Mayor Furey Backtracks; Now Swears He Paid Fair Share of FPPC Fine
Mayor Furey’s recent ethical entanglements with illegal campaign contributions have left some, like former Mayor Scotto, proclaiming that the city is looking for character, integrity and honesty in their leaders and that the City Council needs to gain back the confidence of its residents.
On the eve of an important election, new documents released by the FPPC reveal the Mayor now swears he paid his fair share of the $35,000 fine recently levied by the FPPC. This position is a complete about-face from previous comments the Mayor made on the subject.
The settlement agreement with the FPPC stipulated that the Mayor was liable for half of the $35,000 fine with representatives from McCormick liable for the other half. Yet, despite agreeing to the settlement, Mayor Furey boasted at the 12 April 2016 Council meeting that he did not pay his portion of the fine and that McCormick paid the entire $35,000. At the time the Mayor said:
“I’m not liable for half of that. I’ve not paid a penny of it.”
That admission was startling as California Government Code Section 89503 prohibits gifts to locally elected officials in excess of $250 in any calendar year. The question of whether McCormick paid the fine is also crucial because the Mayor participated in a vote involving McCormick’s contract with the city shortly after the fine was paid – an act which would raise conflict of interest concerns per Code Section 87103.
A complaint to the FPPC submitted shortly after the mayor denied paying the fine raised these very same issues. In response to that complaint, the Mayor enlisted the Kaufman Legal Group who wrote a letter to the FPPC asserting that “Mayor Furey paid his share of the FPPC settlement.”
The FPPC complaint was filed 19 April 2016. On 03 May 2016, Kaufman wrote to the FPPC seeking an extension to the response due date of 04 May 2016. Kaufman ultimately submitted the response on 13 May 2016.
That response included an explanation that Mayor Furey and McCormick had entered into an odd arrangement in which Furey paid all the legal fees stemming from the FPPC case and McCormick paid the fine with the parties anticipating that the costs would be about the same.
Kaufman’s response attests that the Mayor ultimately paid $37,719.27 in legal costs to their firm. Kaufman acknowledged, however, that final invoices were not issued until after the FPPC complaint was filed alleging the illegal gift. Indeed, in a sworn declaration by Mayor Furey included in the response, the Mayor affirmed he did not pay the final legal bills until the week of 09 May – two months after McCormick cut the $35,000 check to the FPPC on 08 March and nearly one month after the FPPC complaint was filed.
The Mayor’s declaration also reveals that $4,536 of the $37,719.27 he paid to Kaufman was for representation of his son. He then deducted that amount attributable to those services and reconciled with McCormick by issuing a payment to McCormick of $908.36.
Kaufman’s response also included a sworn declaration from Richard Roesch, President of McCormick Ambulance, attesting to the same explanation. Relying upon the letter from Kaufman, and the sworn declarations from Mayor Furey and Richard Roesch, the FPPC has closed the matter and is not planning on taking further action.
By way of full disclosure, I was the one that submitted the FPPC complaint raising the concern of the illegal gift. I contacted the FPPC shortly after the Mayor made his initial statement claiming he did not pay one cent of the fine. I was told the only way that statement could be verified was to file a formal complaint. I felt it important to uncover the truth of the matter and so I filed the complaint.
The response from Kaufman presents two disturbing possibilities. The first being that the Mayor purposefully misled the public with his comments at the 12 April meeting with the second, even more nefarious, possibility being that the Mayor took the 3 and a half weeks after I submitted my complaint to concoct a story with his attorney’s – in collusion with McCormick – that would absolve them all of any penalties.
I don’t know the answer but I am left with several questions. Why did it take Kaufman nearly 3 1/2 weeks to respond to my complaint? At what point in time exactly (before or after I submitted the complaint) did the Mayor and McCormick agree upon sharing the expenses in the manner they explained? How much were the invoices for legal fees that were paid by Mayor Furey after I submitted my complaint and well after McCormick paid the fine? What records of payment does Mayor Furey have to Kaufman? I don’t anticipate the Mayor will be forthcoming with responses to any of these questions.
For those interested, I have linked in the article to all documents provided to me by the FPPC.
It’s time for Mr Furey to pack his bags and get out of his seat. He can play his dirty politics somewhere else.
Ain’t gonna happen until he is voted out. City Council is too afraid of freakin’ Furey to “do the right thing”.
Very comprehensive follow up on your part, Mr. Paulson. I am confused, however …. Did the Kaufman firm represent McCormick, Mr. Roesch and Ms. McKinnor in this matter, as well as the Mayor and his campaign? I take it they did, as these legal fees and the fine are now intertwined, and that does not concern the FPPC. So, in summary, the Mayor paid the legal fees for everyone in the action brought by the FPPC and wrote a check for $908.36 to McCormick for the difference, and McCormick paid the entire fine of $35,000 because that then balanced out with each “party” paying 50-50 (or at least the “cooked books” created by the Kaufman firm AFTER you filed your complaint creatively showed). I know the mayor wouldn’t want to be “on record” for paying a fine to the FPPC, but this is even more evidence that McCormick and Mayor Furey are doing business together. They are sharing attorneys (and therefore information), books, accounts payable, etc. What more evidence would one need to show a conflict of interest arises when the Mayor votes on anything to do with McCormick?
Madam Counsel, giving your profession, in the event Furey did pay all these fees to the law firm, would it then be attorney client privilege as to exactly how much he paid and how? If so, theoretically he could have given a $35,000 speech in the law firm’s conference room and there is no way to confirm if this was his form of paying. Is that possible?
Any conversation between an attorney (or a law firm) and their client is considered attorney-client privilege and is confidential. If two completely different entities hire the same lawyer, for the same matter, they may have to sign a “waiver” of the privilege as to each other for the law firm to proceed (as the attorney will discover information from one client that may aid and/or assist in the representation of the other client). However, that confidential privilege still exists as to all other “persons”, subject to some other waiver, of course. In your theoretical scenario, it suggests a “barter”, in which services are exchanged for services. No matter, however, as the privilege still exists. All conversations between attorney and client are privileged, and remain so after the representation ceases to exist. Although anything is possible, I highly doubt that a “speech” by Mr. Furey would be valued by anyone at $35,000.
Incredible that the lies just keep coming, assuming the citizens are not watching or buying this trash. Mr Paulson thank you for all you do for Torrance. Mr Furey hasn’t learned yet that the truth always comes out.
CYA, CYA, CYA.
Interesting that the FPPC closed the matter relying only on statements by the accused parties.
Using that standard, every criminal who denied involvement would have the case dismissed.
Sure would solve the jail overcrowding issue.
I actually asked the FPPC investigator about that very issue. I was told that the FPPC lacked the investigative resources to pursue it further as they would have to uncover evidence that would definitively prove in a court of law that the sworn declarations were false.
Asking for bank records is apparently too big a deal.
This could be closed with about ten minutes of work with full record submissions.
I have a lot of respect for the people that work at the FPPC as they are probably overworked caseload wise and largely go unnoticed and unrecognized for the important work that they do. That said, let’s face it the previous matter with the Furey’s that led to the $35,000 fine took over 18 months to resolve. Now I’m sure that is partly because Furey’s lawyers were blocking them every step of the way, but still If that’s any indication of the investigative resources at their disposal it is not a surprise to me that they lack the resources to fully pursue matters such as this. Maybe former Torrance Police Chief Neu will look into it in his role with the DA’s office as I’m sure he has a lot more resources at his disposal.
Mike (and Clint for that matter) … you can see right where the issues are and get to the point. Funny how McCormick has plenty of money to get our Mayor a billboard on Crenshaw Boulevard (so they can count on his vote), but our taxpayer dollars cannot fund the adequate resources to prosecute unethical conduct on the part of those who serve in government, and by association, choose where to appropriate those taxpayer dollars. How ironic. And oh …. for that anonymous individual who monitors this website for Mr. Furey, I realize he doesn’t have any say in how the FPPC is funded, but I think you get the point.
That’s usually Mr Furey Jr trolling this site for his dad.
Thank you for the update Clint.
If the accumulation of information and facts that prove the shady nature of the Furey clan doesn’t prompt an early resignation by the Mayor, or his removal at the next election, then it will be confirmation that the city employee unions are the ones in control of Torrance, not the residents.
But of course, the facts do not matter to the Leftists, and if we oppose the unethical Mayor we are ‘hatemongers’. Right, Ms. Kimmel-Dagostino?
A vote for Leilani is a vote for the same corruption. I am amazed at the voters of Torrance for voting in the same every darn time.
Most voters, even intelligent ones, don’t know unless they read things like this forum. The Breeze doesn’t get to everyone.
I said it once before that the problems that President Nixon had with Watergate stemmed more from the cover-up than the actual crime. The Furey family mist be going crazy to not only make up new stories to cover-up their mess, but to keep all the plates spinning on the tales they have told so far. At some point, like it did with Nixon, this is all going to come tumbling down. Thank you Mr. Paulson for keeping us up to date on everything that’s happening with our crooked mayor.
Susan Hughes
Wonderful similes Susan. Thanks for the chuckle.
How people can be upset with others simply asking for clean local government is beyond me. I don’t like this crap from either political party; one of the few good things to say about Republicans is they more often than not will eat their own when it comes to ethics.
If you listen to his 3 minute speech, it mentions nothing what they responded to the FPPC with, what a load of lies again!