Hermosa Beach City Council Must Agendize Their "Oil Neutrality" Closed Session Agreement To Avoid Brown Act Violations

See Howard Longacre's letter to the City Council received and filed on the June 24 meeting.

Have The Rights of City Council Members To Speak On Their Own Been Muzzled By An Agreement?

Letter From Howard Longacre Letter to City Council May 20, 2013 (Item 4)

(Please excuse my typos below)

4)  Request for clarification as to any other ongoing confidential agreements (other than the March 2, 2013 settlement agreement itself) which have also been made by the City's staff and/or the City Council, and/or with any other entity regarding the oil issue.  

The March 2012 settlement agreement between the parties states that the City will take the necessary actions to have an election for the voters to vote Yes or No on lifting the ban on oil drilling in Hermosa Beach.  However, as long as an election does take place and is facilitated by the Council, is there anything that precludes any individual council members from stating to the press or to the public, inside or outside of a public forum, and on the record, of being for or against lifting the ban on oil drilling? 

Has in any manner the rights of any individual council member to speak on their own, or on their constituents behalf, been muzzled via any agreement by the council in closed session or otherwise?  This question has not been answered clearly in my and others' view and such is not specified in the settlement agreement, nor do I recall a debate on the agenda item in any public meeting where the council specifically voted to maintain a position of unanimous support to muzzle themselves.  Something seems to be missing here and apparently has a lot do with the perception the public has of the Council regarding the entire oil matter? (See article:  Did elected officials in Hermosa Beach violate the Brown Act.)

Complicating the issue is that rumors persist that more than one council member has made it very clear to some residents or business operators that they are either supporting or not supporting lifting the ban on oil drilling in Hermosa Beach.

Unfortunately, that all five council member appear to be stonewalling, on the record, the issue of what agreement they perhaps made behind the scenes indicates to many, if not most, that the Council is being disingenuous and playing politically coy, given that the oil drilling issue is far from new in the city.

Further, it is doubtful that even 1 in 20 of the electorate who actually vote on the oil drilling issue will make up their minds one way or the other, basis reading or understanding anything of the nuts and bolts of the EIR's likely mountain of esoteric data, E&B's application, the flood of mailers and propaganda barrages to be likely put out by E&B and others, or the underlying agreements with Macpherson that have been transferred to E&B or others, nor will they perhaps understand or trust the grandiose claims of revenue one way or the other or the safety or lack of safety claims E&B and others are making.  Thus,

4-a)  Are there any agreements written or verbal other than the settlement agreement as related to the question of lifting the ban on oil drilling, the election, confidential, or otherwise, that the public and press are not distinctly and formally aware, and understanding of?  This could include any issues agreed to by the Council members among themselves, such as that they would not individually take announce a public position on oil drilling until "XYZ" occurs, etc.   If there are any other agreements please disclose and clarify as best possible what purpose they are for, why they are needed, and when they are made.

4-b)  Is each and every council member free at this time to speak his own mind regarding lifting the ban on oil drilling, both inside or outside of a public forum, and/or to the press on the record?  Yes or No?  If No, this due to a specific binding agreement made by the full council among themselves, and if so why such agreement required when the settlement agreement is supposedly the full and complete agreement?

See Hiding Oil Money Point 3  

Hany Fangary Ask For Public Meetings & Hermosa Beach City Council Needs to Get Involved

Hany Fangary suggests that the City Council get involved with the scoping, approach, election, timeline and RFP's for the proposed oil drilling project.  It has been over one year since the settlement was signed and there hasn't been any meaningful public discussion.  RFP's should be held as a public meeting.  

Kit Bobko of Hermosa Beach City Council Violated The Brown Act

Watch Kit Bobko Blatantly Violate The Brown Act in a Public Meeting

This meeting above was the first City Council's first attempt at a public meeting that did not go so well for them.  They tried sneak it onto the agenda of a School Board Meeting that was supposed to be about public safety and it back fired on them.  Preventing discussion of certain issues on the agenda is a Violation of the Brown Act.

Will one of the 5 City Council members crack and break the code of silence by November?  Or will the Citizens revolt and elect 3 responsible Hermosa Beach citizens who work for the Communities best interest not their own. We need to make sure that our elected officials loyalty is not divided by serving on board(s) or organizations where there can be conflicting interest.  We need to make sure that our elected officials are disclosing information, signing legal agreements, hiring reputable companies and City Attorneys that we can trust.

A lawsuit was filed in the town Sanford / Broome County, N.Y., whose town board has blocked discussion of fracking at public meetings.  This is very similar to what is going on in Hermosa Beach and the City Council trying to deflect responsibility to a regulatory process.  This video of Sanford, New York are what future meetings in Hermosa Beach are going to look like if the City Council continue to stand behind their illegal code of silence and not commenting the agreement or oil drilling.

The Natural Resources Defense Council and Catskill Citizens for Safe Energy argue that the board of the town of Sanford violated citizens’ right to free speech (Brown Act) when it voted unanimously to block any further discussion of the controversial natural gas extraction technique during the public comment sections of town board meetings. (See the video above.)

"E&B Won't Fool Hermosans" - Howard Longacre Letter

The Beach Reporter Letter February 6, 2013

Steve Layton, president of E&B Natural Resources, condescendingly portrayed 12 Hermosa residents who spoke out at a recent meeting as just those “remaining concerned” of E&B’s plan to drill 35 oil wells in city (Jan. 31 Beach Reporter letters).

Those residents and others are again having to give of their own valuable time and expenditures to challenge the insanity of drilling oil wells next to million-dollar homes in tiny Hermosa Beach. Now they’ve received this latest insulting, ignorant, and self-serving Kool-Aid response from Layton.
Why wasn’t Layton personally in attendance at the council/school board meeting when an E&B item was on the agenda? Is The Beach Reporter instead to be printing Layton propaganda responses every time Hermosa residents speak out in a public forum regarding E&B’s less than honorable deal, as made and signed secretly with Hermosa’s City Council?

E&B, with the outrageous secret help of Hermosa Councilman Michael DiVirgilio and Mayor Kit Bobko, and probably a few others behind the woodwork, has slickly weaseled its way into Hermosa Beach, a 21st-century city with stated goals fostering health, being green and carbon-neutral. And now E&B is to be drilling toxic oil wells?

E&B’s pitchman, Layton, has now moved himself into Hermosa Beach to better manipulate its 1.3 square miles of beach, ocean, residents, businesses and home-owners to E&B’s needs. E&B evidently views Hermosa’s electorate as being stupid and easily conned into returning to the 19th-century’s oil-drilling greed and ugliness.

If Layton actually believes Hermosa residents will be fooled into turning backward from a forklift pallet-full of smoke-and-mirrors documents, glossy PR and tempting elixirs to be dumped at their doorsteps and filling their mailboxes, than perhaps he needs to wake up and smell the coffee. Layton’s stuck in a dream and seems to have no clue that what he heard at the Jan. 23 meeting from those residents was merely the tip of the iceberg that E&B has so recklessly navigated into.

Howard Longacre
Beach Reporter Letter

Shame On You Hermosa Beach City Council. 13 Minutes of Shame

Jeff Duclos Promised & Failed To Hold A Public Meeting

What Happened to The Information Campaign You Promised Mayor Jeff Duclos?

Hermosa Beach City Council Promised & Failed To Hold One Public Meeting

Kit Bobko Admits "Taking Heat" Over Oil Settlement

Kit Bobko and Michael Divirgilio finally admitted to the public they are "taking heat" for the settlement that THEY put together themselves without a public forum. A back room deal, without conflicts of interest disclosed and only 1 oil company participated in this process. Watch Kit admit his guilt here.  Why are they acting like victims?  The lack of insincerity is appalling.     

If you want the details of why they are taking heat read why the oil settlement is not legal.  

The Hermosa Beach Oil Settlement Agreement is Not Legal

Why has no one on the City Council read the Macpherson mock jury trial documents or transcript?  The threat of bankruptcy was the basis for was for a $17.5M settlement and extortion vote and no one has read the documents?

Before you read this you should review the contract agreement comments. In a properly negotiated & compromised settlement agreement, "neither party should be happy"with the outcome.  In this settlement agreement Hermosa Beach tax paying residents lost while the lawyers, City Council and oil won regardless of the outcome of the vote.  Here are some very important questions for our proud elected officials: Council Member Patrick (Kit) Bobko, Hermosa Beach City Attorney Michael Jenkins and Michael Divirgilio.

Drilling Down Article 

1)  If there was such a real likelihood that Macpherson Oil would win a court award for HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ($750 million,), then why did Macpherson Oil settle for a mere $30 Million or 4% of his asking price?   Did Macpherson believe that, even if they won the jury trial, they would likely receive substantially less than $30M, or probably even NOTHING (see below)?  

2)  Was the 1995 “STOP OIL” ELECTION FLAWED because the “City Attorney (Jenkins) Impartial Analysis” in the election pamphlet failed to advise/warn voters of the real possibility of a Breach of Contract lawsuit to recover POTENTIAL LOST PROFITS? Were Hermosa Beach voters properly informed about the potential consequences, including tremendous financial liability, of the Proposition E vote in 1995? What law firm was providing City Attorney services to Hermosa Beach during this decade/period of time? Weren’t Bobko and Jenkins both employees of this same law firm - Bobko's current employer RWG Municipal Law Firm (of which he is now a Partner)?

3) Until 2001, Hermosa Beach City Attorney services were being provided by (Bobko’s & Jenkin’s) RWG Municipal Law Firm, represented by RWG Employee Michael Jenkins. From 2001 and onward, Michael Jenkins law firm began providing City attorney services to the City, including providing oversight services on the law firms defending the City from the MacPhersson lawsuit.  After the MacPherson lawsuit was filed, why didn’t RWG admit there had been and omission/error, and advise the City to hold a new election? (The 1995 measure passed by a mere 565 votes). Why didn’t Jenkins (after he/his law firm began providing City Attorney services to Hermosa)? Why didn’t Bobko (after being elected to the City Council)? 

4)  Could damages even be awarded to MacPherson by a jury (under directions provided by the presiding judge) due to failure of Macpherson Oil to make reasonable efforts to “mitigate damages” over the past 15+ years, as required under California law, by insisting on a new vote with a new proper City Attorney Impartial Analysis?  Did Macpherson sue because he could NEVER meet the TERMS & CONDITIONS of the LEASE imposed by the Coastal & State Lands Commission?  Did Hermosa Beach trial lawyers including Michael Jenkins purposely ignore evidence that could have won or minimized damages?  

5) Because of Bobko's associations with RWG Municipal Law Firm and Michael Jenkins, did Councilmen Bobko have a “CONFLICT OF INTEREST” in negotiating and voting on the settlement agreement? Shouldn’t Bobko have RECUSED himself, as required under California law from all such activities.  Has Bobko violated the Brown Act?  

6)  Are these the reasons the Settlement Agreement was negotiated by Bobko in secret, and voted upon behind closed doors without public participation? Was Bobko just protecting the reputation of this law firm, and his friend Jenkins, to the detriment of the City? Why was the settlement agreement not discussed in public BEFORE City Officials signed the contract with a new 3rd party E&B before the scheduled jury trial in April of 2012? Don't neighbors heavily impacted deserve "a say" in that their property and lives could be heavily impacted? - That seems to be normal business practice with Tattoo parlors or new bars, etc

7) Is this the reason that this behind the closed doors settlement includes a requirement that the 1995 "Stop Oil  election be held again"?  By wiping out all City reserve funds if not passed. Are there also other implications with regard to attorney "errors and omissions"insurance and possible reimbursement to the City for its approximately $4M in legal defense costs?

Continue to read a list of more questions that need answers.

Hermosa Beach City Council Voting Record

Hermosa Beach City Council Voting Record

Kit Bobko & Michael Divirgilio are the dissenting votes or absent for all of these City Council Meeting votes?  

1)  Voted 3-2 No on Outsourcing Parking Meters

2)  Voted 3-2 Yes Hiring Tom Bakaly as new City Manager

3)  Voted 3-2 Yes to Ban Polystyrene
4)  Voted 4-1 Yes Banning Smoking on Strand & Pier Plaza
5)  Voted 4-0 Yes (Bobko Absent) Banning Smoking on Beaches
6)  Voted 3-2 Yes Approval of Bank of American Banking contract
6)  Voted 3-2 No Suspend City Treasurer Cohn who was a victim of extortion.

Oil Drilling Settlement Negotiations

The City Council seems to have a clear divide on most voting issues in recent months as described above.  However, I often have to scratch my head to understand the logic behind some of the dissenting votes in recent months.  Bobko and Divirgilio are clearly working as a team and it all seemed to culminate immediately after both launched a PR campaign to promote their oil settlement.  The big question is:  Why were the two of these guys negotiating our oil settlement deal together?  Shouldn't they have had Duclos, Fishman or Tucker in the room negotiating? Neither Bobko or Divirgilio own a home in Hermosa Beach.  It would have been impossible for a third City Councilman to participate in the negotiations because it would have been in violation of the Brown Act.  Were the residents represented properly?  I don't think so.  What business, lobbyists or people are motivating these two individuals to make make their voting decisions or press their unpopular agendas?

Outsourcing Parking Meters vs Replacing With Credit Card Machines

I think many residents who are disappointing about the City not even considering outsourcing are missing the point of Duclos, Fishman and Tucker voting no.  However, the City can always outsourcing at any point in time but lets take some baby steps and install credit card machines that we own first.  Some of the high salary and union problems might naturally go away over time.  90% of the problems can be solve by installing credit card machines and that does not require outsourcing.   The City currently collects $2.5M per year from coins and who knows we might be about to double this to $5M simply by putting in credit card machines and managing the price per spot during peak hours.  What if we charge $5 per hour for parking near the pier during peak hours.  Hint, hint . . .  this might control some of the alcohol related problems of people flooding into our city.  Controlling our own meters with credit cards is not that hard and Manhattan Beach has already demonstrated they can do it profitably.

Kit made faulty parallel assumptions that it works for Newport Beach, why not in Hermosa?  His PR was recognized in the national media blaming $100,000 meter maids as the problem?  Why did Kit conveniently leave out that installing credit card machines would have $0 cost to the city and would be profitable immediately.  This does not require outsourcing.  So, what his suggestion to outsource politically motivated or does he have the best interest of our city at heart?  Does he or his law firm RWG have any political ties to the large outsourcing firms that manage parking meters?  Does Kit once again have a conflict of interest he would like to explain?  Was he motivated to get a "deal" in return for some political donations down the road.

Kit routinely makes statements and negotiates deals that are not backed with any financial analysis.  Kit also does not appear to see the big financial picture or have a cohesive fiscal strategy as it relates to the affect on the community.  Kit is not a property owner and has no skin in the game.  He simply seems to look for revenue opportunities or ways to save money to further his political platform.  I wish Kit would simply more rational decision based on what is right for the community and not based a political ideology.  I am a conservative voter and thinker myself, however, I don't agree with much Kit's thinking or ideas as they pertain to what is best for our community.   

Councilmen Howard Fishman said the city should move immediately on replacing coin-operated meters with credit card parking meters to solve 90% of the problems. City Treasurer wrote a memorandum to the council encouraging the installation of credit card-accepting meters as other municipalities have done in order to increase funds and efficiency.  “With credit card meters, revenue goes up overnight,” Pete Tucker said.   Former Police Chief Greg Savelli, who now runs the parking enforcement department of the Los Angeles Department of Transportation, also spoke against outsourcing, saying the service the officers provide “goes beyond the balance sheet.”

“What we have now is fantastically expensive,” Kit Bobko said who seems adamant about cutting costs and saving money no matter what the outcome.  Outsourcing to save money or outsourcing to generate (oil drilling) is going to be a common platform for Kit to propel himself to a higher political office.  Kit gave no credible financial arguments justifying his outsourcing position.

Hiring Hermosa Beach City Manager Tom Bakaly

"First, let me say that I think without question that Tom was an impressive dude, and I think that he provides a lot of earned and demonstrated skills that meet our needs and that match quite nicely with our uniqueness," said Councilman Michael DiVirgilio.  Council votes 3-2.

"In Hermosa Beach, we're whistling past the graveyard because we are not having any financial troubles yet,” Bobko said. “We weren't going to stand firm and ask of our leader, the person who is in charge of our city's staff, to do what we want the staff to do, which is to pay for his own first contribution. That is deeply disappointing and I think a failure of leadership for this council…

I don't think either of these guys have much experience running a business or hiring and firing people.  My philosophy has always been to hire the best CEO you can get and pay him top dollar.  There are a lot of problems in the City right now and we need a strong, competent, financially oriented person to do the job.  I am confident Tom Bakaly was a great hire and will help turn the City around that has been neglected in many areas.

Banning Polystyrene in Hermosa Beach

Bobko and Divirgilio have been routinely voting together.  Bobko is a Registered Republican and Divirgilio seems to be a Democrat having worked for Jane Harmon.  However, the two of them seem to be singing to the same song when it comes to local voting matters.  They also don't seem to be able to sway the other 3 council members very often on their views.  Both Bobko and Divirgilio were dissenting votes (3-2_ as well on Hermosa Beach polystyrene ban.   This was shocking since Michael Divirgilio once led the Green Task Force in Hermosa Beach and pounded the table in his campaign about a City that needs to become "carbon neutral".

Banning Smoking on Strand, Pier Plaza & Beaches

It goes without saying who was the lone voter in the 4-1 vote to ban smoking on the Pier and Stand. Kit Bobko does not support banning smoking on the Pier or Strand.  Kit Bobko was also conveniently absent for the 4-0 that banned smoking on the beaches.  Does he have your health at interest or his political views?

Hermosa Beach Renegotiates Banking Contract First Time Ever Recorded

Bank of America has been the Bank of Hermosa Beach for over 40+ years. It would have cost the City over $100,000 to change banks.  Also, Treasurer Cohn renegotiated the current contract for the first time ever and was not touched by John Workman prior Treasurer.   Hermosa Beach was paying $24,000 per year in banking service fees and a $28,000 rebate?

Bobko and Divirgilio Accuse Treasurer Cohn of Sloppy Non-Transparent Work?

Sloppy?  Transparency?  Do Mr. Divirgilio and Mr. Bobko have a personal issue with Treasurer Cohn?  Aren't they being hypocritical about the City Treasurer lacking transparency in the bank bidding process of 12 banks? Correct me if I am wrong but you are the same to 2 councilmen that negotiated a $17.5M settlement with any transparency and 1 oil company? They seem to think the backroom oil deal is justified because of the ongoing litigation but you did brought in a 3rd party without any bidders. Their lack of due diligence and transparency on this deal is appalling and speaks for itself. We are talking about saving money in a banking relationship of $50,000 per year in banking fees vs a $17.5M check they wrote without any bidders while jeopardizing the health and safety of its citizens. I think the two of them have some explaining to do.  Their hypocritical voting record speaks for itself.   E&B loaned the City of HB $30M to settle the lawsuit with Macpherson. How many companies got to bid on this? Only 1 company sourced by Gary Brutsch and Michael Divirgilo and Kit Bobko. Why doesn't the LA Times investigate this?

Did Our Elected Officials Violate The Brown Act?

The Ralph M. Brown Act, was an act of the California State Legislature, authored by Assembly member Ralph M. Brown and passed in 1953, that guaranteed the public’s right to attend and participate in meetings of local legislative bodies.  How many open forum meetings did the Hermosa Beach City Council have on this issue in the last 10 years?  Zero.  In fact, all negotiations and discussions were in a closed session and nothing was disclosed to the public until the deal was done.  Not only that but if you read the Hermosa Beach Macpherson settlement agreement it appears our officials are under a non-disclosure agreement and confidential information is being withheld.

Throughout California’s history, local legislative bodies have played a vital role in bringing participatory democracy to the citizens of the state. Local legislative bodies - such as boards, councils and commissions - are created in recognition of the fact that several minds are better than one, and that through debate and discussion, the best ideas will emerge. The law which guarantees the public’s right to attend and participate in meetings of local legislative bodies is the Ralph M. Brown Act.

While local legislative bodies generally are required to hold meetings in open forum, the Brown Act recognizes the need, under limited circumstances, for these bodies to meet in private in order to carry out their responsibilities in the best interests of the public. For example, the law contains a personnel exception based on notions of personal privacy, and a pending litigation exception based upon the precept that government agencies should not be disadvantaged in planning litigation strategy. Although the principle of open meetings initially seems simple, application of the law to real life situations can prove to be quite complex.