shopping carts can be spotted throughout the city.
Councilwoman Margaret Clark said that problem is not unique to the city or the store.
"We have shopping cart problems everywhere," Clark said. "And we have an ordinance for fixing that."
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, November 25, 2007
Pasadena women top area municipal pay list
By Kenneth Todd Ruiz, Staff Writer
Three women earn the largest salaries at Pasadena's City Hall and are the highest-paid municipal officials in the San Gabriel Valley.
Outgoing City Manager Cynthia Kurtz tops that list with a salary of $235,928. City Attorney Michele Bagneris earns $216,358 and utilities chief Phyllis Currie falls just short of $200,000, with $197,103.
On a per-capita basis, Kurtz ranks low among her peers in other cities. Earning the most, based on how many residents she serves, is Bradbury City Manager Jennifer Vasquez, who is paid $80,000 each year in a city with fewer than 1,000 people.
But then, that's on the low-end for a city manager's gig - the next lowest paid is Anthony Ybarra of South El Monte at $129,842.
To discern what city employees are paid should take nothing more than a telephone call - no deep-throated sources, clandestine Dumpster dives or computer hacking required.
The information in this story does not include any comparisons to West Covina and San Dimas - the two cities which have yet to provide figures for actual employee salaries.
Social taboos attached to discussing pay are trumped by the public's right to know how its money is being used, said Steve Levin, political reform project director at Center for Governmental Studies.
"On the one hand, you want to respect the officials' privacy," Levin said. "But the more important concern is the public's concern of knowing what public officials are making, whether they deserve what they're making, whether they're overpaid or underpaid, and how that compares to people in other jurisdictions."
In a landmark decision, the state Supreme Court recently reaffirmed the public's right to know after a Bay Area newspaper sued to regain access to payroll data in Oakland.
"There was a city council and mayoral election at the time, and they were being pressured by the public unions to not disclose the information," said Kevin Keane, executive editor of the Contra Costa Times. "The feeling was some of the people running for office caved into the unions' demands. The Contra Costa Times sued for full disclosure for all public records."
In a unanimous decision, the court rejected appeals from public employees' unions and ruled in favor the Times, a sister paper to the San Gabriel Valley Tribune.
Almost every city polled in the San Gabriel Valley readily responded to requests for salary information.
Pasadena required a few days to "collect the information." Arcadia responded within an hour by e-mail.
Some asked for other cities' information for comparison purposes.
Not to say all cities feel the same.
West Covina responded to a request for actual salaries by providing ranges and has not responded to further requests.
Claremont City Attorney Sonia Carvalho has come under criticism for asking Google to shut down a blog which posted pay information.
That blog, Claremont Insider, posted paycheck data - excluding Social Security numbers - its operators pulled from a document archive on the city's own Web site.
Coming from the corporate banking world, Mayor Bill Bogaard said publicizing employees' pay can create unrest as some will wonder "why the hell am I making less than the next guy?"
He was surprised to learn actual salaries - not just ranges - were for public consumption.
In the public arena, he agreed disclosure was necessary for transparency and said the ascension of Kurtz, Bagneris and Currie to the top fit Pasadena's desire for its leadership to "be reflective of the diversity of its residents and communities."
Pasadena Star News, November 12, 2007
Cities reconsider 30-day impounding of cars
The law is meant to discourage unlicensed driving. But some officials say it is too harsh and puts an unfair burden on immigrants and the poor
By Anna Gorman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
After the city of Los Angeles' brief moratorium on impounding the cars of unlicensed drivers, two other cities have moved to end their 30-day impounds, which they say place an unfair financial burden on illegal immigrants and low-income residents.
Bell Gardens, which modified its policy in September, and Huntington Park, which approved the change last month, now allow drivers to reclaim cars immediately instead of waiting a month and paying the hundreds of dollars often required to get a car back.
The moves by those cities are part of a renewed push by some in California to soften the state law that requires impounding of vehicles driven by unlicensed drivers.
Huntington Park City Atty. Francisco Leal said the law imposes an unfair hardship on many drivers.
"This will take away the most egregious part of the law, that is, the 30-day period," Leal said. "There is no way these people can afford that."
Ira Mehlman, spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said the law was intended to be harsh to ensure that drivers have licenses.
"Losing your car for a day isn't enough of a threat to convince people it's not worth the risk," he said.
But opponents maintain that the punishment goes way beyond the offense. They say the law has essentially become a weapon to punish illegal immigrants, who cannot get driver's licenses.
"The hardship on these families is just phenomenal," said Cynthia Anderson-Barker, who filed a lawsuit against the state and several cities challenging the 30-day impounds. "When the car is gone and the family . . . loses their transportation, it pushes them further into poverty."
The impound issue surfaced in August when the Los Angeles Police Department decided to halt the practice, saying it might be unconstitutional.
The LAPD's move was partly based on a 2005 U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals case ruling that impounding a legally parked car was an unreasonable seizure of private property when there was no reasonable threat to public safety.
The city attorney's office later determined that the impound law did not violate the constitution in most cases, and the LAPD resumed impounding in September.
With no definitive legal guidance, cities have adopted a mishmash of enforcement policies.
"Each agency, I think, looks at it differently," said Maywood Police Cmdr. Frank Hauptmann. "We all know what the law says -- it really is a matter of how flexible the city wants to be."
Last year, the department started releasing cars before the elapse of the 30-day period, Hauptmann said.
"The problem is people can't afford to get their cars out," he said. "They don't have a car to take their kids to school or go to work."
In Bell Gardens, police do not hold the cars of unlicensed drivers for 30 days unless the driver is a repeat offender, said Police Chief Andreas Probst. "To hold their cars for 30 days would be an economic hardship for them," he said. "I don't think it would be good public relations."
South Gate police routinely keep such cars for 30 days, though supervisors have some discretion to make exceptions, said Sgt. Keith Underwood. The monthlong impound is important because it gets the unlicensed drivers off the street, he said.
"Everybody has got to have a driver's license as far as we are concerned," he said. "If you don't have a driver's license, you are less likely to have insurance, and if there is a traffic accident, somebody has to be on the hook."
Immigrant rights groups have pushed lawmakers in Sacramento to allow illegal immigrants to get driver's licenses, but the bills have been rejected.
State Sen. Gil Cedillo (D-Los Angeles), who has sponsored several such bills, said he has been pushing city and police officials throughout the state to change their impound policies.
Cedillo said he was pleased that some cities have altered their policies but would like to see cities and counties stop towing entirely.
He said a statewide moratorium would be legal, citing an analysis by the state legislative council that said the simple fact of a driver's being unlicensed was not enough justification to impound a vehicle.
But Mehlman of the Federation for American Immigration Reform countered that ending impounds would send the signal that cities welcome illegal immigrants.
"Obviously, these are local governments who have been inclined to accommodate illegal immigrants in every way possible," he said.
Los Angeles Times, November 1, 2007
Council OKs newsletter
Some say timing helps incumbents
By Sandra T. Molina, Staff Writer
MONTEBELLO - The city will be mailing a newsletter that could leave it open to legal risk after a 3-2 vote by the council, officials said.
About a dozen people attended a special council meeting Tuesday morning called by Mayor Norma Lopez-Reid to discuss behind closed doors the mass mailing of a city-funded newsletter, Montebello Today, with the names of council members printed on it.
"There's nothing time-sensitive in it to stop us from mailing it until after the election," said Councilman Bill Molinari, who along with Councilwoman Rosie Vasquez voted against sending it this week.
"The timing only matters to those who are running for re-election," he said during a meeting that had heated exchanges between some of its members.
Lopez-Reid and Councilman Bob Bagwell, who are the incumbents in the Nov. 8 election race, and Councilman Jeff Siccama, who is mired in a Dec. 18 recall election, voted in favor of the glossy mailers being sent immediately.
"The city attorney gave us his opinion, and it's each council member's right to make our own decision," Siccama said.
Molinari said City Attorney Arnoldo Beltran in the one-hour closed session advised them that the mailer opens Montebello up to potential litigation.
Vasquez confirmed that, saying, "The attorney was explicit that we will be at risk."
Beltran said he was unable to speak about what he told the council behind closed doors.
"They are taking the risk only because it's a political advantage for them," Molinari said.
Vasquez said city officials, specifically Lopez-Reid, have been warned in the past about bulk mailings.
"You do not need to implicate me," Lopez-Reid said, raising her voice as the two women tried to talk over each other.
Molinari said the California Fair Political Practices Commission told the city it violated the bulk-mailing law in 1999 when Lopez-Reid signed a mailer sent to senior citizens about the Dial-A-Ride program.
Molinari said it cost more than the $1,000 limit on bulk mailings that are endorsed by elected officials and paid for with city funds. Also, the number of mailings went beyond a 199 limit.
"These candidates are desperate," Vasquez said. "How low can you be to use taxpayers' money to get elected?"
Last published in 2004, Montebello Today is paid for by Montebello Tomorrow Inc., a nonprofit corporation founded in the 1970s to help publicize city activities.
Interim City Administrator Randy Narramore said the council approved a newsletter in August 2006 and that it was paid for before his arrival in April.
"There's been a push for it to be completed and mailed since I got here," he said.
The cost of the newsletter is about $12,000, Molinari said. The funds for Montebello Tomorrow come from the city and its Redevelopment Agency, officials said. The newsletter, which is four pages and in full color, was delivered to the post office Tuesday afternoon, Narramore said.
About 20,000 will be mailed to residents.
Members of the public were split on the mailing being sent on the eve of the election.
"To be denied information about the city for any reason is a violation of our rights," said Jacqueline Carr.
Steve Stokes said the newsletter was a political tool being used by the incumbents.
"If this information is so important, it will still be after the election," he said.
The rest of the candidates for City Council - Giuseppe "Joe" Veneziano, Robert Urteaga, Kathy Salazar and Leo Rodriguez - were also on hand.
They thought the mailer should be sent after the election so there could be no misrepresentation about its motivation.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, October 31, 2007
Report: Release of pay stubs an error
By Will Bigham, Staff Writer
CLAREMONT - The release of city employee pay stubs through the city's Web site was caused by human error, according to a report commissioned by the city.
The report confirms claims made by the Claremont Insider blog that the information was available on the city's online public document archive.
The report also confirms that there was no security breach or theft related to the release of the pay stubs.
"I regret the error was made, but human error is a natural phenomenon that occurs in life," City Manager Jeff Parker said.
The pay stubs were inadvertently placed on the city's Web site while the Information Technology Department was working to change the procedures used to archive payroll documents, said Steve Senkle, the city's IT manager.
"There are rights as to what folders and files get put on public access versus private," Parker said. "And at some point in time those rights were modified in our system, which then made those folders public."
The city has taken steps to shore up the security of the online document archive, and officials said Thursday that they expected the archive back online by the end of the day.
"We purchased additional licensing for the software that allows us to create two additional databases, separate databases within the system, so that confidential records can be separated from public records," Senkle said.
"That being the case, it won't be possible in the future for this mistake to result in confidential records being made available because our confidential database will not be connected in any way to the Internet."
On Sept. 7, the Claremont Insider blog posted a scanned copy of Parker's pay stub, along with salary and benefit information for city employees who were identified by name.
In response, the city shut down its public document archive and sent a letter to Google, which hosts the blog, demanding that the post be removed and demanding that the hosting service for the blog be terminated.
In addition to the pay stubs accessed by the blog, additional payroll-related files were accessible on the city's Web site, including pension slips and other documents that included Social Security numbers and bank account information, Parker said.
City officials declined to state how long the information had been available on the city's Web site.
Parker said the report will not be forwarded to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, as he had previously stated, because the report shows that there was no theft involved in the release of the documents.
A two-week investigation into the release of the pay stubs was conducted by Michael Fitzpatrick, CEO of the NCX Group.
Fitzpatrick said that as more information and filing systems have become electronic, his company has seen similar problems occur in other organizations.
"It's potentially a problem for public agencies, for private organizations, as anything becomes electronic in nature," Fitzpatrick said. "The more we rely on it, the more opportunity there is for mistakes to be made."
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, October 19, 2007
Lawsuit alleges city is hostile
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD -- Two men who are suing Rosemead for unpaid wages said "intimidation" and "fear" pervade City Hall.
Longtime Rosemead employees Randy Haro, who quit in May, and Robert Ballin, who is on disability, filed a lawsuit against the city nearly three weeks ago.
In the lawsuit, Haro and Ballin allege that the city failed to pay them -- as well as up to 40 other employees — in both regular and overtime wages.
"I want what I deserve," said Ballin, a Baldwin Park resident. "This city was a beautiful city to work for. Now, forget it."
The city is investigating the allegations, said City Manager Oliver Chi.
"We've referred this over to the (Joint Powers Insurance Authority) and our legal counsel," Chi said Friday. "And we're auditing our financial records."
Haro, 46, said he believes the city owes him at least $40,000.
"But it isn't about the money, it's the principle," Haro said.
In the last two years, both employees, who have worked nearly 30 years combined, said that after an upheaval among the staff and city council, they were encouraged to quit, did not receive raises and took a cut in benefits.
"I feel there is a hostile work environment," Haro said. "It is very uncomfortable, and people are very afraid to say anything because they think they'll get fired."
Similar claims surfaced recently from Councilman Gary Taylor, who alleges that a private investigator reported city employees were exposed to a hostile work environment and stayed silent in fear of getting fired.
Mayor John Tran said he thinks Haro is just "jumping on the bandwagon with Gary, which is a shame."
Tran added that since the staff is not hired by the council, there is no direct authority over the employees.
Councilwoman Margaret Clark, who has been on the council for nearly 17 years, disagrees.
"The hostile work environment is definitely there," Clark said. "Maybe a change in the council would solve it."
The city received the lawsuit Oct. 3. It was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Sept. 25.
It alleges employees were asked to work "off-the-clock." On other occasions they were paid "straight-time instead of time and one-half their regular rates of pay when performing work in excess of 40 hours per week — or not paid at all," the lawsuit states.
City Manager Chi said there was never any indication during prior discussions with Haro or Ballin that they were not being paid.
"Employees generally know if they are not being compensated," Chi said. "If this would have been happening, I am sure we would have heard about it sooner."
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, October 14, 2007
Council votes to report member
ROSEMEAD - A councilman could be ousted from office if a grand jury finds that he was violating the state's open-meeting laws, experts said Wednesday.
The City Council voted 3-1-1 Tuesday to report Gary Taylor to the Los Angeles County grand jury for releasing confidential information about sexual harassment allegations against Councilman John Nunez.
Terry Francke, general counsel of Californians Aware, a nonprofit, open-government organization, said if Taylor is found guilty of violating the Ralph M. Brown Act, he could lose his seat.
"It is a little like a local impeachment," Francke said.
The Brown Act is the state's open-meeting law.
Nunez joined Mayor John Tran and City Councilwoman Polly Low in voting to send the case to the grand jury. City Councilwoman Margaret Clark voted against the move. Taylor abstained.
Council members allege Taylor leaked private information to the public during repeated verbal and written requests for an investigative sexual harassment report. The report was presented during a closed-door meeting in April.
"I'd like to refer Gary Taylor to the grand jury for criminal prosecution for violating the Brown Act," Low said.
The confidential report included comments from staff members who were interviewed by a private investigator hired after a finance employee accused Nunez of sexual harassment. Nunez denies the claim.
City Attorney Bonifacio Garcia said releasing such confidential information is a violation of the Brown Act and could be punished as a misdemeanor.
Garcia said the city will file a complaint with both the District Attorney's Office and the grand jury.
Deputy District Attorney Dave Demerjian, head of the public integrity division, said that while the City Council could report Taylor to the grand jury, Taylor can't be criminally prosecuted.
"Releasing confidential information is not a crime," said Demerjian, who added he has not received a complaint from Rosemead against Taylor.
According the Brown Act, a person may not disclose information presented and discussed during a closed-session meeting. Punishments for violating the prohibition include injunctive relief, disciplinary action or referral to the county grand jury.
The council's action Tuesday satisfies requests by Taylor, who previously challenged the council to report him the grand jury with the hope that information released in the investigative report would be made public.
"You have jeopardized all the employees of Rosemead," Taylor said on Tuesday. "The truth is going to come out now or later."
Taylor thanked the council for its decision.
"Thank you, Mrs. Low," Taylor said. "The grand jury is on its way."
Francke said if the case goes forward, a prosecutor would have to lay out what was reported during closed session and what was disclosed by Taylor.
"Ultimately, if this were to be tried, they would have to be very specific," Francke said, "and have to disclose what was learned in closed session."
During open meetings in recent months, Taylor alleged that an investigator, Tess Elconin, reported during a closed-session meeting that the city employees were exposed to a hostile work environment and stayed silent for fear of being fired.
In an Oct. 2 letter to the City Council, Taylor requested that the council authorize Elconin to complete the report.
"If the City Council agrees to completing the report it will protect your integrity and honesty," he wrote.
Low, who made the motion to recommend Taylor to the grand jury, said she was frustrated and disappointed with his repeated violations of the law.
"We had to put a stop to this," Low said after the meeting Tuesday night.
Tran admonished Taylor Tuesday night.
"You should be ashamed of yourself," Tran said. "You broke the law and compromised the taxpayers."
City Manager Oliver Chi said he expects the complaints to be filed by the end of the next week.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, October 11, 2007
City attorney clarifies letter's intent
Carvalho says she didn't ask Claremont blog be shut down
By Will Bigham, Staff Writer
CLAREMONT - City Attorney Sonia Carvalho delivered an emotional statement during Tuesday night's City Council meeting denying that she intended to demand, in her letter to Google, that the company terminate the Claremont Insider blog.
On Sept. 7, the anonymously penned blog posted a scanned copy of City Manager Jeff Parker's pay stub, along with salary and benefit information of city employees who were identified by name.
In response, Carvalho sent a letter to Google later that day demanding that the company remove the post and "terminate the hosting service for this blog to prevent further violations."
Carvalho said that when she sent the letter, she had incomplete information on what the blog possessed, and she feared that the blog would publish more copies of employee pay stubs, which she believes contain personal employee information.
"I have to tell you in hindsight I can see how the structure of the letter, the raised statement in the letter, and the demand itself might appear offensive to those who abhor the idea of prior restraint," Carvalho said.
The intent of the letter was not to demand that the blog be shut down completely, Carvalho said, but that Google "honor its privacy policies in the event that further breaches of employee privacy occurred."
Since the content of Carvalho's letter to Google was revealed last week, the city attorney has been criticized for her actions.
"I've been personally attacked by the blogs, and I have to admit to you it doesn't feel good," Carvalho said. "And if the aim of those bloggers were to make me suffer personal pain, then they've succeeded."
Carvalho's statement came after Dean McHenry, president of Active Claremont, admonished the city for its actions.
"I think that's the first time since this city was founded 100 years ago that you've gone to the extent of demanding the shutdown of a news source," McHenry said.
Michael Keenan, former City Council candidate, used his time at the public microphone to read aloud for nearly six minutes a list of salary and benefit figures for city employees, whom he identified by name.
The investigation by an outside consultant into the pay stub leak has been completed, and the final report was delivered to City Manager Jeff Parker on Monday afternoon, Assistant City Manager Tony Ramos said Wednesday.
Ramos said that Parker had not finished reading the report, and did not indicate when the document would be released to the public.
"After (Parker) reads it, he will tell me what's next," Ramos said.
Inland Dally Bulletin, October 10, 2007
Report: Workers in hostile setting
Councilman calling for expanded inquiry
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - An investigator found that city employees were exposed to a hostile work environment and stayed silent for fears of getting fired, a councilman claims.
Rosemead Councilman Gary Taylor, in a letter to the council, said Tess Elconin was concerned about statements employees made during her investigation into a sexual harassment claim lodged against Councilman John Nunez. Taylor said "many of the 22 employees gave information of a hostile work environment."
Taylor has requested a public copy of Elconin's findings. He now wants her to expand her investigation.
"(Elconin) is concerned about items above and beyond Nunez," he said Monday.
Nunez declined to comment on Taylor's request.
"That is something my lawyers are working with," he said.
Elconin started the review in March. Nunez denies all the allegations.
The City Council is expected to vote today on whether the investigator should expand her inquiry.
"I believe the entire City Council is guilty of misfeasance by not taking actions to protect the Rosemead employees," Taylor wrote in an Oct. 2 letter to the council.
City Clerk Nina Castruita said no claims related to harassment or a hostile work environment have been filed within the past six months.
Councilwoman Polly Low said Taylor can have access to the information in closed-session meetings.
"There is no cover-up," Low said. "My problem is that he doesn't have all the information and is making assumptions."
At a Sept. 25 meeting, Elconin presented council members with a report in a closed-door meeting. Taylor refused to attend, saying he wants the information made public. At an earlier meeting, he said the findings should be sent to the District Attorney's Office or another law enforcement agency. That request was denied.
"I've exhausted my avenues in the city of Rosemead," Taylor said. "I'll ask (the city attorney) what he recommends."
City Attorney Bonifacio Garcia previously accused Taylor of violating state law by releasing private information.
The councilman challenged the city to file a complaint with the DA if they believed he broke the law.
"I'm hoping to get this straightened out so employees aren't fearful of talking about anything," Taylor said. "I'm trying to find out what they're doing to our employees."
Pasadena Star News, October 9, 2007
City wants blog pulled
Officials ask Google to terminate Claremont Insider
By Will Bigham, Staff Writer
CLAREMONT - The day the Claremont Insider blog posted a scan of City Manager Jeff Parker's pay stub, City Attorney Sonia Carvalho contacted Google and demanded that the company "terminate the hosting service for this blog to prevent future violations."
City officials had previously said they only demanded that Google, which hosts the blog, remove the offending post.
The demand to terminate the blog was contained in a letter sent by Carvalho to Google on Sept. 7.
The letter was released by the city after a public records request for the document was made by the Daily Bulletin.
Carvalho's letter also states that the information in the blog post "was obtained in an illegal manner that appears to have involved trespass theft."
The Claremont Insider blog, which is penned anonymously, has claimed it obtained copies of 283 city employee pay stubs through a legal search of the city's public documents archive.
After the blog obtained the information, it posted a copy of Parker's pay stub, later also posting the pay stub of Jeff Porter, director of human services.
The blog also posted the salaries and benefit figures of several dozen city employees.
In the days after being contacted by the city, Google removed the post and instructed the Claremont Insider not to re-post the pay stubs, claiming the pay stubs were copyrighted documents. The company did not terminate the blog.
Mayor Peter Yao said the demand for the blog to be terminated was appropriate because the city was attempting to remove "private, privileged employee information."
"I think it's one and the same," said Yao, referring to the city's demand that Google both remove the offending post and terminate the blog. "We were really addressing the issue of making public a lot of private, privileged employee information. I take them to be the same and not separate."
Councilman Sam Pedroza questioned the appropriateness of the city's demand, saying "it's not the role of the city to make a request like that."
Pedroza, however, remains very critical of the blog, which typically takes aim in its posts at prominent city leaders, including Pedroza.
"I always felt that the blog was nothing more than a negative political thing against me, so honestly I would be more than happy to see that thing get off the Internet," Pedroza said. "But it is what it is, and I don't know how legally the city could make that request (to terminate the blog)."
A city investigation into how the pay stubs were leaked remains under way, Parker said. He said the city hopes to complete its investigation in a week.
Parker said the city has not been able to confirm claims made by the blog that the documents were available on the city's Web site.
The city disabled its public document archive in the days following the initial blog post, and the archive remains down.
Parker said the archive will not be back up until the city's investigation, conducted by an outside specialist, is complete.
Parker also said that the city contacted the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department in the days following the initial blog post and notified the agency of a potential theft of city documents.
Parker said the city will forward additional information to the Sheriff's Department when its internal investigation is complete.
"There are two issues," Parker said. "How did the information get there, and was it done appropriately? And two, is it in the hands of somebody who is inappropriate?
"If there's information out there that is privileged and private, and it's not public information, then it's against the law for somebody to have that information."
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, October 4, 2007
Mario's Tow Truck Troubles
A state senator comes to the aid of a pal facing legal and political problems in Bell Gardens. But at what cost?
by Jeffery Anderson
With a tough election seven weeks away in Bell Gardens, State Senator Gil Cedillo ventured into the working-class city to help out a protege' who could be in deep trouble: Councilman Mario Beltran.
Cedillo stood side-by-side at a press conference with Beltran, a young, trouble-prone politico with a criminal record and called for an end to a widespread police policy of impounding the cars of unlicensed drivers for 30 days. It made good local political theater and armed Beltran to fight for a just cause. Within a matter of days, he persuaded his colleagues on the City Council to end the practice. In Bell Gardens, stuck in the rough-and-tumble belt of heavily immigrant cities that lie southeast of downtown Los Angeles, the high cost of towing penalties often meant the owner lost the car.
But more was on Cedillo's mind that September day than notching up one more city in his statewide crusade to renounce the draconian 30-day impound. The state senator also wanted to help his former field advisor and close friend of his son, Gil Jr., beat a possible rap. Months ago, investigators from various law enforcement agencies began examining whether Beltran helped cut a special deal that gave the tow truck operator, United Motor Club, a five-year monopoly worth millions of dollars in Bell Gardens. District Attorney spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons said Beltran and the tow truck operator are under investigation by the LAPD, the D.A.'s Office and the FBI. Warrants served in June at Beltran's home and office suggest that authorities are looking for possible criminal conflicts of interest related to Beltran's political consulting firm, Americas Consulting Group, and the towing firm.
Cedillo himself underscored the strong message sent that day when Beltran joined him at the press conference to denounce the 30-day impound policy that enriches the city's tow truck operator. Says Cedillo: "He has my full, unwavering support. I think that the fact that he led the charge to rescind the towing ordinance rebuts completely any charge of conflict of interest."�
Now that Beltran's problems may not be limited to winning reelection in November, Cedillo makes a point of saying that he will not turn his back on the man he nurtured in the political process. For Cedillo, it simply doesn't matter that Beltran was convicted in March of filing a false police report, after an embarrassing incident in which he woke up drunk in a downtown L.A. prostitute hotel.
But Cedillo's own political fortunes could be intertwined in the outcome of the Beltran matter in ways that raise questions about the powerful role that tow truck companies play in local and statewide politics. Thousands of dollars in contributions to elected officials statewide were made, including some to Cedillo, the vice chair of the state legislature's Latino Caucus, by United Motor Club and a second firm, Maywood Club Towing.
Together, the two companies control contracts worth millions of dollars in four cities: Maywood, Bell Gardens, South Gate, and Cudahy. And since 2000, the two companies and various family members, employees and associates have contributed more than $120,000 to L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, Assemblyman Kevin DeLeon, Cedillo, and a number of other progressive Democrats, including Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard, according to a CityBeat review of campaign finance reports.
To further complicate political peace in Bell Gardens and beyond, the D.A.'s Office last week charged United Motor Club's former point man in Bell Gardens. A three-time felon, accused drug trafficker named Shahram Shayesteh faces charges of obstructing a government official and making a criminal threat during a three-way phone conversation that Beltran set up with his political rival, Bell Gardens Councilman Daniel Crespo. According to LAPD Lieutenant Paul Vernon, police are investigating Beltran's role in Shayesteh�'s alleged threats to Councilman Crespo, and are sharing the fruits of their investigation with the FBI.
Cedillo, whose presence in the troubled waters of Bell Gardens worries some of his political colleagues, told CityBeat he's not sure if he's met the man behind United Motor Club. "I don't think I've ever spoken to him. I don't think I have any recollection of him, but I don't know."�
Yet, through the avenue of political contributions, the towing companies can remain nameless and faceless, yet insinuate themselves into the fabric of the state's political culture every day.
The dark history of Shayestah
Days after the May Day melee in MacArthur Park in which the LAPD roughed up immigrant protestors and members of the media, a number of L.A. officials gathered on a stage in the park to ease tensions in the Latino community. Three of the officials present -- although the event did not specifically address driver's license or impound issues -- Villaraigosa, Nunez, and DeLeon -- received generous campaign donations from Maywood Club Towing.
Maywood Club Towing is a company that is owned by Tooradj Khosroabadi, an Iranian who also is known as "Tony Bravo."� He is the brother-in-law of United Motor Club's Shahram Shayesteh, according to Bell Gardens city officials and law enforcement sources.
Last November, less than a month after Shayesteh met with Beltran and his ally on the council, Mayor Jennifer Rodriguez, at an Applebees Restaurant in Bell Gardens, he attended a City Council meeting, represented himself as a "manager and spokesman"� for United Motor Club, and walked out with an exclusive five-year franchise agreement to tow cars for the police in Bell Gardens. At the time, he was under indictment in two federal drug trafficking cases, one involving an international opium smuggling ring that allegedly extends from Iran to Germany to Los Angeles. He has since been dismissed from that case, and pleaded guilty of lying to federal investigators in another drug case and is expected to get probation and no time.
United Motor Club told Bell Gardens officials that Shayesteh was merely a contractor who helped them sell unclaimed cars. He has since been fired by the company.
In one of the drug trafficking cases, Tony Bravo liquidated real estate to post a bond on Shayesteh�'s behalf, according to court records. At the same time, Tony Bravo was being accused of giving kickbacks to police and local officials in Maywood, and about to come under investigation by the FBI, according to elected officials and police sources in Maywood. That probe is ongoing, law enforcement sources say.
Shayesteh is described in government affidavits sworn by agents with Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement as an opium addict with a gambling problem. He has been convicted of fraud in New Jersey, Wisconsin, and Arizona, and was indicted in two drug trafficking cases in federal court in Los Angeles in 2005.
Shayesteh, according to his own sworn declaration filed in U.S. District Court in Los Angeles, and sworn declarations by his handlers with the Department of Homeland Security, is a government snitch associated with alleged drug traffickers. Before 2005, he provided federal agents with information about opium trafficking from Mexico to El Paso and El Paso to Los Angeles, and about illegal activities within the Iranian-American community in Los Angeles. He has served time in federal prison for credit card fraud.
One of the cases involves an alleged international drug trafficking and money-laundering ring involving a jewelry design store in downtown Los Angeles owned by a man named Mehrdad Lari, a wealthy Santa Monica businessman.
According to a federal indictment, in 2003, German authorities and the Drug Enforcement Administration seized close to 600 pounds of opium -- valued at $5.4 million once processed into heroin -- from an international drug organization that extends to Los Angeles, where Lari is known as the "boss of the bosses."� According to the indictment, Lari would sell opium from Germany and Iran -- smuggled into the U.S. in false bottomed suitcases -- wire the money to international locations, buy property and vehicles, set up limited liability companies, and refinance homes and property in a complex scheme to launder the drug proceeds. Lari pleaded guilty to using a phone to commit a felony drug offense; on March 27, he was sentenced to four years in federal prison.
According to court documents, the transactions that led to Shayesteh�'s arrest involved $64,000 in checks deposited to Lari�'s jewelry company account, Mallery Design, which federal authorities allege is a front for purifying and selling opium and laundering money. The checks came from a company owned by Shayesteh called KBR Coachworks, also known as Regal Auto Sales, according to court documents.
Several months ago, the U.S. Attorney's Office dismissed Shayesteh from the case against Lari and a dozen others, however, for lack of evidence that he acted in a conspiracy to deal drugs and launder money. He claimed checks from KBR Coachworks to Mallery Design were loans.
Then, a month or so later, a second drug trafficking case involving the seizure of eight pounds of opium from Shayesteh�'s Reseda apartment fell apart and ended in his conviction for lying to investigators.
A review of court documents shows that Homeland Security's immigration and customs enforcement agents botched the second case with an illegal search of Shayesteh�'s residence that the court later invalidated -- despite Shayesteh�'s admission, according to documents, that he "got involved"� with an associate who "smuggled two kilos in."� Meanwhile, Shayesteh cooperated with authorities by telling them about international drug smuggling from Mexico and criminal activity in the Iranian community in L.A., according to a sworn declaration he signed on May 31, 2007.
But it was an entirely different kind of legal matter that spurred Cedillo's interest in righting the wrongs of the 30-day impound policy.
Taking on the law
Ricardo Castillo was driving to a yard sale with his wife and kids in the family's 2004 Chevy Malibu one September day in 2005, when a Maywood police officer pulled him over for having some fabric attached to his front passenger window.
Castillo had an Arizona driver's license but no California driver's license. So the officer seized his car -- worth $12,000 but invaluable in terms of his ability to get to work -- and had Maywood Club Towing, under an exclusive contract with the city, tow it to an impound lot.
The next day, Castillo called Maywood Police Department and said that a licensed driver was available to come pick up the car. An officer told him that his car would remain impounded for 30 days.
By the time the 30 days was up, Castillo was required to pay $1,500 in fees for the towing, impound, and the release of the car. It was a price he could not afford. Instead, Castillo forfeited his car, and with it his means of travel to and from work.
Castillo�'s plight is hardly unique. Tens of thousands of immigrants in California have their cars seized each year, as cities aggressively enforce a state law that punishes unlicensed drivers -- in particular those who are not entitled to a license because of their immigrant status.
The same month, Juan Salazar, also from Maywood, had his 1990 Oldsmobile impounded because the driver lacked a valid license. Salazar was four blocks away and ready to retrieve his car, but Maywood police refused to release it. Eventually Salazar got his car back, after paying $400 to Maywood Club Towing and $200 to Maywood police.
The problem is not just in Maywood, which, according to police sources there, towed more than 17,000 cars in the last five years, before a public outcry led to a change in city policy.
From Escondido to Santa Rosa, immigrants forfeit their cars for driving without licenses because the price of another used car is less than the cost to get a seized car out of an impound. Advocacy groups say predatory towing companies and greedy cities are targeting Latino immigrants, forcing them to buy used cars that are destined for a tax lien sale.
Perhaps more troubling is that self-declared champions of working class immigrants have ascended to power at the local and state level, yet have been slow to rectify the vicious cycle of vehicle forfeiture that torments those very same working-class immigrants.
"It amounts to a municipal tax on immigrants,"� says Nativo Lopez, national director of Hermandad Mexicana Latinoamerica, who spoke one day last summer on the South Steps of Los Angeles City Hall. "The economic devastation in the immigrant community is incalculable."�
Lopez spoke to a handful of Spanish-language journalists that day, yet there wasn't an L.A. city official or politician in sight. But then, the tow truck issue -- inseparable from a decade-long debate over driver's licenses for illegal immigrants -- puts government officials in a quandary.
A federal class-action lawsuit in U.S. District Court names the city and county of Los Angeles as defendants, and seeks to overturn a state law that allows for such 30-day impounds. The lawsuit, in which Salazar and Castillo are plaintiffs, charges that local governments and police agencies throughout California have violated the constitutional rights of its undocumented residents.
In addition, law enforcers believe that aggressive towing and impound policies are necessary to keep unlicensed drivers off the roads, for public safety reasons. But there might be another reason why many city and state politicians shy from the topic of city towing and impound policies.
Each year, tiny cities such as Maywood, South Gate, Cudahy, and Bell Gardens rake in hundreds of thousands of dollars in impound fees. Los Angeles takes in more than a half dozen smaller cities combined. That money can be budgeted for police purposes, or any purpose the city chooses.
Los Angeles City Councilwoman Janice Hahn recalls the first time she became irked by L.A.'s towing policy. It was just before Christmas in 2005. Hahn wanted to see an LAPD sobriety checkpoint in action.
But sobriety was not the real reason LAPD officers were stopping cars that December day in Wilmington, in the middle of Hahn's council district.
She recalls a troubling scene: Police had pulled people over and forced them out of their cars with their belongings, including Christmas presents. Entire families were sitting on the curb by the side of the road. One family had been to a dinner party, they had dishes of tamales sitting on their laps.�
Hahn inquired if the motorists were being arrested for drunk driving, but was alarmed to find the reason entire families were having their cars towed was because the driver had no license. "It dawned on me what we were doing,"� she recalls. "I thought, what happens now?"� Police told her that the cars would be impounded for 30 days. "I was told most of them would simply go to an auction and buy another car. These were hardworking families that use their car to go to church on Sunday and work on Monday. There must have been 20 cars there. It just seemed wrong."�
Moved by what she witnessed, the councilwoman told LAPD Chief Bill Bratton she did not want these types of checkpoints in her district. She says the police stopped doing them.
Then, in June, she seconded a motion by Councilman Jose Huizar to review the mandatory 30-day hold on impounded cars, in light of a federal court of appeals ruling that, according to Cedillo, says it is unconstitutional for police to impound a car solely because the driver is driving without a license.
However, Bratton recently lifted a self-imposed moratorium on 30-day impounds and so far has faced little opposition from the City Council.
For police, the issue is a no-brainer: they point to statistics that a large number of car accidents involve unlicensed drivers. "I can't tell you how many times as a patrol officer I came up on a brutal car accident, only to find that at least one of the participants was driving without a license,"� says Detective Ben Jones of the L.A. Police Commission's Investigation Division.
For L.A. city officials, the math could be even easier. A recent report in the L.A. Times found that the city impounded 47,000 cars in 2006 because a driver had no license. Current city law allows the city to impound those cars for 30 days. Despite months of requests for public information, the LAPD failed to disclose how much money it makes from these impounds -- or how many cars are never re-claimed.
None of those in the political community who are troubled by Cedillo's rushing to the aid Beltran question the righteousness of his cause.
Risks of helping a pal
In fact, Cedillo is not the only one standing by Beltran. And that perplexes prominent local and state politicians.
State Senator Ron Calderon employs Beltran as a field deputy. Calderon's brother and sister-in-law, Tom and Marcella Calderon, held a fundraiser June 21 at their home for Beltran, according to an invitation to the event obtained by CityBeat.
Calderon has resisted calls to fire Beltran by angry constituents who fear that Beltran is not fit to represent their interests. Calderon paid more than $28,000 to Beltran for campaign workers salaries, office expenses, and reimbursement for campaign expenses from February to June 2006, FPPC reports show. Beltran's consulting firm operated out of Calderon's campaign headquarters in 2006.
Calderon refused to answer CityBeat's questions about his field deputy. One former employer of Beltran's was more talkative. Former Assemblywoman Judy Chu, now vice chair of the State Board of Equalization, hired Beltran to work as a field deputy for her Assembly office in 2005. When Chu got wind of Beltran's political consulting activities she gave him a choice: cease outside campaign and political activities, or give up his position as field deputy. Beltran walked, Chu said, and was hired by Calderon, after helping Calderon in his 2006 campaign.
"Mario seemed like a young man with high ideals,"� Chu said recently, when asked about Beltran's widely reported legal troubles and the ongoing investigations that threaten his political future. "I am extremely shocked and disappointed that he went for the trappings of an elected official. He seems to have let himself be taken by every temptation there is."�
If Chu sounds as if she is harsh on Beltran, it might be because she is troubled on other levels.
According to Chu, while Beltran was her field deputy, he also was working weekends for a downtown Los Angeles nightclub that has drawn scrutiny from police and local officials in recent months. Chu tells CityBeat that she urged Beltran to disclose his night job to the Fair Political Practices Commission. However, the commission has no record that he ever did. Nor does it have any record of Beltran's financial disclosures regarding his political consulting and campaign activities.
When Beltran was arrested earlier this year and charged with filing a false police report, he had been drinking at the same establishment where he once worked, the popular and trendy 740 Club. The nightclub and at least one of its representatives have been at the center of a number of troubling reports.
Los Angeles City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo is considering a nuisance abatement action against the club, according to L.A. Councilman Jose Huizar, based on neighborhood disturbances and police reports of violence and gang activity.
One of the club's key representatives, Steven Carmona, a former L.A. planning commissioner who helped secure building permits, was indicted recently for allegedly taking a bribe in an unrelated federal racketeering case. So far there is no indication that Carmona's connection to the club has anything to do with Beltran.
Yet Beltran -- along with Huizar and Maywood and Huntington Park City Attorney Francisco Leal -- have hosted political fundraisers at the 740 Club. And though Beltran's actual connection to the club is unclear, it was an aspect of his life that bothered Chu. "I was increasingly concerned about his outside activities,"� she said. "He boasted of not reporting his earnings, and then we heard he was some sort of manager at this nightclub. Then he confirmed his activities as a political consultant. I didn't have a good feeling. We wanted to separate ourselves from him. It was intuition."�
Of Tom Calderon's recent fundraiser for Beltran, Chu says, "People cannot believe anyone would even attend that event, much less hold it in the first place."�
L.A. City Council President Eric Garcetti put it another way: "I can see Calderon sticking by this guy, but I don't understand Gil [Cedillo]. Obviously, Gil has strong ties in Bell Gardens. I can't believe Mario's still in office. I've had problem employees before. We deal with it quickly."�
Voters are left to wonder why an elected official like Beltran would go anywhere near Shayesteh -- and why Cedillo would stick his neck out for Beltran. Compared to federal drug and money laundering investigations and credit card fraud schemes Shayesteh has been involved with in the past, an arrest for alleged criminal threats might be just a minor inconvenience. Or maybe it will lead to other more meaningful revelations, given his self-described proclivity for cooperating with government investigators.
For Cedillo, the time is right to stand by his man in Bell Gardens. "He's not my first friend or ally to be investigated by the FBI, and he won't be the first to be completely exonerated."
Los Angeles Beat, October 4, 2007
Lynwood voters oust mayor, three city council members
Voters overwhelmingly ousted the mayor and three council members in a sweeping recall election called after years of investigations, allegations of corruption and a grandiose proposal for an NFL stadium.
Mayor Louis Byrd and council members Fernando Pedroza, Alfreddie Johnson Jr. and Leticia Vasquez were recalled by about 70 percent of voters who cast ballots in Tuesday's election.
Four months ago, the Los Angeles district attorney's office charged five current and former council members with using public funds to boost their salaries and pay for personal expenses.
The recalled politicians tried to block the special election, going as far as firing the city clerk, but a judge and the state Legislature ordered the election to proceed under the supervision of county election officials.
The ousters followed passage of steep water rate hikes earlier this year as well as a proposal to build a 70,000-seat professional football stadium, which would have razed an entire neighborhood in the working class town 15 miles south of Los Angeles.
"People just don't want to be told they may have to give up their homes," said Jim Morton, a candidate to replace Vasquez.
Two years ago, former Mayor Paul Richards was convicted of steering $500,000 worth of city contracts to a front corporation he secretly owned. He was sentenced to 16 years in federal prison.
County election officials must certify the election results and that certification must be signed by the Board of Supervisors, probably on Oct. 16, county chief deputy registrar-recorder Dean Logan said.
The remaining City Council members would normally appoint replacements, but there's only one incumbent left so another city government body will have to do that, Logan said.
City manager Roger Haley, who came from Long Beach in August, said he expected city staff and county officials to discuss what the next steps will be.
San Francisco Chronicle, September 27, 2007
Justice in Lynwood
Voters move forward with election City Hall tried to block
No matter where one stands on the many substantive issues affecting Lynwood, the recall election that threw out the mayor and three City Council members this week was a victory simply because it took place at all.
Some members of the City Council did their best to prevent voters from weighing in on their performance - even after the county clerk certified voter petitions calling for a reelection. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger had to force the election after the council fired the city clerk and then refused schedule it.
Voters finally took back control of their city Tuesday. But the change may not stick if voters do not return to the polls.
Because of the election timing, three of those who replaced the recalled officials could be in their jobs for only a month. This is because the next regular city election is set for Nov. 6; two recalled officials were up for reelection anyway and are on the ballot; another recalled official wasn't up but plans to make a run after losing office.
It is easy to say the special election was redundant and a waste of money in a city that needs every penny, but in our view it was necessary because of all of the City Hall meddling that led up to it.
What was the voters' beef with them?
The four officials supported a controversial redevelopment proposal, Angeles Fields, that could displace more than 1,000 families along Atlantic Boulevard and voted to increase water rates, according to a report in the Los Angeles Wave newspaper.
In addition, two of those recalled, Mayor Louis Byrd and Councilman Fernando Pedroza, and three former officials, were accused by the district attorney of one count each of misappropriating city funds.
We won't bore you with a recap of all of the political scandals to hurt Lynwood in recent years, but one of the more recent involved a former mayor being convicted in 2005 of funneling city funds to a business in which he had an ownership stake.
No matter how these accusations pan out, or what happens with the redevelopment plan, the election should have taken place for this reason: The voters wanted it to.
Long Beach Press-Telegram, September 27, 2007
Attorney fees remain high Rosemead looking to trim spiraling costs
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - City attorney fees remain high despite shifts in billing practices and the hiring of a new lawyer.
Bonifacio Garcia of Garcia, Calderon and Ruiz was hired in April to represent Rosemead and its redevelopment agency. In four months, he has charged the city nearly $137,000. This includes an invoice dated Sept. 3 for $37,286, and a $52,677 bill for work done in May.
Rosemead has budgeted legal fees at $265,000 for the 2007-08 fiscal year. If Garcia's billing trend continues, fees could cost the city as much as $500,000 dollars for one year, starting from the attorney's hiring date.
Garcia did not return phone calls for comment.
In part because of the high fees, the City Council decided to cap Garcia's monthly bill at $30,000, and as of Sept. 1, a new law firm was taking over duties for the redevelopment agency.
But city officials now can't seem to agree just where Garcia's responsibilities end.
City Manager Oliver Chi said Burke, Williams and Sorensen was hired last month, replacing Garcia, to represent the city on all land use, housing and redevelopment issues.
"The planning commission handles land-use related issues," Chi said.
But Garcia's firm has continued to provide legal advice at the planning commission meetings. His contract required that he attend all planning commission meetings. In a revised contract, effective Sept. 1, that was redacted.
Mayor John Tran and Councilman John Nunez said they intend for Garcia to remain as attorney of the planning commission.
"As far as I understand, he will continue to represent the planning commission," Nunez said. "The redevelopment agency is separate from the planning commission."
Joe Montes, an attorney from Burke, Williams and Sorensen, will soon be representing the city's planning commission meetings, Chi said.
Montes did not return calls.
"We are in the process of transferring all of the planning commission related items to Joe Montes," Chi said. "This should be done by the next planning commission meeting."
Councilwoman Margaret Clark said she thinks Garcia is milking the city's coffers.
"I would like Burke, Williams and Sorensen to take over all of the attorney representation for the city," Clark said. Now, "we would be paying double for some of the same research on the same issues."
A May billing statement shows that Garcia charged $7,478 for preparation and attendance of two planning commission meetings.
Clark believes that Garcia is being "nitpicky" with his legal fees.
"Where is all the money going?" Clark said.
Nunez attributes the fees to changes in City Hall.
"There's a lot going on in the city," Nunez said. "I think the costs are justified because he is doing a lot of work that is over and above in the last couple of months."
Pasadena Star News, September 22, 2007
Council shoots down motion
By Alison Hewitt, Staff Writer
WEST COVINA - An effort by City Councilman Roger Hernandez to cap the monthly amount that can be paid to the city attorney was defeated in a 4-1 vote by the council.
Hernandez argued that limiting what the city pays for its legal services would help maintain a balanced budget.
"I don't know one resident ... who wants us to have unlimited spending," he argued at Tuesday night's council meeting.
Hernandez contended that cities like Pasadena and El Monte pay less for legal services than West Covina.
City Attorney Arnold Alvarez-Glasman disagreed.
"In West Covina, our rates are actually the lowest that we charge our municipal clients," he said Wednesday, and said Pasadena does not pay less.
He interpreted Hernandez's actions as election-year posturing.
"It's political season," Alvarez-Glasman said, "and I guess I'm just the duck in the pond that he's shooting at."
Hernandez said West Covina pays City Attorney Arnold Alvarez-Glasman $600,000 to $1 million annually. Alvarez-Glasman contended his monthly bill averages $25,000 to $30,000, or up to $360,000 annually.
Billing records obtained by this newspaper for the first quarter of 2007 indicate Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin invoiced West Covina
$50,352.85 in January; in February $60,420.62; in March $69,883.52. Upon reviewing older invoices, Alvarez-Glasman said he billed the city $607,643 total in 2005.
Hernandez and Alvarez-Glasman have tangled before. Hernandez has previously asked the council to consider other attorneys, and was rebuffed in a separate effort Tuesday night to get the council to reconsider Alvarez-Glasman's contract.
A city-commissioned investigation also reported in December that Hernandez verbally abused city employees, and Alvarez-
Glasman said he was one of the victims. Hernandez denied the accusations.
Hernandez's council colleagues were also skeptical of his proposal.
Mayor Michael Touhey said limiting legal expenses would encourage people with lawsuits to simply wait until the city ran out of money.
"We don't have the ability to cap our exposure to lawsuits," he said.
Councilwoman Sherri Lane agreed, saying she didn't want to "tie the hands" of city staff. Councilwoman Shelley Sanderson said it would be micromanaging, and questioned Hernandez's motives.
"It feels like there's just some animosity with regards to the legal services," Sanderson said.
Councilman Steve Herfert questioned why Hernandez hadn't brought the issue up during budget discussions, instead of in the run-up to a November election in which Hernandez and Herfert are running for re-election.
"It looks to us like there's a personal vendetta against the city attorney," Herfert said. "It almost looks like a political hit job."
Hernandez denied the accusation, and said he had been inspired in part by the city of Rosemead. Rosemead put a $30,000 monthly limit on its legal costs this month, after receiving a $55,000 May bill from its city attorney.
Hernandez also noted that other cities were uncomfortable with Alvarez-Glasman, including Rosemead, where the City Council had considered hiring the attorney.
Some Rosemead council members called Alvarez-Glasman too political, and said they decided against him after learning of his brief flirtation with running for city treasurer in Montebello and his $1,000 donations to two of Rosemead's council members made them uncomfortable.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, September 21, 2007
U.S., Walnut reach settlement deal in voting rights lawsuit The accord calls for all city election materials and notices to be provided in five languages
By Tami Abdollah, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
When Walnut city officials were asked before their local election in 2006 whether federal observers could watch the process, the locals said they happily agreed to the chance to receive positive feedback.
"We were a little disappointed that our positive feedback was in the way of a lawsuit," said City Manager Rob Wishner.
A suit filed in April by the U.S. Department of Justice's civil rights division alleged that the city had violated sections of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 by not translating election materials into Chinese and Korean and by failing to provide other assistance to voters of those ethnicities with limited English skills. On Thursday, the federal government and the city reached an agreement to settle the case. The accord calls for all city election materials and notices to be provided in English, Tagalog, Spanish, Korean and Chinese. Federal observers also will monitor the next two elections, Wishner said.
In a statement, Rena J. Comisac, acting assistant attorney general for the civil rights division, called the agreement a "remedial plan."
City Atty. Michael Montgomery said the settlement agreement did not find fault in any previous election or demonstrate that anyone had been prevented from voting. Walnut officials said that the city has provided ballots translated into Chinese since 1992 and that the 2006 election, monitored by the federal government, had a ballot printed in all five languages. The Voting Rights Act requires that after the population of voting-age citizens in a single language group reaches a certain threshold in a jurisdiction, specific steps must be taken. For example, all election materials -- including forms, notices and instructions -- provided in English must also be furnished in the relevant languages.
According to the 2000 census, 28.6% of the nearly 22,000 people of voting age in the city were of Chinese descent and 6.3% were of Korean descent. Of these, 65.3% of the Chinese group and 62.3% of the Korean group had limited English skills.
The settlement agreement still requires approval from a panel of three judges and ratification by the City Council. "It's a good tool for moving forward," Wishner said. "It will also serve, hopefully, as a model for other communities in the region, state and other areas of the country with similar diversity."
Los Angeles Times, September 21, 2007
Lynwood Residents Accuse Willoughby of Malpractice and Misrepresentation
by Yussuf Simmonds
Attorney Willoughby's appointment as the city attorney adds fuel to the recall
The residents of the city of Lynwood are up in arms over the recent appointment of tainted attorney Anthony Willoughby as their city attorney after they found out that he was publicly reproved for ethics violations by the California State Bar and required to re-take the State Bar ethic exam. The mayor and the city council members are in the throes of a recall and Willoughby’s appointment appears to be aggravating the situation. Information about his past ethics violations has been circulated throughout that community and the residents are poised to challenge the city council-members at the next council meeting over Willoughby’s appointment. Dr. Hanan Islam, a resident of Lynwood and a member of the Concerned Citizens of Lynwood Alliance (CCLA), sent a three-page letter addressed to the City Council Members, with copies to the city attorney, the assistant city attorney and the city manager outlining the citizens’ concern about Willoughby’s ethical violations.
ImageShe also stated, “I was very upset about Mr. Willoughby’s performance in representing the city during a recent recall hearing in court. There were two court dates and he basically did not show up therefore, the city council was not represented. And I would definitely be at the next council meeting to present my concerns.”
The CCLA is a group formed by the citizens of Lynwood and they have circulated the above-mentioned letter to the city residents. The letter dated August 28, 2007, stated, “We, the Concerned Citizens of Lynwood Alliance, are appalled at the performance of the Lynwood city attorney’s office and feel it is our civic duty to communicate this to our council in hopes it may assist you to make vital decisions regarding the legal representation you have chose. Our council is receiving inadequate legal counsel and representation and frankly we believe it borders on, if not is, malpractice.”
It appears that Willoughby was supposed to represent the city council at an Order to Show Cause Preliminary Injunction hearing aimed at stopping the recall, and according to the letter, he was not properly prepared. “This was the most embarrassing and damning performance by an attorney I have ever witnessed,” said Dr. Islam, who was present in court.
The letter continued, “...the judge noted that the documents filed by Atty. Willoughby were inadequate, having no useable data in them and she was unable to utilize them in making any decision on behalf of the council.” The judge therefore had no choice but to allow the proponents of the recall to move ahead. The letter explained that there seemed to be a question regarding some of the signatures that were gathered for the recall to proceed and the city council members were challenging the validity of the signatures and the recall. And that is the matter, which Willoughby was expected to present to the court on behalf of the Lynwood city council and indirectly the CCLA, who are also not in favor of the recall.
The CCLA believed that the information Willoughby presented in court was inadequate and unprofessional. The letter further stated, “Who are these attorneys (really) working for? It appears to us that there is intentional misrepresentation going on. We just don’t believe educated professionals can be this incompetent without intending to be so. The success we could have had with having these fraudulent signatures overturned has been thwarted by Anthony Willoughby and Associates, and we want our (city) council to know it and to now look closely at how they are being represented.”
As a result of Willoughby’s inadequate legal representation, the recall process will proceed, and the mayor and city council must now defend the recall rather than doing the business that they were elected to do. Council-member Rev. Alfreddie Johnson believed that his service as an elected official on behalf of the residents of Lynwood would thwart the recall. He said, “After the recall election is over, we are going to investigate the appointment of the city attorney. It is the responsible thing to do; it’s good for the citizens of Lynwood and for the city council.”
Council-member Leticia Vasquez, when asked to comment on the Willoughby appointment stated, “I don’t recall having any discussion about it because we have a recall going on and we have other pressing issues to address with the city.” After she was told about Willoughby’s public reproval and ethics violations she refused to return calls. She became very evasive and seemed to be trying to shield Willoughby’s record from exposure even though it already is a part of the public domain.
Calls to the mayor and the other city council-members were not returned.
When asked if the circumstances surrounding Willoughby’s appointment may be adding fuel to the recall, the president of CCLA, Lorna Hawkins said, “I think it does add fuel, of course it does because it’s a question mark about his ethics violatons. But I’m sure that’s going to be taken care of after the election. We, as the concerned citizens of Lynwood, will have to look into that and make sure that we get the proper representation for this city. This recall has been a real pain for the citizens who live here; this is the third recall attempt in two years.” As far as the city attorney’s performance, Hawkins further stated, “We are not satisfied with the things that he has done and the allegations that were brought against him about his past history. That’s very important to us. We want a city attorney that we can trust and one that we can come to and know that what he is saying is law, and that he actually knows what he is saying and he has the experience because he’s being paid a lot of money.”
Yvonne Wood, a resident of Lynwood, expressed her outrage at what she believed was conduct unbecoming of the mayor and the city council, “There’s a recall going on and when I read about the city attorney I was shocked. So what I’m trying to do is put the word out; I’m going to xerox these papers and I’ve already talked to people in the neighborhood. I am also getting ready to give these papers to the secretary to the principal of Lynwood High School to circulate to the employees who are also residents of Lynwood.” When asked about the lack of due diligence in checking out Willoughby’s past prior to his appointment, she continued, “I think they should investigate his past.
Willoughby was publicly reproved by the California State Bar for using money from his clients’ trust account for his personal expenses. And according to public records in another one of his cases—Lightfoot vs James Construction Company—he failed to competently perform the services for which he was employed and because of that the Lightfoots’ case was dismissed, and Willoughby paid them $8,000.00 by way of a settlement.
This reporter called Willoughby’s office seeking his comments. By press time, there had been no response.
Los Angeles Sentinel, September 20, 2007
Blog's pay stub post protected?
Expert says city employee information is public record
By Will Bigham, Staff Writer
CLAREMONT - When the Claremont Insider blog acquired and then published copies of city employee pay stubs last week, City Hall cried foul. Obtain Public Information: Freedom Friday
City Attorney Sonia Carvalho said the pay stubs contained private, personal information such as references to survivor benefits, use of vacation and sick time, and information on life-insurance benefits.
"Details as to how that employee directs his or her money - be it to a retirement plan, or to a union for dues, or for reimbursement for a holiday party - should not be released to the public for inspection and discussion," Carvalho said.
But according to public-records experts who considered, item by item, the information included on city pay stubs, the documents are a public record that the city would be required to release upon request - with fewer redactions than Carvalho indicates should be made.
The pay stubs include a "grouping of little factoids about various little entitlements that (employees) have from the city, which says nothing about them as human beings or as city employees," said Terry Francke, general counsel for Californians Aware.
"And this is something that public agencies have trouble understanding or grasping, and the city attorneys usually aren't very helpful about educating them about it."
Information that could be redacted from an employee pay stub includes Social Security numbers, dates of birth and home addresses, said Peter Sheer, executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition.
None of that information was included on City Manager Jeff Parker's pay stub, the first to be posted by the blog.
However, most of the 283 pay stubs mailed by the Insider to the Daily Bulletin include check numbers, routing numbers for city bank accounts - all of the information normally found on the bottom of a check.
That information may also be withheld from a public-records release, Scheer said.
Before a state Supreme Court decision in August clarified the law, public agencies released only salary and benefit information by name for top-level administrators.
For lower-level employees, only job titles were used.
"But about two weeks ago, the California Supreme Court said that salary and compensation information about all government employees, by name, is public information," Scheer said. "And the public can get it by requesting it.
"If pay stubs simply reflect all of an employee's compensation, without showing confidential information, then those pay stubs are exactly what the Supreme Court was talking about, and they must be disclosed."
In Parker's pay stub, for the pay period ending Dec. 17, itemized earnings, benefits, leave earnings and deductions are listed and quantified by dollar amount.
For example, the document says $43.45 was deducted for a dental plan, but it does not list any specific dental ailments or work that Parker may have had done.
Because specific information on employees' medical conditions is withheld, the public disclosure would be required, Francke said.
"I don't know what the city is referring to with reference to medical information," Francke said. "Because I've never heard of a pay stub that includes any medical information."
"So the question it comes down to is: What's the big deal?" Francke added. "It's not information that can be exploited by anyone to blackmail, coerce or harm another individual."
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, September 14, 2007
Claremont considers legal action in pay-stub leak
By Will Bigham, Staff Writer
CLAREMONT - The City Council met in a closed session Tuesday evening to consider legal action related to the posting of city employee pay stubs by a local blog last week.
City Attorney Sonia Carvalho refused to say against whom the council was considering litigation. The council did not come to a conclusion about whether to pursue legal action.
"We have reason to believe that the city of Claremont needs to protect its internal information system, and that's what the closed session was about - whether we need to pursue legal action or not," Carvalho said.
On Tuesday, a package arrived at the Daily Bulletin newsroom that included a CD-ROM with scans of 283 city employee pay stubs.
The package included a return address of "Claremont Buzz" - a handle used by the anonymous lead author of the Claremont Insider blog - and a note that said: "In case we go to jail."
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, September 13, 2007
Council accused of Brown Act violation The city attorney's office denies any wrongdoing
By Angela Potter, Staff Writer
Four of the five members of the Dana Point City Council have signed a statement opposing the effort to recall Mayor Diane Harkey.
Recall proponents responded immediately by sending a letter to City Attorney Patrick Mu�oz accusing the council members of violating the state's open meeting law. The statement is worded as a resolution, but isn't on any official letterhead.
The city attorney's office has countered with a letter which said the City Council has done nothing wrong and the resolution was simply an expression of personal political beliefs. The city attorney's office says signing the resolution didn't constitute an official city action.
Mayor Diane Harkey and City Council members Lisa Bartlett, Joel Bishop and Steven Weinberg signed a resolution dated Sept. 4 which says the accusations against Harkey are "not well founded" and that the recall detracts from city business.
Councilwoman Lara Anderson did not sign.
No one denies that the City Council members are entitled to their own opinions about the recall. But Jim Lacy, former City Councilman and recall proponent, said the document was meant to establish that the recall did not have City Council support and was a clear case of a Brown Act violation.
"There's no question about it," he said. "It's not even close. Their intention was to promote this as a collective decision of the City Council to establish that the City Council had collectively decided to oppose the recall."
The document has only five lines for signatures and was not signed by any members of the public, which Lacy said was further evidence that the resolution was meant to be seen as an official city action.
But in his written response to Lacy's letter accusing the council of a Brown Act violation, John Ramirez, who works in the city attorney's office, pointed out that, "Nowhere on the document is there any indication that it is, or purports to be, an official City document."
"The city simply had nothing to do with the creation of the alleged document," Ramirez wrote. "Indeed, the only support for your position is that the document was signed by members of the City Council and is dubbed a 'resolution.' � Furthermore, it goes without saying that simply because a document is entitled 'resolution' does not make it an official city resolution."
Terry Francke is the general counsel with Californians Aware, an organization that promotes open government and free speech. He said that, in his opinion, the resolution was likely a violation of the Brown Act, a state law that requires public agencies to post agendas and meet publicly, unless a topic is exempt.
However, Francke also acknowledged the argument that the document could be seen as nothing more than a statement of personal political beliefs.
One point of concern, Francke said, is that the document is dated Sept. 4 � the same day as a City Council meeting, further blurring the line between official and non-official city action. The council did not discuss or debate the recall issue during that meeting, and there was nothing on the agenda pertaining to the recall.
"I'm afraid using the word resolution and releasing this document after a council meeting really does blur that distinction and leaves them open to severe criticism at least," he said.
It would have been better, Francke said, for the City Council to debate the issue during an open and properly noticed City Council meeting with a public vote on the issue.
"Nothing prevented them from doing this publicly," he said. "Obviously any one of them or all four individually could have said, 'I think this recall stinks.' When they do so collectively, and when they do so in a joint expression called a resolution, it seems to me close enough to an official expression they had better discuss and debate that resolution at a property noticed and open meeting."
But in his letter responding to Lacy's claim, Ramirez said it would not be appropriate to politick from the dias.
"The issue addressed in the challenged document is the political stance of individual members of the City Council regarding the effort to recall Mayor Harkey," Ramirez wrote. "Neither a city nor a City Council has authority to engage in partisan politics. Such partisan political actions are quintessentially outside the subject matter jurisdiction of the City or City Council."
Orange County Register, September 12, 2007
City disables access to online archive
By Will Bigham, Staff Writer
CLAREMONT - City officials Tuesday disabled public access to City Hall's online document archive, citing concerns that it may have been the source of city employee pay stubs that were posted by the Claremont Insider blog.
On Monday night, Google, which hosts the blog, removed the post that included the pay stubs. The blog later re-posted the item without including the scanned pay stubs.
"Bottom line is, if we have a problem with our system that would allow for information that shouldn't be public to be public, we need to identify if there is a problem with our system," said City Manager Jeff Parker. "So until that is solved and identified, we're going to take that action."
City officials continue to investigate how the pay stubs were released. They remain unwilling to confirm claims made by the lead author of the blog that the pay stubs were accessed through a legal search of the city's public document archive.
On Friday, the Claremont Insider posted a copy of Parker's pay stub, along with the salaries and benefits of 31 staff members identified by name.
The blog later posted the pay stub of Jeff Porter, director of human services, and the salaries and benefits of five additional staff members.
The Claremont Insider has said in blog posts that it typed something along the lines of "Jeff Parker salary" into the search function of the archive, yielding several years' worth of pay stubs.
But attempts by the city to duplicate the search yielded no pay stubs, said Mayor Peter Yao, fueling concerns that the documents may have been obtained by other means.
City Attorney Sonia Carvalho first contacted Google on Friday to request that the post be removed because, the city claims, the pay stubs contain private information about employees that should not be available to the public.
In an interview Tuesday, Carvalho would not elaborate on her communication with Google and refused to release the city's e-mail correspondence with the company, citing attorney-client privilege.
Carvalho said the city was withholding the e-mail correspondence because city litigation against Google remains a possibility if the company fails in the future to respond if the blog re-posts copies of the pay stubs.
In an e-mail response on Tuesday to the Daily Bulletin, Google spokeswoman Wendy Rozeluk said: "Blogger prohibits certain kinds of content from being hosted on its servers."
"When we are notified of the existence of content that violates our terms of service," Rozeluk added, "we act quickly to review it and determine whether it violates these policies. If we determine that it does, we remove it immediately."
According to e-mails forwarded to the Daily Bulletin from the e-mail address listed on the Claremont Insider blog, Google removed the post because the city documents were copyrighted.
The authenticity of the correspondence could not be confirmed by Google because the Internet company did not respond to interview requests on Tuesday.
"We have removed your post due to the images of the paycheck stub of the city of Claremont, which in actuality is their copyrighted material," the e-mail from Google said. "If you would like to reload the post that we removed, feel free to do so as long as you leave out the images of the paycheck."
Parker and Carvalho refused to discuss whether the city argued in its correspondence with Google that the city pay stubs were copyrighted documents.
According to one open-government expert, the documents are not copyrighted.
"It doesn't make any sense," said Terry Francke, general counsel of Californians Aware. "First of all, I doubt that it's a fact that the city copyrights the pay stubs. I don't know why it would.
"And secondly, it's not clear to me that the display of the pay stubs would violate the copyright act anyway. It's simply displaying an image of them, it's not making a copy of them."
Francke added that if the documents are indeed copyrighted, the posting by the blog of the pay stubs would qualify as a "fair use" - meaning it would pass legal muster - because there is no market value lost by the publication.
"And what possible market value does the city have in the images of its pay stubs?" Francke added.
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, September 12, 2007
Conflict of interest in school deal?
By Jennifer Mclain
ROSEMEAD — A deal that appears to benefit the community, Garvey School District and East Los Angeles College also raises questions about the involvement of the mayor and city attorney.
The city on Tuesday granted permission to the Garvey School District to use Dan T. Williams Elementary School as a satellite campus for ELAC.
The deal came after years of negotiating, said Garvey school board member Bob Bruesch.
It will help Garvey supplement a $512,000 budget shortfall and satisfies ELAC's demand for more classes.
But questions surfaced over the city's and school district's legal representation as well as to a possible $20,000 that Rosemead Mayor John Tran will make from the agreement.
Tran, who served on the Garvey School Board until he left in 2005 to take a seat on the City Council, is a Realtor and served as negotiator between Garvey and ELAC.
"There is nothing wrong with a former trustee acting as a negotiator," said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, a watchdog group. "But an attorney can't represent two clients on the same issue. He would have to disqualify himself."
City Attorney Bonifacio Garcia's firm, which represents the Garvey School District, was expected to provide legal counsel for the city's planning commission meeting. But shortly before the meeting, City Manager Oliver Chi said he called another attorney to represent the city on that particular issue. Garcia's firm dealt with the rest of the agenda.
Joe Montes of Burke, Williams and Sorensen was hired last month to take Garcia's place as the city's redevelopment agency lawyer and to be the counsel to the planning commission. However, Montes was not scheduled to start his new position for another two weeks, Chi said.
The potential for conflict of interest could have been there, interim Redevelopment Director Brian Saeki said, but it was avoided by having Montes serve as counsel instead of Garcia's firm.
George Yin, the attorney from Garcia, Calderon and Ruiz, recused himself from the agenda item.
"George Yin made a statement that he has never worked on the project and never provided any opinions on the subject to the (city)staff," Saeki said. "But he did recuse himself, and Joe Montes stepped in and oversaw the proceedings."
Bruesch said the only thing Garcia's firm has done for Garvey in the land deal is, "helping us with dotting all of our 'I's' and crossing all our our 'T's'."
When Garcia was hired in April, council members questioned whether it was a conflict of interest for him to serve as counsel to Garvey School District and the city.
The day that Garcia was hired, Councilwoman Polly Low asked him: "Is there a conflict of interest for you to represent the city of Rosemead as well as the Garvey School District?"
Garcia said there wasn't, and in the event that there was an overlapping issue, "we would step back and .... advise that you bring other counsel to handle your relationship with the school district."
Residents also raised conflict-of-interest questions about the mayor's connection to the lease deal.
Steven Ly, president of a community group, Rosemead Partners, said that he sent out a letter to several hundred neighbors informing them of the possible change in use to Williams School. He also noted Tran's involvement.
"We view what is going on as a conflict of interest," Ly said. "(Tran) will be profiting a large commission."
Tran, who will receive up to 4 percent of the $500,000 deal, said that he has been upfront with staff and council members.
"This is another erroneous attempt to mislead and deceive the public once again," Tran said of Rosemead Partners, formerly known as Rosemead Guardians. "The Rosemead Guardians should be ashamed of themselves."
He also said that he plans on recusing himself from the council meeting if this comes.
Stern said as long as Tran doesn't participate in the vote and doesn't tell his colleagues how to vote, he is within the law.
"I told everybody not to mention ELAC in front of me," Tran said. "If it gets approved, I will recuse myself."
Though the mayor said the district contacted him, Bruesch said that Tran approached the district.
"He is a Realtor, and before he went into politics, that is what he did," Bruesch said. "When he said he would negotiate the lease for us it seemed logical because he knew both parties and could work through the issues."
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, September 9, 2007
City looks into leak of pay stub
By Will Bigham, Staff Writer
CLAREMONT - The posting on a local blog Friday of a scanned copy of City Manager Jeff Parker's pay stub left city officials scrambling to determine how the document was leaked.
The pay stub contains private information that the city would not be required to release upon request, said City Attorney Sonia Carvalho, putting the city in a position to be sued by any staff member whose privacy was compromised.
Parker said late Friday that he plans to investigate how the information was leaked and said he had contacted Police Chief Paul Cooper about the possibility that the document had been stolen.
Carvalho said Friday afternoon that she had contacted the legal department at Google, which hosts the Claremont Insider blog, to request that the private information in the post be removed.
At 6 p.m. Friday, the post remained online and unchanged. The post also contains information on the salaries and benefits awarded last year to 31 city staff members who are identified by name.
"It is my opinion, and also the city attorney's opinion, that it violates privacy issues with my employees," Parker said.
"I'm not happy because I don't think it's information that should be on any kind of Web site, or a blog in this case," he added.
The writers of the Claremont Insider blog are anonymous. The blog has been posting consistently since February, often taking aim at city leaders it refers to as the "Claremont 400."
City officials said Friday that there had been no public-records request or release related to the information on the blog, meaning that either the information was leaked by a staff member, or the city's computer system was hacked by an outside party.
"We're disappointed that the information got leaked out," said Mayor Peter Yao. "The city clearly has a responsibility to protect that data, and we didn't do a very good job."
The blog post included an explanation for its acquisition of the information that appeared to be satirical.
"However it got into the hands of the blog, there was a theft involved, and that concerns me greatly," Parker said. "I'm going to look into starting an investigation into the potential theft of that information."
Parker would not comment when asked whether he would consider legal action against the city if it's determined that a city staff member was the source of the leak.
He would also not comment on whether he was considering taking legal action against the blog.
The lead author of the blog did not immediately respond to an e-mail seeking comment late Friday.
Whittier Daily News, September 8, 2007
Huge legal fees dog attorney Cities fired Garcia over bill excesses
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
Concerns about legal fees trail Rosemead's city attorney, Bonifacio Garcia.
Officials at several cities have complained about high bills, questionable charges and lack of city attorney experience.
Garcia's firm, Garcia, Calderon and Ruiz, represents Rosemead, Wasco, Garvey School District and served Arvin's planning commission until the city fired the attorneys in July.
Garcia defends the quality of his firm's work and its rates.
"We want the highest quality of lawyers," he said, "and we're willing to pay for them and so are our clients."
Garcia is relatively new to the city attorney's business. He spent the past 11 years representing Garvey School District. In his 26 years as a lawyer, his first city attorney job was in January for the city of Wasco, which is near Bakersfield.
Garcia's lack of experience was the cause for an increase in costs in Arvin, Wasco and Rosemead, officials said.
"People think an attorney is an attorney is an attorney," said Alan Christensen, interim city manager at Arvin. "But you wouldn't hire a research attorney to do litigation for you. Of course they could learn, but it will be on the city's dime."
In Rosemead, a May bill for $55,000 prompted the City Council on Tuesday to place a $30,000 cap on Garcia's contract.
Garcia charged the city $100,000 the past three months. That is nearly the total charged for a year's worth of work by the previous law firm, Wallin, Kress, Reisman and Kranitz, according to city records.
From 2000 to 2007, annual charges from Wallin, Kress, Reisman and Kranitz ranged from $137,583 to $179,219, according to the city's finance records.
Rosemead City Council members Gary Taylor and Margaret Clark said Garcia performed work that should be done by staff and that is another reason why his bills were so high.
Garcia was originally hired to represent Rosemead's redevelopment agency, city and housing authority. Two weeks ago, however, the council hired a separate attorney to represent the redevelopment agency and housing authority. Now, Garcia only represents the city.
Pasadena Star News, September 4, 2007
Rosemead puts cap on legal fees Move comes after city billed $100,000 in 3 months
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
Concerns about legal fees trail Rosemead's city attorney, Bonifacio Garcia.
Officials at several cities have complained about high bills, questionable charges and lack of city attorney experience.
Garcia's firm, Garcia, Calderon and Ruiz, represents Rosemead, Wasco, Garvey School District and served Arvin's planning commission until the city fired the attorneys in July.
Garcia defends the quality of his firm's work and its rates.
"We want the highest quality of lawyers," he said, "and we're willing to pay for them and so are our clients."
Garcia is relatively new to the city attorney's business. He spent the past 11 years representing Garvey School District. In his 26 years as a lawyer, his first city attorney job was in January for the city of Wasco, which is near Bakersfield.
Garcia's lack of experience was the cause for an increase in costs in Arvin, Wasco and Rosemead, officials said.
"People think an attorney is an attorney is an attorney," said Alan Christensen, interim city manager at Arvin. "But you wouldn't hire a research attorney to do litigation for you. Of course they could learn, but it will be on the city's dime."
In Rosemead, a May bill for $55,000 prompted the City Council on Tuesday to place a $30,000 cap on Garcia's contract.
Garcia charged the city $100,000 the past three months. That is nearly the total charged for a year's worth of work by the previous law firm, Wallin, Kress, Reisman and Kranitz, according to city records.
From 2000 to 2007, annual charges from Wallin, Kress, Reisman and Kranitz ranged from $137,583 to $179,219, according to the city's finance records.
Rosemead City Council members Gary Taylor and Margaret Clark said Garcia performed work that should be done by staff and that is another reason why his bills were so high.
Garcia was originally hired to represent Rosemead's redevelopment agency, city and housing authority. Two weeks ago, however, the council hired a separate attorney to represent the redevelopment agency and housing authority. Now, Garcia only represents the city.
In Arvin, Garcia was fired because of his high bills, city officials said. Garcia's firm represented the planning commission from November to July.
"The city did a financial review of their legal expenses, and based on that decided to let the legal firm Garcia, Calderon and Ruiz go," Christensen said.
Garcia, however, said his firm's departure was the result of political turmoil and came after former Arvin City Manager Enrique Ochoa resigned.
Arvin's financial records show that for eight months of legal work to oversee the planning commission, Garcia's firm charged nearly $50,000. Half of those charges came from two months alone.
The flat fee charged by Arvin's previous firm in 2005 was $105,000 for city attorney and planning commission representation. That included attendance at two council meetings per month. Garcia's contract required the attendance of one planning commission meeting a month.
Arvin city officials said they are also asking for a refund for work performed by attorney Eva Plaza, who charged a partner and associate rate of $225 per hour. She was not admitted to the California State Bar until July, records show, and Arvin officials said the city should have been charged accordingly.
In Wasco, the hiring of Garcia's firm prompted a grand jury investigation, which was released in July.
The Kern County grand jury alleges the Wasco City Council violated the state's open meeting law by deciding in secret to fire the city attorney and replace the firm with Garcia, Calderon and Ruiz.
The report states that since Garcia was hired, "the city is incurring substantial increases in the cost of having a city attorney. It is estimated that this will cost four to five times more than the previous city attorney."
Garcia denied the grand jury's allegations. On behalf of the city, Garcia responded, "The grand jury's mistaken legal conclusions could have been avoided with a reasonable amount of legal research and factual investigation."
According to Wasco's finance records, Garcia's firm billed the city $148,024 for six months worth of work. In comparison, the previous law firm billed the city $34,178 for the previous six months of work.
"He is not overcharging the city. Some people say that his contract rate is too high, but he is charging the city what the contract rate is," said Wasco City Manager Ron Mittag.
Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, said an attorney can charge whatever he wants to charge. "The real question of course is, `Is this guy providing his money's worth?', and that is something for the city to determine."
Wasco Councilman Tilo Cortez said he thinks Garcia is "screwing the city."
"Bonny says you get what you pay for," Cortez said. "But I don't see what we are getting for the extra money that we are paying him."
Garcia's charges at the Sweetwater Union School District, where he has been counsel for the past 12 years, also raised questions.
The San Diego Union-Tribune reported last year the Sweetwater Union High School District surpassed its legal budget halfway through the fiscal year, spending more than $1 million on legal services for the year. That was 77 percent more than in the past fiscal year, the Union-Tribune reported.
Officials from the Sweetwater Union School District did not return calls for this story.
Garcia stands by his work, his charges and the councils he represents. And ultimately, he said, it is up to the elected officials to determine whether they are getting value from Garcia and his firm.
"One of things you don't read about is any massive losses," Garcia said. "Our reputation is that we are very effective lawyers."
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, September 4, 2007
Council district proposal fails
West Covina petition rejected by city, judge
By Frank C. Girardot, Staff Writer
WEST COVINA - A proposal to divide the city into five council districts failed to make the November ballot.
Organizers submitted petitions containing nearly 6,000 signatures to Sue Rush, West Covina's assistant City Clerk, earlier this month. But she rejected the petition on Aug. 10 for several reasons, according to a a statement from the city issued Thursday.
"The most significant (flaw) was the petition's failure to provide a summary of the initiative on the top of each page signed by supporters," the press release said.
Rush did not return phone calls.
Supporters said dividing the city into council districts would make running for office less expensive for candidates and give voters more local representation. Opponents of the plan said the divisions could result in uneven distribution of sales tax revenues.
Petition supporter Fred Sykes filed a lawsuit on Thursday asking county Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe to force the city to release the petition to the county Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's office and be placed on the November ballot. But the judge declined to issue an order, Sykes said.
"We hoped to get this on the November ballot," he said. "I thought I would be able to testify, but the judge said he would not listen to live testimony."
Sykes, who is running for City Council, said it was not likely he would appeal.
"I spent the $3,000 to get this case heard," he said. "I have yet to try to raise $40,000 to $50,000 for the campaign. It's probably going to have to stay where it is. It's a dead issue right now."
West Covina Mayor Mike Touhey said the ruling isn't necessarily a vindication for the city.
"It's a win, but with Fred Sykes, it's just one issue after another causing the city to spend money on lawsuits," Touhey said. "I call it campaigning at taxpayer's expense."
In their answer to the suit, the city contended that Sykes and fellow petitioners may have misled signers by not attaching a map of the proposed districts and other legally required information.
"I don't know what they may have told people at their front door," Touhey said. "I'm concerned what they may have told people when they were gathering the signatures.
"I don't know if they got 6,000 through straight up information or through biased information."
Sykes denied the charge.
"Absolutely no way," Sykes said. "Their position was that citizens were stupid. That's not the case."
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, August 30, 2007
Rosemead council puts cap on city attorney fees
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - In an effort to cut attorney's fees, the City Council on Tuesday approved a new contract that caps charges.
The change in contract comes after Rosemead was billed $55,000 by City Attorney Bonifacio Garcia, who represented the city, the housing authority and its redevelopment agency.
"Everyone agrees that the $55,000 bill was high, and based on that the City Council and staff have taken proactive steps in preventing that in the future," interim City Manager Oliver Chi said.
The council voted 3-2 to approve the new contract, with Councilwoman Margaret Clark and Councilman Gary Taylor opposed.
The new contract for Garcia outlines what services are being provided to Rosemead and are covered under the $15,000 monthly retainer for 70 hours of work. Garcia's previous contract had a $5,000 monthly retainer, but no cap and no description of what the retainer included.
"It gives the city more protection in terms of trying to ensure that we don't have an excessively high bill," said interim City Manager Oliver Chi.
Any additional services cost $210 for partners, $150 per hour for law clerk and $125 for paralegals. No more than $30,000 can be charged for a month by Garcia, "unless there was some sort of extraordinary circumstances," Garcia said.
Councilwoman Polly Low said the council struck a good deal.
"I think with the retainer at $15,000 and cap at $30,000, it's pretty reasonable," she said.
The past three months, Garcia charged the city $100,000 - that is nearly the total cost charged for a year's worth of work by the previous law firm Wallin, Kress, Reisman and Kranitz, according to city records.
From 2000 to 2007, annual charges from Wallin, Kress, Reisman and Kranitz ranged from $137,583 to $179,219, according to the city's finance records.
The city also paid for former City Attorney Robert Kress's medical and pension payments.
After Wallin, Kress, Reisman and Kranitz resigned - the firm cited philosophical differences as their reason to move on - Garcia was hired at the request of his friend and former colleague, Councilman John Nunez.
It was also Nunez who recommended after Garcia was hired to hire a separate attorney to represent the city's redevelopment and housing authority agencies.
Still, some City Council members are concerned that the contract is expensive.
Attorney's fees for La Puente, a city of 41,000, ranged from $9,000 to $20,000 a month during 2005-2006, when Alvarez-Glasman and Colvin represented the city and its redevelopment agency.
In Monterey Park, a city of 62,000, city attorney firm Brown, Winfield and Canzoneri charged from $26,000 to $55,000 a month in 2005. Of that $484,582 annual cost, $192,489 of it was paid for by an insurance company.
Garcia charges for travel time and mileage, but does not bill for conferences attended, he said.
Burke, Williams and Sorensen's contract states that it will charge the city $225 per hour for the first 15 hours of work for both the redevelopment agency and the housing authority. After that, rates are $275 for partners, $225 for associates, and $150 for paralegal and clerk time.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, August 29, 2007
Recall election a go in Montebello
By Sandra T. Molina, Staff Writer
MONTEBELLO - The city clerk's office said Wednesday a community action group has gathered enough certified signatures to force a recall election targeting Councilman Jeff Siccama.
The City Council has 14 days to set a recall election date, City Attorney Arnoldo Beltran said. It must be scheduled for not less than 88 nor more than 125 days after notification is given to the City Council of the petition's validity.
If the council fails to schedule an election, the county will step in and set a date, Beltran said.
Montebello Citizens for Honest Government began its petition drive last April in response to Siccama, Mayor Norma Lopez-Reid and Councilman Bob Bagwell's efforts to explore the county taking over the city's fire services.
The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder's Office verified 5,028 signatures of registered voters of the 6,717 total signatures filed.
At least 4,713 verified signatures were required to trigger a recall election.
"I support the right of the voters and the democratic process," Siccama, 46, said in a prepared statement Thursday. "I do not question the validity of the signatures themselves, but I believe the voters were misled."
He said the Montebello Citizens for Honest Government has duped voters into thinking he supports dismantling the fire department.
"Nothing can be further from the truth," said Siccama, who was first elected in November 2005. "I have always supported the Montebello Fire Department and will continue to do so."
He added the election will give him the opportunity to set the record straight.
Representatives from the Montebello Citizens for Honest Government did not return calls Thursday seeking comment.
Last month the same group fell short in the number of valid signatures needed to recall Lopez-Reid and Bagwell.
The recall attempt needed the support of 20 percent of the city's 23,563 registered voters.
In the recall petition aimed at Lopez-Reid, the group collected 6,178 signatures, but county election officials were able to validate only 4,689 of them, falling short by 24 signatures.
In the petition against Bagwell, 4,581 of the 6,068 signatures gathered were validated, missing the 20 percent target by 132 votes.
The three council members have maintained they have not made up their minds on which department provides fire services, but are trying to ascertain if a county-run department would save the city money. Local cities such as Whittier and Pico Rivera contract with the county for fire and emergency services.
The three council members also were targeted because they voted not to allow an initiative giving voters the right to decide on fire services on the November ballot.
It was rejected because the notice of intent for the initiative was not printed in a publication of record.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, August 24, 2007
A political issue
Pomona City Attorney Arnold Alvarez-Glasman's law firm last week lost out on gaining the Rosemead Redevelopment Agency as a client because of fears of involvement in politics.
The City Council in Rosemead decided to hire Burke, Williams and Sorensen, one of the area's largest legal firms serving cities, instead of the firm of Alvarez-Glasman and Colvin, or three other candidates.
Rosemead Mayor John Tran and Councilman John Nuñez moved to hire Alvarez-Glasman and Colvin, but they could get no other support from their colleagues. Some council members and residents were concerned about Alvarez-Glasman's political activities.
His firm, which also represents West Covina, Bell Gardens and Pico Rivera, made political contributions in Rosemead of $1,000 to Tran in 2004 and $1,000 to Councilwoman Polly Low in 2007.
"I have a real problem with Glasman and his involvement in politics," Councilwoman Margaret Clark said.
Alvarez-Glasman nearly became a candidate in November in his home of Montebello. He took out papers to run for city treasurer but later said he had decided not to run.
He is a former Montebello councilman.
"It doesn't matter that he withdrew it. It shows that he's still involved with politics," Clark said. "We don't need this kind of politics in Rosemead."
Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, August 19, 2007
Council decides on law firm
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - The city hired a new redevelopment attorney on Tuesday, replacing the lawyer it hired four months ago to fill the post.
Law firm Burke, Williams and Sorensen, which began its public law career in Montebello in 1938, beat out four other firms vying to represent the city's redevelopment agency.
The other firms were Best, Best and Krieger; Alvarez-Glasman and Colvin; Kane, Ballmer and Berkman; and Richards, Watson and Gershon. Each were interviewed by the council at Tuesday's meeting.
Contracts for the new law firm have not been negotiated.
Bonifacio Garcia, a former attorney for Burke, Williams and Sorensen, was hired in April to represent the city and its redevelopment agency. He remains as the city attorney.
The decision to bring on a separate agency attorney was sparked by a request by Councilman John Nunez, who said having two firms representing the city and the redevelopment agency will avoid conflict of interest concerns.
The unanimous approval on Tuesday for Burke, Williams and Sorensen came after a failed motion by Mayor John Tran and Nunez to hire Alvarez-Glasman and Colvin.
Council members and residents expressed their apprehension about bringing aboard partner Arnold Alvarez-Glasman, who represents West Covina, Bell Gardens, Pomona and Pico Rivera.
"I have a real problem with Glasman and his involvement in politics," Councilwoman Margaret Clark said, referring to Alvarez-Glasman and his interest in Montebello politics.
Alvarez-Glasman pulled papers Aug. 3 to run for city treasurer, but later said he decided not to run after discussing it with his family.
"It doesn't matter that he withdrew it. It shows that he's still involved with politics," Clark said. "We don't need this kind of politics in Rosemead."
Alvarez-Glasman, a former Montebello City Councilman, has also served as city attorney for Baldwin Park, Montebello, South El Monte and La Puente. However, his contract was not renewed with these cities after new council majorities came aboard.
"He is a fine attorney," said Baldwin Park Councilman David Olivas, who voted to oust Alvarez-Glasman. "I felt it was time to make a change, but it had nothing to do with \ service to the city."
Among the firms, Alvarez-Glasman was the only one to give campaign contributions to existing council members, according to campaign finance records: $1,000 to Tran in 2004, and $1,000 to Councilwoman Polly Low in 2007.
Clark said this was also another reason why she would not vote for Alvarez-Glasman.
Low, however, said that receiving campaign contributions is no guarantee on a vote.
"Just because council members receive a contribution doesn't necessarily mean they will absolutely vote because they've received money," Low said.
Tran, who just before voting for Alvarez-Glasman, added, "$1,000 does not buy my vote, Maggie."
Pasadena Star News, August 15, 2007
Power struggle over project; Firefighters oppose development plans
By Jennifer McLain Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - A project set to be built under high-voltage power lines could prove to be precedent-setting for the rest of the San Gabriel Valley, according to fire union officials.
Los Angeles County fire officials said they originally rejected the retail development at 8518 W. Valley Blvd. because of safety concerns.
Although a spokeswoman for Chief Michael Freeman said Friday the department did not approve the project, city documents show the Fire Department's Fire Prevention Bureau stamped those plans in July as having been reviewed and as requiring no additional changes. Freeman's spokeswoman would not comment further.
The city issued building permits in July to a single-story commercial project.
"They were stamped reviewed, but it basically is county fire saying the project can go ahead," said interim City Manager Oliver Chi. "Because the plans weren't stamped denied, and were checked for fire code regulation, it is safe."
The fire union said the development poses a threat to residents and firefighters, and could change the way other cities deal with such developments.
"We're absolutely, 100 percent opposed to any construction that would put firefighters or residents in danger," said director Paul Rusin of Union 1014, which represents firefighters in the Los Angeles County Fire Department. "We've been very stern on that decision."
The go-ahead on the project came several weeks after Rosemead proposed an ordinance that would have given the city manager final authority over fire code issues in the city.
City officials said they were unhappy with a fire regulation that limits development underneath high-voltage power lines.
In May, the city had eight proposed developments in violation of that code.
The proposal sparked the ire of Freeman, who called it "out of left field" and threatened litigation.
Since then, the city abandoned the ordinance and stopped the development on all but one project. Chi said the project has been in the works for nearly four years.
"We won't allow other developments," Chi said. "But given the uniqueness of the project, and the fact that it's been in the loop for so long, it is appropriate that it be able to move forward."
Union officials, however, fear that the development of this project could be the springboard for future projects.
"Rosemead is the testing front of all the San Gabriel Valley," Rusin said. "If the project continues, it is my sense this is will start to happen all of the area."
Tran said he "whole-heartedly believes" in the fire union and the safety of the firefighters, but assured them that no other developments would occur.
The ordinance comes after approval of a 2006 county fire code that prohibits building underneath high-voltage power lines.
The city proposed an ordinance that would allow the city manager to overrule "all interpretations, recommendations, rules, permits, regulations, applications and decisions" of the fire code, which would include denial of projects by the Fire Department.
Under the existing fire code, homes built under power lines before the regulation change would not be affected unless homeowners wanted to upgrade their homes, which some council members said was a concern.
Tran said this has since been changed after conversations between the Chi and the fire chief.
The regulation has been modified by the fire department to prevent any residential home from having to comply.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, August 13, 2007
Attorney's bills prompt review
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - The city attorney in May was paid more than four times the average monthly charge of the previous attorney, the latest billing records show.
Bonifacio Garcia charged Rosemead $55,000, though information on what the money was spent for was redacted from records. He declined to give an itemized description of the charges, citing "attorney-client privilege."
"I cannot go into detail," Garcia said. "It was $55,000 worth of work."
The city attorney was hired in April after longtime City Attorney Peter Wallin and the firm Wallin, Kress, Reisman and Kranitz quit.
According to the records, Garcia's law firm worked 222 hours in May, and charged between $210 and $225 per hour. Garcia also gets a $5,000 retainer.
The invoice issued for May is the most recently paid. Invoices for June and July are not yet available.
Garcia charged the city nearly $16,000 in April.
During 2005-06, Wallin, Kress, Reisman and Kranitz charged $170,579, or $14,149 monthly, for their work as redevelopment agency and city attorney.
Rosemead is searching for a new redevelopment agency attorney, and interviews for that position are scheduled for Tuesday.
City officials said they were surprised at the high charge for May.
"I'm shocked that it's such a large amount," said Councilwoman Margaret Clark. "I plan to look into where the money is going."
While Rosemead council members have access to the description of the 76 charges listed, Garcia redacted the information from the records the city released.
Experts say the public deserves the right to know how their money is being spent.
"To not justify that cost to the taxpayers is patronizing," said Jim Ewert, general counsel for the California Newspaper Publishers Association.
He said that while some information deserves to be confidential, it is unlikely that all of it should be redacted.
"There may be specific instances in the itemized description where there may be a greater public interest in maintaining the confidentiality of that information," Ewert said. "But it is hard for me to believe that every single item has that status."
Interim City Manager Oliver Chi would only say that Garcia blocked out this information because it was privileged.
"There is detailed information that the city is engaged with, and (Garcia) wanted to redact certain information so that nothing confidential would be made public," Chi said.
Monterey Park's deputy city attorney, Adrian Guerra, said this is not an unusual practice.
"Generally, that type of information is protected under the attorney-client privilege," Guerra said.
City officials would not comment on the redaction of the information.
Instead, it was the cost that prompted Clark to request the council to review Garcia's performance at Tuesday's council meeting.
"We are concerned and staff is looking into the details," said Mayor John Tran.
Chi said he was initially surprised at the high bill, and now is exploring ways in reducing such costs in the future.
Garcia said he stands by his billing.
"I think people get what they pay for," Garcia said Wednesday. "They shouldn't expect something for nothing."
Pasadena Star News, August 10, 2007
Council districts on ballot
By Frank C. Girardot, Staff Writer
WEST COVINA - A petition drive to divide the city into five council districts has enough signatures to qualify the measure for the ballot, organizers said Tuesday.
The plan would call for setting up five electoral districts comprised of roughly 20,000 residents each. The more than 5,600 signatures organizers claim they collected since July must now go to the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's Office for verification, city officials said.
The county must certify about 4,400 of the signatures, or 10 percent of the city's 44,000 registered voters, before the plan can be voted on, West Covina City Clerk Sue Rush.
"We're hoping now to get on the November ballot," said Dana Sykes, one of three West Covina residents who organized the drive. "Being on that ballot means the cost would be much less to the city than if we have to have a special election."
City Attorney Arnold Alvarez-Glasman estimated a special election could cost the city as much as $90,000.
By contrast, Sykes said including the measure in the Nov. 6 general election would cost the city no more than $9,000.
Rush said the petition effort has several other hurdles to clear before it qualifies for any ballot.
"It's a little premature to address what will happen from here," she said. "There are processes that have to be followed."
Besides Sykes, the other primary backers of the plan are Alfred Williams, head of Concerned Citizens of West Covina, and Royall Brown, a local activist.
Brown, who sits on the city's Senior Citizens Commission, is an appointee of City Councilman Roger Hernandez, the only member of the council who supports the proposal.
West Covina Mayor Mike Touhey said Sykes, Brown and Williams were able to quickly gather signatures because they misled petition signers by not disclosing the true cost of an election.
"They are telling people things that aren't true," Touhey said. "It hasn't been done in a forthright way, out in the open."
Hernandez said he supported the plan primarily because it would provide better representation for geographically diverse regions of West Covina.
"This effort is all about providing fair and equal representation for West Covina," Hernandez said.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, August 8, 2007
Hawthorne councilman indicted in conflict case
By Ari B. Bloomekatz, Times Staff Writer
Hawthorne City Councilman Ludwig "Louis" Velez was indicted this week on charges that he used his elected position to trade favors with a developer.
Velez was indicted on felony charges and has surrendered to authorities.
Sandi Gibbons of the Los Angeles County district attorney's office said Velez was accused of a "conflict of interest" but would not comment further because the indictment was sealed.
"We are shocked and saddened by the indictment today," read a public statement released by Hawthorne City Manager Jag Pathirana. "This is a horrible day for council member Velez, his family and the community of Hawthorne."
The conflict-of-interest allegations stem from Velez's dealings with a local developer and contractor, officials said.
According to Pathirana's statement, Velez rented his home from a developer who later came before Hawthorne's City Hall to bid on projects.
Pathirana's statement said that Velez is a "dedicated public servant" and that "his rental terms [with the developer] were and are consistent with the current rental market value."
Velez met with legal counsel and the Fair Political Practices Commission before voting on the contracts given to the developer, according Pathirana's statement. Velez "was told that there were no legal obstacles to his participation in city deliberations concerning the developer's proposals," the statement said.
The Daily Breeze reported that officials raided Velez's home in April with their guns drawn and later carried out a file case, a satchel and a box marked "special issues."
Velez was elected to the Hawthorne City Council in 2003 after serving two years on the city's Civil Service Commission.
The council elected him mayor pro tem in January.
He was released Wednesday on his own recognizance and will be arraigned Aug. 7.
Los Angeles Times, July 27, 2007
Harassment suit against Nunez fuels arguments
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - Conflicting opinions in connection with a sexual harassment lawsuit surfaced last week when a councilman challenged the city's response.
Rosemead has denied allegations in the lawsuit filed by staff employee Valerie Mazone in April. She sued the city and Councilman John Nunez, claiming that he sexually harassed her at work since September 2005.
Both the city and Nunez cited multiple defenses to the allegations, including that Mazone's lawsuit is a "frivolous, unfounded and unreasonable cause of action for sexual harassment."
Longtime Councilman Gary Taylor said at a council meeting on Tuesday that those denials conflict with a closed-door verbal report made by a private investigator to council members.
"I am shocked and appalled at this response," Taylor said about the city's court response to the lawsuit. "That's not what happened."
Officials and council members would not comment on Taylor's statements because they said the report was confidential, and discussing the lawsuit in public could be a violation of the state's open meeting law.
"The (Ralph M.) Brown Act prohibits members of legislative bodies from disclosing things said in closed session," said Terry Francke, general counsel of Californians Aware, an open-government advocacy group. "It seems that the law clearly stands in the way of being candid about honesty in litigation."
The Brown Act mandates how municipalities and public agencies conduct their meetings.
Former City Manager Andrew Lazzaretto in April said that the city hired private investigator Tess Elconin to look into the allegations against Nunez.
The city paid Elconin $10,000 for a three-week-long investigation.
Lazzaretto said no written report was issued to the City Council and no documents from the investigation will be made public to "avoid embarrassment."
Elconin reported her findings to the council in a closed session meeting, Lazzaretto said. He would not elaborate on what findings were made.
The lawsuit alleges that Nunez massaged Mazone, leered at her, and "on one occasion looked directly into her blouse in an attempt to observe Plaintiff's breasts."
Taylor on Tuesday requested any copies of written reports made by Elconin. He also said the verbal findings were not reflected in the city's response to the lawsuit.
"What is proceeding is not what was discussed," during the closed session report, Taylor said on Tuesday.
City Attorney Bonifacio "Bonny" Garcia would not say whether Taylor's statements on Tuesday violated the Brown Act.
"I really cannot comment on that," Garcia said Friday.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, July 23, 2007
Beltran removed as city attorney
By Marisela Santana, Staff Writer
LYNWOOD - J. Arnoldo Beltran, principal of the Beltran and Medina law firm, was released from his contract as city attorney by a 4-1 vote of the City Council Tuesday night during a closed session meeting at the new Lynwood Senior Center.
The attorney, who has served as Montebello's city attorney since February as well, was terminated by Mayor Louis Byrd and council members Fernando Pedroza, Alfreddie Johnson and Leticia Vasquez. No reason foir the change was announced.
Councilwoman Maria Santillan cast the only dissenting vote.
Beltran, who would not return telephone calls, was hired in December 2003.
Byrd and Vasquez first sought to replace Beltran in early 2005, citing what they said were high monthly billing statements. At the time, council members Pedroza and Santillan voted against replacing Beltran.
Johnson, who was new to the council at the time, said at the time he preferred to have more time to consider such a change.
At the time, Vasquez said that she was targeting not only Beltran's fees, but those of Redevelopment Agency counsel Ronald Wilson's fees.
The matter was dropped and instead of firing either law firm, a cap was placed on Beltran's fees.
Sources say council members have been uneasy with Beltran since the latest recall campaign was initiated. One City Hall source said that four council members who voted to terminate Beltran's contract are angry that Beltran didn't protect them from the recall. Others are saying that Beltran is being relieved of his city attorney duties because council wants him to be a yesman and cites the law to them too much.
"This is merely a matter of these people parking all of their friends in the best places to get what they want done, even if it is illegal,"� one source said. "Parking them in good paying jobs with contracts that will be unbreakable. It really is business as usual in this city. What they're trying to do is pass their business and protect the staff who sits here and does nothing."�
Also during closed session and while Pedroza and Johnson reportedly played a game of pool in the Senior Center's Rec Room, the council agreed to retain the services of Anthony Willoughby as the city's new attorney, at the suggestion of Vasquez. The council also agreed to hire Roger Haley, a department head in Long Beach's Business Development Division, as the new city manager.
But because neither action was a scheduled agenda item, a special City Council meeting is being planned for Thursday at City Hall, to discuss the new city attorney, the new city manager and the city's new amended exclusive negotiating agreement with John McDonald of Imperial Partners regarding the Lynwood Promenade project, now being called Angeles Fields.
"To me this sounds like they already made up their minds on who they wanted to hire to replace Arnoldo,"� said Ramon Rodriguez, a former councilman who is seeking to replace Pedroza in the special recall election Sept. 25. "They haven't even discussed these replacements openly so the community can hear the options. They just throw out a name, and all agree. Behind some closed door, they've all agreed to all of these matters."�
Wave Newspapers, July 19, 2007
Judge Orders Lynwood Recall Election Forward
(CBS) LOS ANGELES -- Backers of a bid to oust Lynwood's mayor and three City Council members scored another court victory Thursday when a judge ordered that preparations for a recall election move forward.
Mayor Louis Byrd and Councilman Fernando Pedroza are among five current and former council members charged with misappropriation of public funds for allegedly paying for personal expenses with city credit cards, among other things.
Lynwood residents Aide Castro and Joanette Francine Gutierrez filed a petition July 2 in Los Angeles Superior Court seeking a court order directing the city to schedule a recall election against them, as well as council members Leticia Vasquez and Alfreddie Johnson Jr.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Dzintra I. Janavs issued a preliminary injunction ordering that the recall election take place Sept. 25, although she still plans to hold a non-jury trial on all the issues before then.
The residents also were granted an order preventing the city elections official, Deborah Jackson, and the four people targeted for recall, from having access to the recall petitions.
The recall supporters scored their first court victory July 3 when Judge Robert H. O'Brien directed the city to issue nomination papers to potential challengers.
A majority of the council appointed Jackson to supervise the recall election after they stripped City Clerk Andrea Hooper of her authority, the Los Angeles Times reported. The council took the action after Hooper tried to certify the recall petitions, The Times reported.
Despite the council's refusal to call an election, the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder scheduled an election for Sept. 25.
cbs2.com, July 19, 2007
Rosemead council delays decision on law firm
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - The majority of the council decided to interview attorney candidates for the redevelopment agency in August.
Despite Rosemead Mayor John Tran and Councilman John Nunez saying they were prepared to approve an attorney on Tuesday, the council voted 3-2 to interview the five law firms vying for the post.
"I read their proposals and reviewed them, but that is more of a paper interview," Councilwoman Polly Low said Wednesday. "I am more comfortable meeting all five before making a decision."
With one of the five firms represented at the meeting - partner Arnold Alvarez-Glasman - Tran and Nunez voted against interviewing all of the firms.
"I'm ready to choose one," Tran said at Tuesday's meeting, with Nunez echoing his comments.
Council members were provided with the bids on July 12. Councilwoman Margaret Clark said Wednesday, "that it is a little bit odd that they did not want to interview the firms."
Alvarez-Glasman is the city attorney for Pomona, West Covina, Pico Rivera and Bell Gardens, and has also served Baldwin Park, Montebello, South El Monte and La Puente.
Among the firms, he is the only one to have given campaign contributions to existing council members, according to campaign finance records: $1,000 to Tran in 2004, and $1,000 to Low in 2007.
"I'm just happy to be part of the process," Alvarez-Glasman said at Tuesday's meeting.
The other firms are Best, Best and Krieger; Burke, Williams and Sorensen; Kane, Ballmer and Berkman; and Richards, Watson and Gershon.
The search comes three months after the city hired Bonifacio "Bonny" Garcia as city attorney to represent Rosemead and its redevelopment agency.
Garcia was brought on as lead attorney on the suggestion of Nunez. The council did not accept any other bids for the position.
The council's decision in April drew some criticism from the community. Residents questioned Garcia's billing practices and why the council didn't put the contract out to bid.
Garcia serves as general counsel to the Sweetwater Union High School District, and the Garvey School District. He is also the city attorney for Wasco and counsel to the City of Arvin.
According to Garcia's resume, he "is an expert on the (Ralph M.) Brown Act, municipal governance, California conflict of interests and ethics laws binding on elected officials, litigation and labor and employment matters."
The Brown Act mandates how municipalities and public agencies conduct their meetings. The resume does not make reference to redevelopment work.
Nunez recommended last month that the council hire a separate attorney to represent the redevelopment agency to avoid conflict of interest concerns, and stated it did not reflect his opinion of Garcia's work at the city.
"I didn't think it is appropriate to have the same law firm handle development and be the city attorney," Nunez said previously.
Longtime council members Gary Taylor and Clark, who frequently vote against increases in the budget, said at Tuesday's meeting that such a move would tag on extra costs to the city.
"So why are we hiring another attorney?" Taylor said.
Garcia's contract calls for a $5,000 monthly retainer for the attendance of two regular city council and planning commission meetings per month. For the redevelopment agency, there is no retainer.
Basic legal services cost between $125 to $210 per hour, and speciality services including business and real estate or intellectual property range from $205 to $295 per hour, depending on the experience of the attorney.
The council will interview the attorneys at 4:30 p.m. Aug. 14, said interim City Manager Oliver Chi.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, July 19, 2007
DA won't charge Hernandez
By Frank C. Girardot Staff Writer
WEST COVINA - The District Attorney's Office said Monday that no
charges will be filed against a councilman accused of unauthorized use
of city staff.
Deputy District Attorney David Demerjian in a letter to the city said
there was no reason to believe that West Covina Councilman Roger Hernandez benefitted politically or financially from the creation of a DVD.
Hernandez was accused by the rest of the City Council of misusing
public resources for political gain in connection with a DVD assembled
by city staff. In May, he joined the council in voting to send
information to DA's Public Integrity Unit for investigation.
"The allegation that Mr. Hernandez directed city employees to create a
video for use by a citizen to lobby for Hern ndez's appointment to
mayor would not appear to constitute campaign activity," Demerjian
wrote to the city. "He was not utilizing the resources to assist him
in running for an elected office. ... I am declining to file a civil
action."
Hernandez, in a statement released Monday, said the conclusion of the
DA's review should end what he called politically motivated attacks
against him.
"These allegations were simply an attempt to continue to destroy my reputation
since it is election year," Hernandez said. "I hope that now after a
couple of rejections from the DA's office that the petty, shameless,
political attacks can finally come to an end."
In April, Hernandez supporters Dana Sykes and Natalie Mendoza used a
laptop computer during the public comments portion of a City Council
meeting to play edited segments of previous meetings to support their
claim that Hernandez should be restored to his place in the rotation
to become mayor.
Hernandez was removed from the rotation while the DA investigated a
complaint that the councilman benefitted from the discounted purchase
of a sport utility vehicle from a local car dealership.
Various members of the council had promised to restore Hernandez's
spot in the rotation once the DA investigation was complete. When they
failed to do so, Sykes, with help from Hernandez, put together the
video.
"I'm not surprised the DA made this decision," Sykes said. "This was
just another political witch hunt. We made them look bad. And we'll
continue exposing how often they lie - which is quite often."
In May, City Manager Andrew Pasmant sent several documents to the DA's
Office in support of the complaint against Hernandez, including
employee interviews and citations of city code sections. Pasmant said
several employees faced discipline as a result of their actions.
Pasmant did not return two phone calls seeking comment Monday.
Demerjian also wrote that Hernandez's actions did not constitute a felony.
"This appears to be an isolated incident," Demerjian wrote. "As a
result no felony criminal charges are warranted in this case."
It is not known if Pasmant consulted with City Attorney Arnold
Alvarez-Glasman prior to sending the complaint to Demerjian's office.
Alvarez-Glasman did not return phone calls seeking comment.
City Councilwoman Shelly Sanderson said the case was initially turned
over to the DA's Office for an impartial ruling.
"It went to the DA to let them make the decision," she said. "As a
council member I believe our employees have rights. I'm not going to
walk in there and tell them what to do."
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, July 3, 2007
Lynwood defies order to hold recall vote
The council strips the city clerk of her duties when she tries to certify petitions. And it refuses to set an election date. A judge gets the case today
By Hector Becerra, Times Staff Writer
A battle over the integrity of the election process is coming to a head this week in Lynwood, where the City Council has defied the Los Angeles County registrar-recorder and refused to set a date for a recall election targeting four of its members.
The registrar-recorder's office concluded in June that there were enough signatures on recall petitions to force a special election for the four officials, two of whom were recently indicted on public corruption charges.
But when Lynwood's elected city clerk tried to certify the recall petition, the City Council voted to strip her of all election duties, appointing its own election official to take up the matter.
The city clerk gave the petitions to the Sheriff's Department, which has rejected the City Council request to review the documents.
"The only way they're getting them is either by a request from the elected city clerk or by a court order," said Capt. Steven M. Roller of the sheriff's Century Station, where the petitions are being kept in an evidence locker. "The only reason we are storing the petitions is for the integrity of the recall process."
The county registrar-recorder has set its own recall election date for Sept. 25, but the council is refusing to call the election. A Superior Court judge will hold a hearing today to consider a request by recall leaders to force the city to call an election.
Deborah Wright, executive liaison for the registrar-recorder, said her office has never handled a case like this.
Lynwood officials, she said, seem intent not only on blocking the election but also on learning the identities of residents who signed the petition -- which would be a violation of state law because the documents are supposed to remain confidential.
"It seems clear to me that what the council really wants is someone under their control to get a look at those signatures," Wright said.
City officials are firing back, arguing that the recall petition might include fraudulent signatures. Mayor Louis Byrd said the county was exceeding its authority.
"We are the policymakers of Lynwood. The county doesn't set policy for us," Byrd said Monday. "We don't care if the recall goes forward. We want the process to be fair and just, and don't feel that it is."
Lynwood, a city of 100,000 south of Los Angeles, has had a contentious political history.
In April, five current and former council members were charged with using public funds to boost their salaries and pay personal expenses. Byrd and Councilman Fernando Pedroza, the two current council members indicted, vehemently denied the allegations.
The four council members targeted by the recall effort are Councilwoman Leticia Vasquez, Councilman Alfreddie Johnson Jr., Byrd and Pedroza. The only council member not being recalled is Maria Santillan, who frequently opposes the others on council votes.
Vasquez said the people pushing for the recall are failed political candidates bent on wresting control of the city. She also said the registrar-recorder's office did not check the validity of the signatures.
County officials strongly disagree.
"That's absolutely false. We check each and every one of them," Wright said. "They're just making that up."
Attorneys for the city and for the proponents of the recall are expected to clash in court today.
David Rodriguez, an attorney representing the city, said the election official appointed by the council, Deborah Jackson, is empowered to certify the recall election. He said that until the petitions are turned over to Jackson, the process cannot go forward.
Jackson previously headed the city's quality of life department, but before that also worked in the city clerk's office.
Rodriguez said that City Clerk Andrea Hooper never went through the proper process of verifying the recall signatures or placing the issue on the City Council agenda.
Hooper did not return a phone call seeking comment. But in a letter Monday to Rodriguez, her lawyer told of Hooper's displeasure with the council's actions regarding the recall.
"Ms. Hooper is an independent elected official," the letter states. "She will not be 'directed' in the conduct of her duty by you or anyone else."
In a June 27 letter to County Registrar-Recorder Conny McCormack, attorneys for the city criticized Hooper. "If she feels a law has been violated, her remedy is to bring a legal action against the city. Instead, it appears that she has chosen to 'appeal' the city's decision to the county registrar-recorder's office."
Fredric Woocher, an election law attorney representing the backers of the recall, said the council's reaction was not unprecedented.
Four years ago, Lynwood officials also resisted a recall, in a case against ex-Mayor Paul Richards, who subsequently was sentenced to 16 years in federal prison for corruption.
"They're trotting out the same exact thing," Woocher said. "Back then they also tried to get access to the signatures."
Kareem Crayton, an assistant professor of election law and political science at USC, said the developments in Lynwood were bizarre. He said it was unusual that the registrar-recorder's wishes would be defied without an apparent legal maneuver.
"As far as the claims the city has made, it seems those are the sort of claims better made to a court to enjoin an election from happening," Crayton said, "as opposed to refusing to let a process laid out by the law move forward."
The recall effort is just one of several launched against council members in Lynwood since the Richards situation, but the first to get this far. Vasquez said an investigation by Rodriguez's firm, Strategic Counsel, previously found irregularities in the recall signature-gathering process.
Vasquez said she wants the district attorney's office to investigate this.
But David Demerjian, the head of the district attorney's public integrity unit, said these problems are news to him. "No one ever complained about that," he said.
Demerjian said his office looked into the removal of Hooper, but did not find any criminal violations. His office is monitoring the situation.
Los Angeles Times, July 3, 2007
Rosemead may seek second attorney
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - Arnold Alvarez-Glasman is one of the candidates who could replace an attorney hired two months ago to represent the city's redevelopment commission.
In April, Bonifacio "Bonny" Garcia was appointed to serve as Rosemead city attorney and redevelopment attorney without competing bids after Councilman John Nunez recommended Garcia's name to the council.
The position became open after longtime City Attorney Peter Wallin resigned.
Now, Nunez is requesting that the Community Development Commission, the city's redevelopment agency, vote today to consider hiring a different attorney. Garcia would keep his position as city attorney.
"Even when Peter Wallin was around, I didn't think it was appropriate to have the same law firm handle development and the city attorney's position," Nunez said Monday. "I think it is important to have two different law firms."
Nuñez said he has no one attorney in mind to assume the position, but several firms and individuals, including Alvarez-Glasman, have in the past expressed interest in serving as counsel for the city.
"A lot of law firms have come and talked to me," prior to requesting the agenda item for today's community development meeting, Nunez said.
Included in that list, he said, were Alhambra City Attorney Joe Montes of Burke, Williams, and Sorensen, former Huntington Park City Attorney Francisco Leal, and Alvarez-Glasman, who is the city attorney for West Covina, Pomona, Pico Rivera and Bell Gardens.
"[Alvarez-Glasman] has said that if there was anything he could for us to give him a call," Nunez said. "I know that he is one of the guys out there."
Alvarez-Glasman did not return calls Monday.
Alvarez-Glasman, who also served as city attorney for Montebello and Baldwin Park, contributed $1,000 to Councilwoman Polly Low's campaign in January and $1,000 to Mayor John Tran's campaign in 2004.
Former City Attorney Peter Wallin said that he thinks that Rosemead should have put the position out for bid after he resigned in March.
"They wanted [Garcia] as city attorney," Wallin said. "I have no personal knowledge of his firm, but I take it that if the city is going out to find someone else, then Bonny is probably saying he's not interested in doing this kind of work. That is just speculation on my part."
Garcia deferred all comments to Nunez.
City officials said they are impressed with Garcia's work as city attorney, despite earlier concerns by Council members Margaret Clark and Gary Taylor.
Both said the appointment was rushed and that there may have been a potential conflict of interest. Garcia's firm is the legal counsel for the Garvey School District.
Now, Clark said that Garcia is "doing just fine."
"The hiring of a new attorney is an unnecessary waste of money," Clark said Monday.
The commission will vote today on whether to approve the request by Nunez to go to bid for legal services. If approved, staff will prepare a request for qualifications, which will be distributed for 30 days to all qualified legal firms.
Pasadena Star News, June 26, 2007
City districts petition gets second rejection
By Frank C. Girardot, Staff Writer
WEST COVINA - The paperwork for a petition drive to divide the city into five council districts was rejected for a second time by city officials, organizers said Monday.
Originally submitted in May, the petition, put together by supporters of West Covina Councilman Roger Hernandez, was rejected June 15 by Assistant City Clerk Sue Rush for failing to comply with a specific section of state election laws.
"Any attempt to circulate your proposed petition is premature," Rush wrote to the group. "Any signatures collected for your proposed petition are invalid."
A check for $200, submitted as a filing fee, was also returned.
Organizers Monday blamed City Attorney Arnold Alvarez-Glasman for the rejection.
"I'm not giving up," said Fred Sykes, a West Covina resident whose wife Dana is among the proposal's three signers. "I'm getting an attorney to file an injunction or a temporary restraining order asking [Alvarez-Glasman] to stop delaying the petition."
Alvarez-Glasman did not return two phone calls seeking comment Monday.
West Covina Mayor Mike Touhey said Monday he was unaware of the petition's status.
There are approximately 40,000 registered voters in West Covina,
Rush said earlier this month. Supporters would need at least 8,000 signatures to qualify for a ballot.
Chances of getting the measure on the ballot in time for the city's November election are slim, Fred Sykes said Monday.
"I believe it's possible," he said. "It would be a lot of work and we'd have to do it pretty quickly. We have the heart for it. But, I think [Alvarez-Glasman] is going to turn us down again."
Dana Sykes said that if the proposal could be enacted in November, it would take effect over the next two years.
The petitioners all have direct ties to Hernandez.
In April, Dana Sykes played a DVD for the council supporting Hernandez's bid to become mayor. Hernandez was removed from the standing rotation after the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office investigated his dealings with a local car dealer. No charges were filed in the case.
The two other organizers are Alfred Williams, head of Concerned Citizens of West Covina, and Royall Brown, a local activist and Hernandez appointee to the city's Senior Citizen's Commission.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, June 26, 2007
Developers contribute to council members
By Jennifer McLain Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - Developers connected with four projects in the city have contributed at least $30,000 to council members since 2005, according to finance records.
In addition, two developers paid for three meals for former Rosemead City Manager Andrew Lazzaretto. Other city officials, including Mayor John Tran and interim City Manager Oliver Chi, also attended, but said they paid for their own meals.
"People may think, `Wow, staff and council members are meeting developers. Is something shady going on?"' Chi said. "At the end of the day, to get the deals done, you have to get to know one another and it is hard to do in just an office setting."
There is nothing illegal about receiving campaign contributions, said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies. But he said accepting any more than $500 in contributions "looks bad."
Tran, however, said the financial support he received for his campaign has no impact on the progression of the projects.
"Any campaign contribution I've received does not impact my decision," Tran said. "We are well aware of our conflict-of-interest laws."
Staff members said that there is a lot of interest in development in Rosemead.
"I think there is a tremendous opportunity right now for the city to capitalize in the development interest," Chi said. "We have a lot of pots on the stove."
A potential mixed-use project at Rosemead Boulevard and Steele Street, proposed by Hieu Tran, was granted an exclusive negotiating agreement in April.
Tran and his associate Thong Van Lu contributed $5,000 each to Mayor John Tran.
A mixed-use and commercial development, both proposed by Hawaii Supermarket owner Gerard Yang, are in the planning stages.
Associates related to the Hawaii Supermarket and those involved in the proposed Big Island mixed-use project - including the architect - have contributed $4,700 to Tran and councilwomen Polly Low and Margaret Clark. Tran received $1,000, Low received $2,900, and Clark received $800.
Low and Clark did not return calls to comment on this story.
Chi said that he hasn't experienced any pressure to bend the rules for certain developers.
The conditions for a fourth project, which is located on one parcel owned by Eric Lee and Bob Nguyen, was approved by the City Council after it was originally denied by the planning commission.
Councilman John Nunez, who did not return calls, appealed that planning commission's decision.
Nguyen and Lee combined have donated $14,000 to Rosemead council members, including a $50 dinner bought for Lazzaretto by Lee. Nguyen gave Mayor Tran $7,000. Lee gave Tran $5,000 and gave Low $2,000.
Whittier Daily News, June 24, 2007
Glendora ordered to pay attorney's fees
Resident Aguirre won Public Records Act lawsuit
By Alison Hewitt, Staff Writer
GLENDORA - A judge ordered the city this week to pay $40,000 in attorney's fees and costs to a resident who won a Public Records Act lawsuit against Glendora.
Gil Aguirre said he felt good about recouping his costs but is still unsatisfied with how the city responds to requests.
"They were saying, `Sure, we lost in court, but we did nothing wrong' - it's comical," Aguirre said. "The judgment of fees shows they did something wrong."
City Attorney Wayne Leech could not be immediately reached for comment. City Manager Eric Ziegler said he had not yet heard about the $40,000 judgement.
Judge David Yaffe ordered Glendora in March to stop requiring records requests to be written down and to stop overcharging for copies - a bar that Leech had said in previous interviews the city has always met.
The city filed a reply to the court order in May saying that Glendora did not need to make any changes in order to comply with the order.
Aguirre and his attorney, Robert P. Silverstein, plan to return to court to force the city to follow the court order. The motion includes witness statements from three people testifying that they were required to submit their requests for public records in writing, in violation of the court order.
"I do a lot of Freedom of Information Act litigation," Silverstein said. "The city of Glendora is one of the worst offenders that I have seen."
The city has also retained its 25-cent-per-page copy fee, the same fee it charged before the lawsuit.
Aguirre said Silverstein was working to settle the issues with Glendora without going to trial again, but that he doesn't expect it to work - nor does he expect the city to pay the $40,000 right away.
"I won't be surprised if they appeal the attorney's fees," Aguirre said.
During the February trial, Yaffe said the city's copying fees appeared "arbitrary and capricious," but added that "If they can prove a dollar is the direct cost of duplication, I suppose they're entitled to charge that much."
The city argued that it takes 30 seconds per page to make copies, and that paying an administrative assistant for 30 seconds costs about 29 cents. Silverstein countered in his motion that the city's copier copies at a rate of more than one page per second.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, June 22, 2007
Bell Gardens councilman accused of conflict in backing city contract;
Mario Beltran allegedly helped a towing firm linked to a friend get a $5-million job
By Andrew Blankstein and Greg Krikorian, Times Staff Writers
Bell Gardens Councilman Mario Beltran is suspected of steering a $5-million automobile towing contract to a company connected to an old friend and business associate, according to a Los Angeles police affidavit released Thursday.
L.A. police also allege that Beltran's City Council colleague Daniel Crespo received an unspecified threat when he raised "issues" over the contract.
Although authorities would not specify the nature of the alleged threat or who made it, the affidavit says Crespo told Beltran during a telephone call that he had been threatened by the owner of the towing company, United Motor Club in South Gate, after a council meeting in November.
The affidavit also alleges that Beltran allowed the owner, Shahram Shayesteh, to secretly listen in on the conversation in which Crespo discussed the threat.
During the conversation, the affidavit says, Beltran asked Crespo how he was going to vote on the towing contract and told Crespo he had the support of two other council members to give it to United. Beltran asked Crespo if he liked Shayesteh, and Crespo said, "No, he threatened me."
In November, Beltran was in the City Council majority that awarded the contract to United, ending a 38-year relationship with another towing firm.
The conversation triggered a criminal-threat investigation that led this week to searches at Beltran's home and City Hall office. Police also took evidence from the towing company.
Authorities say the vice president of the towing firm, attorney Bahran Madaen, also did free work for Beltran's firm, Americas Consulting Group, and said he was an old friend of the councilman. In the affidavit, an LAPD detective says she and an FBI agent went to the Van Nuys address listed for the consulting group and found it to be a law office of Madaen.
"If these facts are correct, Mario Beltran would have a financial interest in the United Motor Club vote," the affidavit says, "since his providing a benefit to Bahran could influence Bahran's continued providing of free services to Beltran."
Further, according to the affidavit, Madaen's free services to Beltran should have been reported as a gift under state laws governing public officials.
Beltran's attorney, Phillip Cohen, denied any wrongdoing by his client. "This appears to be a witch hunt against Councilman Beltran for purely politically motivated reasons," Cohen said.
"What is interesting here is that the case initially began as a criminal-threat case against Mr. Beltran, for which the search turned up no evidence. Then it apparently became an eavesdropping case against Mr. Beltran, for which the search turned up no evidence. And now it seems they are grasping at straws to promote some type of political platform" by accusing Beltran of improperly acting on a towing contract.
A person who answered the phone at Madaen's Huntington Park law office hung up. A later message was not returned. A man who answered the phone at the towing firm said its owner, Shayesteh, was not at work Thursday and also hung up.
Bell Gardens Mayor Jennifer Rodriquez said she didn't know of any relationship between Beltran and United Motor Club.
"This is a surprise to all of us. I believe everyone who voted in favor of this company thought it was the best towing company to bring in," Rodriguez said. "If we were aware of the allegations, perhaps the council would have gone in a different direction."
Beltran, a legislative aide to state Sen. Ron Calderon (D-Montebello), was convicted in March of filing a false police report claiming he was robbed a block from a hotel in downtown L.A. At trial, the prosecutor said Beltran lied to police because he was embarrassed by the fact that, according to witnesses, he had been drunk at a downtown nightclub and passed out in a hallway of the hotel, which is used by prostitutes.
Beltran is scheduled to be sentenced Tuesday and faces a maximum of six months in jail and a fine of up to $1,000.
His attorney has appealed the conviction and filed a motion this week seeking a new trial.
Los Angeles Times, June 22, 2007
Ex-city official to be arraigned Thrasher faces perjury, interest conflict counts
By Frank C. Girardot, Staff Writer
WEST COVINA - Fomerer city Planning Commissioner Carlos Thrasher will be arraigned Monday in Pomona Superior Court on charges of perjury and conflict of interest, authorities said Friday.
Thrasher, appointed to the commission in December 2005 by City Councilwoyn Shari Lane, is accused of failing to disclose a personal loan from developer Ziad Alhassen.
On Jan. 24, 2006, while a member of the West Covina Planning Commission, Thrasher voted on the Inspiration Point housing project being developed by Alhassen, Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney David Demerjian said.
Then, on Feb. 14, 2006, Thrasher voted against a time extension for the project, "allegedly after he and Alhassen had a disagreement over the loan," Demerjian said.
Thrasher did not return three phone calls seeking comment Friday.
Alhassen did not comment Friday. His attorney, Ravi Mehta, said the developer and car dealer did not want to jeopardize the case.
"It probably wouldn't be helpful to the DA's Office to have a potential witness comment at this point," Mehta said.
Thrasher resigned from the planning commission in February. He also had been a member of the West Covina Chamber of Commerce's eight-person executive committee, according to the group's Web site. Carolina Chacon, president of the executive committee, said Thrasher missed three consecutive meetings, which under the Chamber's bylaws constitutes a resignation.
Thrasher is facing three misdemeanor counts and one felony count of perjury. If he is convicted, he could face up to four years in prison and $10,000 in fines.
Thrasher, who owns an insurance and investment company, said in 2004 he owed Alhassen about $17,000 in overdue payments for an office he leased from Alhassen in the Eastland Tower.
Demerjian said the allegations against Thrasher stem from his failure to disclose the obligation as the law requires.
"In a statement of economic interest, Thrasher allegedly failed to disclose a $17,165 loan from Eastland Tower Partnership and CEO Ziad Alhassen," according to a press release from the DA's office.
Two counts against Thrasher involve misdemeanor conflict-of-interest charges, one count involves a felony perjury allegation. Statements of economic interest are signed under penalty of perjury, Demerjian said.
The fourth count stems from Thrasher's alleged failure to disclose that he lived within 500 feet of the development in question, Inspiration Point, Demerjian said.
Although Thrasher's business office stayed open while Thrasher served in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserves in Iraq, he could not earn enough money to cover costs, Thrasher said in 2004. At the time, Alhassen said Councilman Steve Herfert asked him to go easy on Thrasher regarding Thrasher's debt repayment schedule.
Mayor Mike Touhey said Friday he took exception to the DA's allegations.
"That's one way to award a guy who's off to three tours of duty in Iraq," Touhey said.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, June 17, 2007
DA again rejects filing charges in dispute over campaign signs
By Alison Hewitt Staff Writer
GLENDORA - The District Attorney's Office has declined for a second time to file charges against two women who put stickers on incumbents' campaign signs during Glendora's last city council election.
There is not "a probability of conviction" because there is too much evidence in the case that might not even be admissible in court, wrote Pamela Booth, who reviewed the case for the DA's Office. When the Glendora Police Department first presented the case to the DA's Office, a West Covina deputy DA decided there was not enough evidence of malice to file charges. The police appealed the decision to Booth, who issued her written denial Friday.
"This case basically involves two opposing factions involved in a local election," Booth wrote. "The complaining witness/victim was one of the incumbents. The suspects were all backing an opposition slate."
Keleigh Marshall, 18, and Cristina Giammalva, 19, were arrested in February for putting stickers on an incumbent councilmen's campaign signs. Marshall's father is Paul Marshall, a former councilman ousted in a 2002 recall election who was backed by the three incumbents whose signs the teens were stickering.
The stickers read, "This sign violates Glendora city ordinance," a reference to an ordinance making it illegal to put any sign on public property, where the signs were located. The city attorney has said that law is constitutionally questionable and not followed for campaign signs.
Police say the women said Marshall's mother, Virginia, was paying them to put the stickers up. Marshall and Giammalva are now suing Clifford for millions of dollars for false arrest because it was a citizen's arrest. Their attorney, Gene Osko, was a failed candidate in the 2002 recall election.
Clifford had no comment Friday, and Osko did not return phone calls.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, June 9, 2007
Recall efforts in Montebello persist Signatures collected to oust 3 council members
By Sandra T. Molina, Staff Writer
MONTEBELLO - Recall petitions have been submitted against Mayor Norma Lopez-Reid and Councilman Bob Bagwell, and proponents said Tuesday they continue collecting signatures to recall Councilman Jeff Siccama.
The three were targeted over their efforts to fold the Montebello Fire Department into the Los Angeles County Fire Department, said Steve Stokes of the group Montebello Citizens for Honest Government, which launched the effort.
The three council members last November voted 3-2 to reject a citizens' petition asking that the Fire Department issue be decided by voters. Mayor pro tem Bill Molinari and Councilwoman Rosie Vasquez voted in favor of the petition.
"They have refused to listen to the will of the people," Stokes said. "And that is what has led us to this point."
The group gathered more than 12,000 signatures - 6,099 for Bagwell and 6,198 for Lopez-Reid - more than the required 4,758 per council member, said Lillian Guzman, deputy city clerk.
It also has collected about 6,000 signatures on recall petitions against Siccama. However, because Siccama has two years left on his term, the deadline for submitting petitions to recall him is not until June 23.
Guzman said her office filed the petitions against Bagwell and Lopez-Reid and now will forward them to the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk's Office, which will verify the signatures.
Maria Halpern, a member of the citizens' group, claimed support for the recall is overwhelming among the city's voters.
"We got more than 18,000 signatures in a city that has only a little more than 23,000 registered voters," she said.
Bagwell disputed the group's grounds for trying to recall him.
"We have not made a decision on whether or not to go county" for fire services, he said. "We want to see a review of the costs.
"The city is in financial trouble, and we are looking into where the city is spending money and where we can save money while still keeping the same level of services," Bagwell added.
He said the group did not follow election rules when it submitted petitions demanding a public vote on contracting with the county.
Siccama accused the group of using scare tactics and feeding misinformation to the public.
"We just want to find out if we can hire the county to do a comparable job for less money," he said.
Two calls to Lopez-Reid were not returned.
The city is spending just under $10 million on the Montebello Fire Department's budget for 2006-07.
Halpern said the recall effort was launched after much soul-searching by her group.
"We went back and forth about the decision because we love Montebello, and a recall can tear a community apart," she said. In the end, she said, the group's board felt it had no other recourse.
"This could have been avoided if they had listened to the voice of the people," she said.
Whittier Daily News, June 6, 2007
Familiar faces returning to Montebello City Hall
By Jennifer McLain, Staff Writer
MONTEBELLO - A former mayor and a fired top executive are slated to return to City Hall less than four weeks after a new council majority took power.
On Wednesday, the Montebello City Council ousted its attorney, Arnoldo Beltran, and chose Arnold Alvarez-Glasman as his replacement. They also plan to rehire Richard Torres - who was fired in March - as city administrator.
Alvarez-Glasman and Torres will assume their duties on Monday, said Mayor Bill Molinari. He's hoping the hires will help restore stability in a City Hall that has seen multiple staff changes and new faces on the council.
"This has always been a stable community until recently," Molinari said. "The best option we have is to bring back well-qualified people."
Beltran and Alvarez-Glasman did not return phone calls. Torres could not be reached for comment.
The mayor said the council declined to consider other applicants or make the search public because of a perceived tainted image the city had since firing four department heads in two years.
"It had a very negative impact on the city's image," Molinari said. "One individual said that the reputation is so bad that they did not wish to work at the city of Montebello."
Former Councilman Jeff Siccama, who was voted out of office during a December recall election, was critical about the expected staff changes.
"This is the old guard getting back in power," Siccama said.
Torres worked for the city for 28 years, and served as city administrator for 18 years. In March, Torres was fired on a 3-2 vote. Councilwoman Rosie Vasquez and Molinari opposed the decision.
Since then, an interim had filled the position.
The decision to fire Beltran was prompted by performance concerns and the cost of services, Molinari said.
Alvarez-Glasman served as Montebello mayor in the mid-'80s and later its city attorney until 2005. He also provides attorney services to Bell Gardens, Pico Rivera, West Covina and Pomona.
During a closed session meeting on Wednesday, the city council unanimously voted for staff to negotiate a contract with Torres, and, on a 4-1 vote, approved firing Beltran. They also directed staff to finalize a contract for his replacement, Alvarez-Glasman.
Councilwoman Vasquez opposed the city attorney decisions, and did not participate in the discussions, she said at the meeting.
The names of the candidates were not released at the meeting on the advice of Beltran, Molinari said.
Molinari said the public gave the City Council a "tremendous" opportunity when voters ousted Siccama in the December recall election.
"I don't think they will be very patient," Molinari said. "They want us to make changes, and fast."
Whittier Daily News, January 11, 2007
Nunez could be off hook in suit
Councilman accused of sexual harassment
By Alison Hewitt, Staff Writer
ROSEMEAD - A city employee who filed a sexual harassment lawsuit against Councilman John Nunez stands to gain $330,000 as part of a pending settlement, officials said.
The proposed settlement with Valerie Mazone would be paid through Rosemead's liability insurance policy, not by the city or Nunez. The insurance also would pay an estimated $40,000 in defense attorney fees.
Mazone sued Nunez and the city in April, alleging that the councilman had harassed her for more than a year. She accused the councilman of grabbing her, kissing her and looking down her blouse.
Nunez denied the accusations.
All parties have agreed to the settlement, although it must still be signed, said John Bolin, liability claims manager for the California Joint Powers Insurance Authority. The JPIA organized and paid for the defense.
"As far as I'm concerned, it's a done deal," Bolin said.
The settlement requires Mazone, who has been on administrative leave, to release Nunez and the city from liability, Bolin said.
"Neither the city nor John Nunez are admitting any responsibility," he said. "They are both denying any responsibility."
Mazone's attorney, Gregory Smith, said it was a good settlement for his client.
"She will not be returning to the city," he said. "She has decided to seek employment elsewhere."
Nunez declined to comment, saying he had yet to hear from his attorney that the settlement had been finalized.
His attorney, Ed Richards, said the JPIA's decision to settle was in the best economic interest of the city and his client.
"I'm confident it would have cost them more than ($330,000) simply to defend the case if they'd gone to trial," Richards said. "Even if we prevailed with a defense verdict, which we believed we would be able to do, it would have cost them more than they were able to settle for."
If Rosemead and Nunez had gone to trial instead of settled, the JPIA's attorney's fees alone would have totaled $250,000 to $350,000, Bolin said.
"If we won, (Mazone) would not have any responsibility for paying us back for any of our attorney fees and costs. We would just be out the money," Bolin said. "With all that in mind, it makes sense to reach some sort of compromise, because arguably, we got out for less money than we would have paid had we gone to trial and won."
But Councilwoman Margaret Clark, who said she believes the allegations, criticized the settlement.
"I think it's just outrageous what he did, and that there's no consequences for him," Clark said.
"He should do the honorable thing and resign," she added. "If he can get away with this with no consequences and he stays in office, what does that say to our employees?"
The settlement also will increase the city's JPIA membership fees, Clark said.
Bolin confirmed that the annual fees are directly based on the JPIA's costs, which are divided among all of the JPIA's more than 100 members. Those members include Irwindale, South Pasadena, Sierra Madre, the Gateway Cities Council of Governments, South El Monte and other local entities.
Councilman Gary Taylor, who has been demanding a copy of a private investigator's report about this and other complaints about Nunez, blamed his colleague for getting the city involved in the suit.
"It's just very frustrating that we get sued for his misconduct," Taylor said. "(Paying) $330,000 is a lot of money for him disrespecting employees."
Mayor John Tran and Councilwoman Polly Low could not be reached for comment.
San Gabriel Valley Tribune, January 4, 2008
For more news stories of interest from 2007, see here.
For news stories of interest from 2006, click here.
For news stories of interest from 2005 and before, click here.
For news stories of interest from 2001 and before click here.
