Your reporting and comments on tonight’s Los Alamitos City Council meeting (7/16/2012)
July 16, 2012 in Uncategorized By: Dave Emerson
(Los Alamitos, 7/16/2012) Tonight’s 6 p.m. Los Alamitos City Council is the first of six trial once-a-month meetings that begin early. . . and may still run late.
Lots on the agenda (see “405 Improvement, 7 Year CIP, Kusumoto Request & More On Monday 7/16 Council Agenda”) so there should be something of interest for everyone.
I’m wondering if it will drone on past midnight or be short & sweet and end by 8:00. My money’s on sometime between 9:30 and 11:30, making it 3 1/2 hours at least. We’ll see if I get it right or not.
As usual, we have this post up so the Council Watchers among us can report what they saw and what they thought. And maybe what they thought they saw
So set your DVR for LosAl TV 3 from 6 – 11 or so, and/or show up in person, & let us know
what you see, hear, & think!
That’s because this is the place for the Community (us) to report on what takes place in our always-interesting City Council. [ad]
For tonight’s agenda, followed by attachments, staff reports & lots of info, click here.
New rebroadcast hours for Council Meetings
FYI: City Council meetings are rebroadcast on channel 3 throughout each month on Tuesdays at 7 am and 7 pm. . They are also rebroadcast on Wednesdays at noon and Saturdays at 7 am.
Your reporting:
As always, please try to be diplomatic, use relatively family friendly language, and please briefly describe what you are commenting on before making your comment. Not everyone has or taped TV3.
8:55 p.m. Dean Grose just ended the public comments on the proposed T.U.T. Ballot Measure, indicating his view that in the interest of transparency the focus should be on telephone user tax “modernization” rather than “reduction.” He was opposed to any reduction at this time.
Then Ken Stephens lead off with a relatively concise almost “Amen” to former Mayor Grose’s position, hedging his bet by indicating he didn’t know what would be decided.
Warren Kusumoto shared his concern that keeping the phone tax rate at 6% was almost certainly a tax increase since additional technologies would be taxed.
The Mayor interrupted Council Member Kusumoto so Gerri Mejia, who was apparently recused for a reason I missed, could make a public comment as a community member before leaving the room again. Mejia felt including “all future new communication technologies” in the tax, feeling that should be addressed as the additional technologies arise.
We never got back to Council Member Kusumoto, who apparently had said enough, the Mayor going to Vice Mayor Poe after citizen Gerri finished. I had some difficulty following her Honor, possibly because I was listening and reporting simultaneously, but it sounded like she thought increased income might be a good option. She did say she wants to talk to JM to find out how to reduce her phone bill. . . interesting. She finally landed supporting the reduction of the rate to 5%.
Then it was Mayor Edgar’s turn. No hesitation there–it’s a “campaign that has to be passed,” and to be sure it passes the “reduction” component is necessary. I thought his remarks were well thought out, persuasive, & I’m guessing the 5% reduction ballot measure will pass tonight 4 – 0 with Council Member Mejia recused.
OK, I’ve done my reporting. . . now it’s your turn?
At least when it gets done–or if I got something wrong.
Okay, I have said many times that when Art DeBolt and I agree, it should be a concern issue. Well if Dean Grose and I agree on something it’s a red flag of “missle crisis” proportions.
You would figure that someone up there should have taken notice.
And worse than that, we actually agreed on the same core issue. Its not like we had separate issues that we agreed should kill the path forward the Council was on.
As I pointed out. No one knows if the revenue will go up, or down, by changing the code, so reducing the tax at this time could be a costly mistake, as the only way to correct for it is to go back before the voters with a tax increase ballot item.
On the other hand, by keeping the rate at 6%, if the tax is not revenue neutral and it is raising more taxes, it can be lowered without having to be voted on.
Do we need to change the code? Yep. Do we need to put city income at risk? Nope. As Troy said, the reason for the cut is to sell the necessary changes, it has nothing to do with actual income. It’s a snow job to entice the people into doing what they should do because it is the right thing to do. A snow job that might bury the city into having to cut costs and reduce services.
When Grose and Ivler agree that something is a bad idea, it’s time to count your fingers and toes because someone is taking you for what could be a very expensive ride.
The audience is apparently down to two, Richard Murphy and Dean Grose. It appeared that all reporters had left. They’re starting on 10A, the next to the last item, a response to Council Member Kusumoto’s requests, which were apparently in response to an effort by the Council to reach out to Warren.
Mayor Edgar appeared conciliatory. The City Attorney indicated that there was no evidence of wrongdoing by Council Member Kusumoto.
The Mayor suggested what might be described as a “split the difference” approach, giving Council Member Kusumoto # 2 of his three requests, reimbursement of legal fees he incurred in anticipation of the Council prosecuting him under the Brown Act. It eventually passed 3 to 1, with Kusumoto recused and Mejia voting no because it didn’t give Kusumoto the opportunity to clear his name.
I suppose one could respond that the statement from the City Prosecutor that no evidence of wrongdoing was found should be sufficient.
It’s now 10:50, they’re starting on Council Announcements, and I’d say it’s an even bet if the conclude before 11, but I think they’ll be done well before 11:30.
A five hour meeting. Nearing the end of the rather large window I predicted of 9:30 – 11:30.
And not a minute too soon for those remaining in the Council Chambers as the midnight hour approached
Over two years ago four members of the City Council voted in violation of City Municipal Code to award a contract. Over nine months ago a Superior Court Judge stated that the award of the contract, “failed to comply with 8.12.15 and 2.60”. A violation of the City Municipal Code.
While the lawsuit was in progress it was not expected that those who violated the City Municipal Code would be held responsible for their violation until the suit was completed. That happened months ago. The perpetrators of the violation have been given every chance to make their case, and now that the lawsuit has completed, it is time for them to be held responsible for violating the City Municipal Code.
At the last City Council meeting I asked for the City to agendize an item that would determine if there should be prosecution for the violation of the law. As you can see from this agenda my request, as usual, was ignored.
It was NOT actually necessary that the City Council to put this on the agenda and vote on this. See, Section 2.08.020 of the City Municipal Code clearly states in Item B that “It shall be the duty of the city manager to enforce all laws and ordinances of the city and to see that all franchises, contracts, permits and privileges granted by the city council are faithfully observed.“ Without me even asking, the City Manager should have forwarded the violation by the perpetrators to the Prosecutor that the City uses for Code Violations.
By failing to comply with 8.12.15 and 2,60 three sitting City Council members have violated the City Code and under section 1.20.10 they should be prosecuted and held responsible for their violations. The City Manager, under 2.08.020 (B) should have referred the violations to the City Prosecutor for appropriate prosecution of the perps.
In excess of two years since the violation the City Council members who perpetrated the code violation have shown no remorse for their violation of the City Municipal Code. Rather than follow the code they violated, the same three City Council members who violated the code re-wrote the code so that they could continue to do what they did, without violating it. No remorse.
We are a nation of laws. We live by the rule of law, and no man or woman is above the law, even when elected to public office. We may not always agree with the law, but that doesn’t give us a right to violate the law. And we know that the perps understand this as we only have to look at what Madam Poe did when she was mayor. During a contentious City Council meeting Mayor Poe, over the trash contract no less, made it clear that unless decorum was maintained she was going to invoke City Municipal Code 2.08.80 section D. Which would have had the Chief of Police, as Sargent At Arms for City Council Meetings arrest members of the community for as much as showing their support and applauding speakers who disagreed with Council majority.
One would expect a law and order demander like Madam Poe to be fully supportive of the enforcement of the Municipal Code, considering she was so driven to use it against the citizens of the city who opposed what the City Council was doing with the trash contract. One would have hoped that the Mayor-Pro-Tem would have insisted that the City Manger do her job and enforce section 1.20.10. But one would understandably be confused; as hypocrisy is the rule of the day from this City Council majority.
There is one set of laws to be used against us, the citizens, and then another set of rules to be ignored when the perps sit on that dais.
The time for hypocrisy and excuses is past. Madam Poe, it’s time for you to demand that the City Manger refer Judge Banks decision to the City Prosecutors, as her job description from the City Municipal Code entails,
I’m sure you will find that should you need support from your other City Council Members, Mr. Edgar, who used the City Code to his political benefit when going after Ken Parker and his landlord for signage should be more than happy to support your call for the City Manager to do what the Municipal Code calls for the City Manager to do. In fact you may find that a majority of the council will agree that the mater should finally be brought to a close by the City Manger making the referral of the criminal activity to the City Prosecutor for review and enforcement.
It’s easy to use the Municipal Code to beat down citizens from that dais when it suits your needs Madam Poe. It is much harder to demand that the City Code be used when it may be your head on the chopping block for violating the Municipal Code. The time for hypocrisy is over. It’s time to pay the piper. It’s time to do the right thing. It’s time to say that sitting on that dais is not the right of Kings to be above the laws. It’s time to enforce the rule of law. It’s time to insist that the City Manager follow Section 2.08.020 (B) of the City Municipal Code and refer Judge Banks finding of the violation of City Municipal Code 8.12.15 and 2,60 was in fact a violation covered by Section 1.20.10 of the Municipal Code, and if so, have the perps held responsible for their violation of the City of Los Alamitos Municipal Code.
The California Attorney General does not enforce the City Municipal Code. The Orange County District Attorney does not enforce the City Municipal Code. The City does, and it is the City Managers job per the City of Los Alamitos Municipal Code. It is well past time for this job to be done. It is time to enforce the City Code and refer the code violation to the City Prosecutors who handle code violations, NOT the city attorney.
Well, it was disappointing that 3 of the 4 Council Members didn’t get to see or understand the work performed by Steven Baric of Baric, Tran and Minesinger.
It was apparent that both Mayor Edgar and City Attorney Levin has knowledge and an understanding of the preliminary work products by Steven Baric.
And it is no wonder that Mayor Edgar has the scoop – it turns out that he and Steven Baric are more than mere acquaintances – they’re friends. Is it any wonder that Mayor Edgar was in a hurry to pay his friend’s firm?
What an incredible coincidence that City Attorney Levin randomly chose Baric, Tran & Minesinger and recommended them to City Manager Avery. Too bad Mayor Edgar did not disclose his personal relationship and request a different prosecutor.
ps – here’s the 411 on Steven Baric:
(1) Vice Chairman for the California Republican Party
(2) Chairman of the California Republican Lawyers Association
(3) Elected Council Member for the City of Rancho Santa Margarita
Is the “Tran” of Baric, Tran & Minesinger the former mayor of Garden Grove and the former member of the state assembly (68th district)? The same Tran who lost to Loretta Sanchez in 2010?
Yes.
That would be Van Tran, the former State Assembly Representative.
Good Grief Edgar ! Does ANYTHING ever get done in government, especially in Los Al without doing a favor for a friend???
How many times do you, the reader, remember being told that there can be no “conversations” between the City Council and the community during public comments on items?
Heck, we have even had it “referred to City Attorney Sandra Levin” so she could tell us how the City Council wasn’t allowed to have conversations with us during our comment period.
Well, please go watch the City Council meeting of 7/16 when we had a wonderful public workshop where the City Council members interacted with members of the community who were in the audience throughout the comments period and even during discussion when comments were not happening.
It’s one of those interesting “above the law” moments where, after the community and the citizens have been told time and time again that the members of the City Council can’t do something, they just go ahead and do it without any problems at all.
I was expecting City Attorney Sandra Levin to step in and shut it down at any time, I mean, according to City Attorney Sandra Levin the public and the City Council are not allowed to have these discussions on agenda items (remember how many times she has said that? Many!).
Seems King Edgar likes this whole “the rules apply to you, not to me!” thing. There are rules that they can now pick-and-choose to follow and those that they can choose to ignore all together.
Must be nice to be King.