Torrance City Council – A Town Hall Style Conversation About Local Politics

In a lengthy post appearing on the groups FB page, the Torrance Teacher’s Association (TTA) issued a stern lecture to the School Board and the TUSD Administration. The statement came in response to calls from parents in the community to change the current school calendar.  In the statement, TTA referred to the issue as a “firestorm brewing” and blasted TUSD and the School Board for continuing to “blame TTA for their [TUSD’s] unwillingness to engage the public in dialogue on the issue.”

The statement also claimed that, “Dr. Mannon and the TUSD School Board is passing the buck and [is] not being totally transparent or correct with their continued response of “go talk to TTA.”

TTA asserts that the issue came up during negotiations three years ago and that they felt their membership was too divided (with 57% opposed to it in polling) to move forward with a change at that time.

In further defense of their position, the TTA cited a TUSD subcommittee finding that AP scores are not significantly impacted by the late start and raised the concern of how much it would cost to properly ventilate and cool classrooms without air conditioning during August.

The TTA statement concluded with the following comments:

TTA Leadership expects TUSD administrators to take ownership of the contract in which they are collaborative partners in negotiating rather than passing the buck. We expect them to be as accountable and responsive to their employees as we are to our members. Unfortunately, it is only now that this has become an issue with parents in the community that the issue has gained any traction. It further demonstrates just how much TUSD administrators and school board members discount the needs and working conditions of their employees and students when making decisions. Only when it becomes a “political” problem do they seek solutions. That is a sad commentary in and of itself.

Proponents of the calendar change recently started an online petition that as of this writing has garnered 216 signatures. Supporters of the petition claim the current calendar “does not align with the TUSD mission to support student academic achievement and maximize individual student potential,” and that it disadvantages Torrance students in several ways including:

• Students involved in extra-curricular activities like band or sports lose opportunities to participate in college recruiting tournaments and camps that begin the third week of June and are less competitive for summer internships;
• AP testing occurs in May leaving AP students with one less month of formal instruction leading up to the exams and causing instruction in AP courses to decline significantly once AP exams are administered;
• High School students wishing to enroll in summer sessions have fewer options as many summer courses begin before TUSD has finished the school year; and
• Students have difficulty getting final transcripts to colleges prior to the 01 July deadline thereby risking having their admissions rescinded.

In response to the petition, School Board Member Michael Wermers wrote that:

This is great! However, as I’ve told anyone who will listen to me, the move of the school calendar is a “negotiated item.”  This means both the school board and the TTA will need to agree to this during the negotiations next fall.  The School Board and the TTA have a very functional relationship and I have high hopes for how this will go…but it still requires agreement between both parties.

TTA indicated in their statement that they would not consider revisiting the issue until the close of the 2018 school year.

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.

The six candidates for Torrance City Council appeared at Anza Elementary yesterday evening for a forum sponsored by the Southwood HOA.  Below is a summary of the candidate responses to some of the questions asked.

Q. The Mayor has been critical of the Daily Breeze reporting.  Do you share those concerns? 

• Eng: Any elected official has a special relationship with the media.  This is to be expected.  I don’t see this as a particular issue.
• Herring: The public has an obligation to take what they read with a grain of salt and do their own investigation, but I am endorsed by the Daily Breeze and so I think they are doing an excellent job.
• Rizzo: It’s important to have multiple sources and perspectives.  I have a concern with all media sources that you get the perspective of that individual reporter.
• Griffiths: It is important for the Council to share information with the media so people can understand what is going on in our City.  To shy away from that completely is an oversight.
• Dagastino: The quality of the Daily Breeze has really been declining. They are publishing opinions rather than news or actual facts.  When you try to get them to make corrections, it’s almost impossible to get them to print a retraction.
• Sheikh: It’s immature at this point to make any comments.  We need more time to do more research and do our due diligence.

Sidenote: The relationship between Mayor Furey and the Daily Breeze can be fairly characterized as “hostile.” Mayor Furey has been sharply critical of the local paper and reporter Nick Green.  He once attempted to have Nick Green removed from his position and recently referred to him as a “hatemonger.”

Q. Former Councilmembers have expressed concerns that the unions run the show in Torrance.  Do they?  Is too much union influence a concern?   

• Eng: Collective bargaining is important.  Historically unions have been very good, but they have been in decline so I am surprised anybody would think they wield too much power.  I think in general it’s been a good balance.
• Herring: I don’t have an informed response to that.  I respectfully pass.  We should have a good relationship between City and Union leaders.
• Rizzo: Union members are important stakeholders.  I don’t think they have the power that some people think they have, but they do have a place at the table.
• Griffiths: Unions do a great job representing all the different employee groups in our City, but there should be a line between their representation of their employees and their involvement in politics.  The unions involvement in politics creates a dangerous conflict of interest that concerns me greatly.
• Dagastino: I believe in people’s right to collective bargaining.  You have to work together to come to a decision.  The unions have to work with the City Council.
• Sheikh: I have not heard that so I am going to pass on that question, but unions have done a good job and are an important element of the City.

Sidenote: With regard to this subject, former councilmember and mayoral candidate Bill Sutherland stated in an interview that, “The unions have a lot of power.  They have more power than the Council has.  You can’t do anything without them signing off on it.”  Former Mayor Scotto echoed similar concerns in an article that appeared in the Daily Breeze shortly after the 2014 election.  The public employee unions are a major player in Torrance elections giving thousands of dollars to their preferred candidates.

Q. How would you pay for needed street repairs and infrastructure improvements?  

• Eng: The recession hurt the City, but it’s now turned around.  I would like more polling of the population to identify what streets need to be fixed and in what order.  It’s important that our streets look good.
• Herring: We should be more aggressive when it comes to our infrastructure.  Look at the streetscape around Lomita and Crenshaw where they have new developments coming in.  Why can’t that be all of Torrance?  We must find ways in which to do this.  I will make it priority. 
• Rizzo: It is time to do these projects as the economy is improving and as our revenue is increasing. These things take time.
• Griffiths: Our facilities and infrastructure are aging.  The recession hurt us as well as Exxon being offline, but with Exxon coming back that should help us.  We are spending a large percentage of our capital budget on infrastructure.
• Dagastino: When I was in DC a few weeks ago we talked about how we could secure more grant funding for the City.  We have to stay on top of our representatives in DC and Sacramento and aggressively pursue those grants.
• Sheikh: Spending on infrastructure will bring a good ROI to the City and its residents.

Side Commentary: Everybody agreed that more street improvements and infrastructure spending is needed, but nobody was able to articulate how they would pay for it with the possible exception of Dagastino who cited the need to capture more federal and state grants.

Q. What is your commitment to scrubbing the City’s budget to eliminate waste? How conservative will you be when it comes to spending our City’s funds?   

• Eng: I think Torrance has done a very good job.  I would like to see alternative budgets developed through the Planning Commission that give options on what to do if there is a shortfall or what to do if there is extra money.  Torrance has a conservative budget.
• Herring: I would audit the various departments and see if there is any fat that could be cut.
• Rizzo: I used to handle the police department budget.  Those budgets do get audited on a regular basis.  This is a very conservative Council.  We do spend our money wisely.
• Griffiths: I’ve been impressed with how City staff organizes their projects and how the City Manager determines what they will go forward with.  We didn’t just willy nilly approve everything that was proposed by staff.  I think we are being conservative and doing a really good job.
• Dagastino: My background is in finance.  I have an MBA in quantitative analysis.  I used to manage a billion dollar budget for American Airlines.
• Sheikh: We have to prioritize based on the needs of the City and the ROI.

Sidenote: The City operated at a deficit in several of the last fiscal years.  With an uptick in projected revenues, however, the Council approved at the last Council meeting to set aside funds for several new annual expenditures such as fireworks ($75K), historic preservation ordinance ($169K), tree ordinance ($168K), increase of Torrance Cultural Arts Center donation ($60K increase bringing total to $168K), and Police Department Social Media Manager ($86K).  While still voting yes to the budget, Councilwoman Ashcraft said she opposed the $75K expense for fireworks.

Q. What do you intend to do as a Councilmember to mitigate the risk to the community presented by the use of hydrofluoric acid (HF) at the refinery. 

• Eng: I am the only scientist running for Council.  I think the Council has missed a lot of opportunities dating back to 1989 by deffering to the experts and presuming they had to listen to what they said.  Many of those experts like Norton engineering have a history of working for Exxon and so it’s hard to get an independent expert. I would like to see a refinery commission created made of non-oil industry people that are scientific and technical experts.
• Herring: I am the only candidate calling for an independent safety monitor to be hired and paid for by fines levied against Exxon. It’s important to restore the credibility gap we now have between the community and Exxon.  HF is something that should not be used and we should work with local and state officials to eventually outlaw HF and find other safer additives to use.     
• Rizzo: I have no opinion on HF yet.  I am still waiting for the report to come back to determine whether there is a safer alternative.  Until that report is completed, I can’t give a solid opinion.
• Griffiths: HF is a very dangerous chemical, but dangerous chemicals can be used safely and that is my goal to ensure HF is being used safely.  There is a big misconception by a lot of people that we can just drain out the HF and replace it.  That’s not true.  It has to be redesigned for a different chemical process.  It’s a very complex process.  I am going to defer to the experts and will follow their recommendations on how to operate the refinery safely going forward.
• Dagastino: We should continue to explore alternatives and look to re-establish the Disaster Commission that was abolished about 4 years ago.  We could also form an Ad-Hoc Committee of residents that could provide suggestions to the City Council.
• Sheikh: I would like to get an opinion from experts and then we should ensure the refinery abides by all laws and regulations.

Sidenote: Organizations like the Torrance Refinery Action Alliance continue to advocate for the refinery to stop using HF in its operations.  One recent Facebook post from the organization criticized the Mayor and Council for their absence of a fighting spirit in the battle against HF and claimed that:

City elected representatives cower behind a slogan we hear repeatedly: “I’m not an expert. I will defer to the experts…There’s nothing the city can do.” Don’t ask for a city investigation, they advise. There are better ways to “handle” this problem. This is utter rubbish, meant to evade their responsibility as elected representatives of the public … Show some backbone, take a public stand and SPEAK UP!