City pledges transparency
Facing allegations it violated the state’s open meetings law, the city commits itself to transparency.
The promise comes amid allegations that Seal Beach off icials violated California’s open meetings law.
After allegations that the Seal Beach City Council twice violated the state’s open meetings law, the council unanimously agreed last week to recommit itself to transparency.
The alleged violations of the Ralph M. Brown Act were raised by Kelly Aviles, an attorney for the nonprofit Californians Aware, who contended that the fivemember board has repeatedly used the guise of “anticipated or threatened litigation” to sidestep public scrutiny.
In a March 7 cease- anddesist letter to the council, Aviles alleged that the f irst Brown Act violation was a closed- session decision to approve a contract worth up to $ 120,000 for a Sacramento lobbying f irm. In another closed session, the council unlawfully decided to move a historic home whose location was the subject of debate in the community, Aviles said.
“You are prohibited from taking action in closed session which deprives the public of their right to participate,” said Aviles, who is representing the Los Angeles Times and the San Diego Union- Tribune in open- government litigation.
During the council meeting March 28, Seal Beach City Atty. Craig A. Steele said Aviles “was not in possession of all the facts” related to the closed session meetings.
“The bottom line is that we believe both items questioned by Ms. Aviles were appropriately discussed by the City Council in closed session,” he later said in an email to The Times.
During a June 8, 2015, closed session, the City Council signed off on the $ 120,000 lobbying contract with Khouri Consulting, City Clerk Robin Roberts said. The contract, obtained through a public records request, calls for Khouri Consulting to lobby on behalf of the city on a proposed bill that would restructure the board of the Orange County Fire Authority, trimming its size from 25 members to 13.
The f ire authority, which provides firefighting service to 23 cities and unincorporated areas in Orange County, gives a board seat to each city it serves, plus two representatives from the county’s unincorporated areas. If passed, the law would have ended the city’s guaranteed spot on the board. The bill’s author, Assemblyman Tom Daly ( DAnaheim), said at the time that the fire authority’s governing board was oversized and inefficient.
The Khouri lobbying contract took effect June 3, about f ive days before the City Council met to give its approval in closed session.
Explaining the time gap, the City Clerk said the initial installment of $ 28,500 was signed off by the city manager, Jill Ingram, who is authorized to approve contracts up to about $ 28,800. Contracts for professional services such as lobbyists and architects do not require a formal bidding process, according to the municipal code.
In closed session, the council unanimously authorized the city manager to extend the contract for its full $ 120,000 scope, the city clerk said.
Robert Goldberg, who regularly monitors the City Council’s activity, said he f irst became aware of the Khouri Consulting contract in October, when he noticed a quarterly report from the city manager that indicated the city had a $ 120,000 contract. He reviewed the roster of checks issued by the city and found two payments to the lobbying f irm. He questioned city leaders over the contract’s genesis, and later alerted Californians Aware to the alleged Brown Act violation.
“I asked, When was the contract approved? It was never on an agenda,” Goldberg said. “I got no response.”
About a month after the City Council hired its lobbying f irm, Daly canceled a hearing on his bill, bringing it to a halt, and the bill has since languished. Still, Khouri Consulting received payments from Seal Beach for a total of $ 120,000, according to f ilings with the secretary of state’s office. In its final quarterly report for 2015, Khouri Consulting listed a $ 30,500 payment from Seal Beach, but did not list any bills on which it had actively represented the city.
Gus Khouri, who signed the contract with the city, did not respond to an email seeking comment.
The f ire authority, which serves more than 1.7 million residents, also opposed Daly’s bill. To its $ 5,500- permonth annual lobbying agreement with Nielsen, Merksamer, Parrinello, Gross & Leoni, the f ire authority added another $ 5,000 per month of work, a decision reported by the investigative news outlet Voice of OC. The additional funds, not to exceed $ 20,000, were designated for only a threemonth period. The f ire authority’s decision to devote more resources to lobbying on the bill was made in an open session.
Aviles alleges the city also violated the Brown Act in an Oct. 26, 2015, meeting, when the council decided behind closed doors to move a historic cottage that had been donated. In the same meeting, the city attorney later announced that the decision to relocate the cottage had been made during the closed session.
The discussion of potential litigation cannot include actions that deprive the public of participation, Aviles said. She expressed fear for what could happen under the auspices of “anticipated litigation” — that governments could make any number of decisions behind closed doors citing the exposure to legal risk.
“Everything that a public agency does could lead to litigation,” Aviles said.
At its meeting last week, the City Council voted unanimously to reply to Aviles’ cease- and- desist letter and drafted a response that does not acknowledge wrongdoing but does include a commitment “to transparency and the Brown Act.”
‘ You are prohibited from taking action in closed session which deprives the public of their right to participate.’
Kelly Aviles,
attorney for Californians Aware