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

Taxpayer and concerned resident Jim McGee scored a key legal victory in his quest to return $109 Million to Torrance schools after the Second District Court of Appeals recently ruled in McGee’s favor. McGee is the lead plaintiff in ongoing litigation against Balfour Beatty Construction (BBC) alleging many of the contracts entered into between Torrance Unified School District (TUSD) and Balfour Beatty Construction (BBC) are illegal due to a conflict of interest.

According to the lawsuit, TUSD hired BBC to act as the District’s construction consultant/manager.  In that role, BBC acted as an agent for the District and developed the scope, determined the requirements, and set the budgets/schedules for the bond projects. BBC also helped the District pass the bond measures by funneling thousands of dollars into the campaigns.  Once the bonds were passed, the District awarded construction contracts to BBC without soliciting competitive bids using a form of contracting dubbed lease-leaseback.

In an effort to kill the litigation, attorneys for BBC and TUSD had argued that McGee lacked standing to bring the lawsuit. Ironically, the logic behind the argument was that any lawsuit challenging the legality of the contracts should have been brought by the TUSD School Board and not a taxpayer representative. The Second District Court of Appeals affirmed, however, that McGee has legal standing to challenge the contracts.  The Court also affirmed that the conflict of interest claim is a valid cause of action thereby allowing the suit to move forward.

The decision is similar to one meted out last year by the Fifth District Court of Appeals. That decision prompted BBC to halt construction on Torrance schools last summer. In light of the favorable ruling on McGee’s behalf, TUSD is facing renewed calls to cease opposing taxpayer efforts to recover the $109 Million in funds.  TUSD has not disclosed to the public how much money it has spent fighting the recovery of these funds, but one Bond Oversight Committee member has confirmed that the District is using bond money to pay for the legal costs.

The recovery of the $109 Million to Torrance schools is also threatened by powerful interest groups that are lobbying the state legislature to amend the law in order to remove any liability they may have incurred due to these illegal contracts. One such effort, Assembly Bill 978, was rejected last year.  Another, AB 2316, is set to be heard by the Assembly Education Committee this Wednesday, May 4, 2016 at 1:30 p.m.

At least one group has established a website requesting people e-mail, call, or tweet members of the Education Committee urging them to “Let the committee members know that you won’t stand for this corrupt, back-room deal to let people, who knew they were violating the law, off the hook.”

The USBA billed the event as a night where you could ask the questions nobody has allowed you to ask.  As advertised, the candidates did field a smattering of questions they are unlikely to receive at other local forums on topics such United Nations Agenda 21, climate change, and the current business license fee structure.

Unlike other candidate forums, the USBA also promised to offer more of a debate with candidates given the freedom to refer to other candidates positions and rebut arguments. With few exceptions, however, the candidates did not take the bait as they mostly stuck to safe talking points and non-committal responses; thereby offering few diverging viewpoints.

When asked if they supported implementing UN Agenda 21 mandates within Torrance, Rizzo said Agenda 21 had no application to local politics. Eng echoed that sentiment by saying the agenda was very far removed from the City.  Griffiths turned it on the residents by saying he would try and support what the residents wanted. Herring deflected the question by stating the need to maintain a balanced approach while Sheikh focused his response on improving traffic in Torrance.

With regard to allocating funding for climate change initiatives, Griffiths and Rizzo both advocated for moving forward with a balanced approach that would not put our businesses at a competitive disadvantage. Eng suggested incremental initiatives such as bike lanes and more public transit routes.  Eng also took the opportunity to take a stab at ExxonMobil for funding climate change deniers as far back as the 1970’s, which is something he referred to as hypocrisy.  Sheikh said climate change is a big concern and that he was doing his part by using recyclable bags to promote his campaign instead of sending out a bunch of mailers. Herring dodged the question entirely by simply saying he was for maintaining property values and keeping the same tax rate.

Concerning business licenses, the moderator referred to a study by the USBA concluding that Torrance is one of the most expensive cities in the South Bay in which to do business and that business license fees are four times higher in Torrance.  On this issue, all the candidates seemed to support a review of the business fee structure. Herring, however, suggested a flat yearly fee of $99 for all businesses with less than 5 employees.  Eng said small business fees should be waived for the first year, but suggested that fees for subsequent years be based on the number of employees or a percentage of revenue. Griffiths mildly clashed with Eng on that point as he was adamant that fees for small business should not be based on revenue as he felt that would be punitive to small business.

Eng and Griffiths also sparred on the City’s response to the refinery start-up and whether they agreed with Mayor Furey’s recent assertion that there was nothing the City could do to address resident concerns expressed by groups such as FLARE.  Eng criticized the City saying they had “dropped the ball” on this one.  He called for the City to establish a refinery commission and to pursue using public nuisance laws to take action against ExxonMobil. Griffiths said the notion that the City has done nothing is inaccurate citing a lot of work they had done behind the scenes.  Griffiths also expressed the need to rely on the experts.

Eng also differentiated himself from the other candidates by being the only one to come out in favor of the $15 minimum wage as a good way to move forward. Griffiths said he was opposed to the government setting wages and said that if a person does not like what they are paid then they should quit their job and find another one. Rizzo echoed that by saying he was not a big fan of it and he felt like government was trying to legislate a middle class. Herring expressed concerns about how it would impact small businesses and said he would not advocate for any minimum wage increases. Sheikh took a softer approach saying he would like to tweak the law, but did not offer what tweaks he would like to see.

In responding to other questions, all the candidates agreed that Torrance is behind the technology curve and supported technology initiatives like the forthcoming updated website and possible development of mobile apps to report concerns like potholes. The candidates also all agreed that Torrance’s water is safe to drink and that the increased sightings of coyotes are a concern.

Candidate Leilani Kimmel Dagastino was a notable absentee from the forum.  She wrote on Facebook that she was, “sorry I could not make it to the debate but I was in Washington DC advocating for small business and other programs benefiting Torrance.”

Dagastino traveled  to Washington DC as part of the LA Area Chamber of Commerce’s Access Washington advocacy trip. The advocacy trip was open to any individual willing to make travel arrangements and pay the registration fee of $850.

According to the LA Area Chamber of Commerce, delegates on the trip were to advocate for the LA region by focusing on priorities including LA’s 2024 Olympic bid, the Trans Pacific Partnership, developing a 21st Century workforce, and immigration reform.

With regard to her experience Dagastino wrote, “Access Washington 2016. We made things happen. I was the only one representing Torrance.”

The six candidates for Torrance City Council congregated at Richardson Middle School yesterday evening for a forum sponsored by the Riviera HOA.  Below is a summary of their responses to the questions posed.

Q. Now that ExxonMobil is resuming operations, what should the Torrance City Council do to ensure the health and safety of residents? How comfortable are you that the City will have adequate oversight of the refinery going forward?

• Eng: I submitted a Citizens’s Petition to the AQMD raising concerns prior to the recent hearing where approval was given to re-start the refinery. I would love to have a City Council observer ensure the refinery adheres to obligations imposed upon it at the recent hearing.
• Herring: I am proposing to use the fine money to appoint an independent safety monitor to provide input to the community.
• Rizzo: I’m not happy with what happened.  We should improve training regimens and how we communicate to the public.  We should rely upon state regulators to enforce regulations.
• Griffiths: We are very concerned about safety, but we are not the experts or the regulators.  We do need to develop better tools to communicate with the community.
• Dagastino: I served on the ExxonMobil advisory panel and felt like we did not get the full picture of what was happening.  I would hope people make suggestions to AQMD about what they should do with the fine money.
• Sheikh: Exxon should undergo a safety and compliance audit every three months.

Sidenote: Several residents affiliated with the group FLARE spoke at the last Council meeting on this issue urging the Council to take steps such as:

1. Install real time air quality monitors, easily accessible to the public and managed by a third party, surrounding the Torrance Refinery.
   2. Remove Hydrofluoric Acid from the Torrance Refinery.
   3. Better track and investigate Cyanide emissions from the Refinery.
   4. Implement a MUCH BETTER disaster preparedness plan to communicate with schools, residents, and local hospitals, etc.
   5. Conduct public outreach with residents, schools, businesses, and homeless populations as to what to do in the case of disaster such as an explosion or Hydrofluoric Acid leak.

Mayor Furey responded to these concerns by saying there was really nothing the City could do to address the issues as it was outside their jurisdictional authority.

Q. In light of FPPC findings against Mayor Furey’s Campaign what, if anything, would you like to see happen next?  How would you deal with division it has exposed in the community?

• Eng: We shouldn’t indict the mayor.  People that scream the loudest may not necessarily represent the truth of what happened.  The wheels of justice will turn and we should wait for all the facts to come in.  I’m glad to see his son resigned from the Traffic Commission.
• Herring: My military service taught me values such as truth, honor, and integrity.  I’m content to let the investigation takes its course.
• Rizzo: The FPPC investigation has concluded and there is an ongoing DA investigation.  I learned from my days in law enforcement not to comment on an active investigation.
• Griffiths: This has been a difficult time for our City government. Even just the perception it has created has let down the people.  It presents a black eye to the City, but there is not much the Council can do.  Only the people have the right to determine what they want to see happen.
• Dagastino: We are not privy to all information.  There has been too much premature judgment.  The mayor’s son resigned.  The fine has been paid.  The city needs to move forward.  It’s a terrible distraction.
• Sheikh: We need political stability.  It’s too premature to make a final judgment.  It’s time to move forward.

Sidenote: The Council has declined to take actions such as a formal censure of the Mayor or recommendation to the School Board Personnel Commission that Patrick Furey, Jr. resign from his position on that Commission.

Q. Do you support a Tree/View Ordinance?

• Eng: Yes, I think it’s good.  Interest in privacy and views should be balanced. Trees should be maintained.  View seeker should be required to pay costs of vegetation maintenance.  View seeker should not be allowed to have line of sight view into homes of neighbors.
• Herring: Yes, let’s get this resolved.  It’s been kicked down the road for too long. I applaud this Council for taking action.
• Rizzo: Yes, it’s long overdue.
• Griffiths: Yes, I am the Chair of the Committee on this issue.  We need to balance privacy and view protection and keep costs neutral.  City shouldn’t bear costs.    
• Dagastino: Yes, we should use examples from other cities.  An ordinance is a long-time coming.  Views should be protected.
• Sheikh: Yes. City should be involved in helping neighbors resolve this issue.

Side Commentary: The City has conducted ongoing outreach and studies on this issue for years.  Considering that everyone seems to support it, the question that should be asked is how come the ordinance has not come up for a formal vote by the Council.  Why does it take so long?

Q. How do you feel about mansionization?  Would you advise the planning department to strictly adhere to the Hillside Overlay Ordinance? 

• Eng: It’s a good guideline that allows for appeal.  System is good as it is.
• Herring: Should be looked at on a case by case basis.
• Rizzo: There might be exceptions to the ordinance.
• Griffiths: We shouldn’t apply it as a blanket.  It’s a good mechanism that allows for extra levels of review.
• Dagastino: Strict adherence is critical.  Views should be protected.
• Sheikh: We should support ordinance.

Sidenote: For an interesting case study on this issue and the passions/conflicts it can create among neighbors review the lengthy discussion at the last Council meeting about the property located at 406 De Encanto.  It got so heated at one point that a resident had to be escorted out of Council Chambers by uniformed law enforcement.

Q. Many residents are concerned about developments like Legado that are located on the border between Torrance and neighboring cities.  What can Torrance do? How would you deal with neighboring cities in these situations?  

• Eng: Torrance gets the traffic, other cites get the revenue.  We should be more proactive in working with the residents to determine if development works for us.
• Herring: I am concerned.  Best thing to do is to ask residents to voice their concerns to neighboring cities.
• Rizzo: We need to have open lines of communication.
• Griffiths: I have individually shared my opinion.  We need to improve traffic and are working on key intersections like PCH and Hawthorne.
• Dagastino: Cities should work with South Bay Cities Council’s of Governments (SBCCOG).
• Sheikh: It’s a concern.  We should propose new guidelines to alleviate traffic.

Side Commentary: I recently attended a community meeting led by a Councilmember from Redondo Beach where the Legado development was discussed.  The Redondo Beach Councilmember revealed at that meeting that Redondo Beach has had no formal communication with City of Torrance staff or officials on Legado.  Why doesn’t the Torrance City Council formally take a position on the issue and then send a letter to Redondo Beach either in support or raising concerns?

Q. Are pensions a concern?  

• Eng: We should do a comparison study and see where we fit compared to other cities.
• Herring: Torrance has a balanced budget and I will work to ensure we balance the budget in the future.  We are moving in the right direction.
• Rizzo: It’s a concern as it will consume a larger portion of the budget.  We are not in trouble.  We should stay the course.
• Griffiths: They are damaging our City.  Pension expenses take away from city services. Not much we can do about it as people under the old program need to retire.
• Dagastino:  Only been an issue since 2012 when they made changes to how the unfunded liability was calculated.  Things will balance out.
• Sheikh: It’s a concern. We need to retain small businesses in order to create more revenue to cover the cost.

Sidenote: Comparative studies have already been conducted by organizations such as the California Policy Center and the Wall Street Journal.  Those studies have found that Torrance’s penision risk is high compared to other cities.  Also, while Torrance does plan a balanced budget it actually ran a deficit in the last fiscal year.

Q. How do we improve business and employment opportunities?

• Eng: Small business should pay less in taxes and fees while big business should pay more.
• Herring: We should increase Economic Development Department by two people and create business development district for downtown.
• Rizzo: We need more Economic Development Department staff and should work with the Chamber of Commerce and groups like the United Small Business Alliance.
• Griffiths: Need to do more outreach to businesses interested in coming to our City that will fill the void left by Toyota leaving.
• Dagastino: We should find more business ourselves and think of Torrance more like an international City and hub for Exports/Imports.
• Sheikh: We should eat, and shop Torrance.  Toyota leaving is their loss.

Side commentary: How are we going to pay for increased Economic Development Department staff?

Q. What can we do about increases in burglaries?

• Eng: Put more cameras on streets.
• Herring: Encourage residents to “see something/say something” and organize neighborhood watches.
• Rizzo: Use the community as our eyes and ears.  “See something/say something.”
• Griffiths: City should lobby state for more funds.  They stopped paying to imprison people, so they should pay to help us protect people.
• Dagastino: Torrance is down 23 officers.  We need more police.
• Sheikh: We need more police presence.

Side Commentary: How are going to pay for more police or cameras?

Q. Do you support City paying for Rose Float and Fireworks?

• Eng: Maybe to Rose Float; Yes to fireworks.
• Herring: Yes to Rose Float; maybe to fireworks.
• Rizzo: Yes to Rose Float; maybe to fireworks.
• Griffiths: Yes to both.
• Dagastino: Yes to both.
• Sheikh: Yes to both.

Side Commentary:  The City is currently using one-time money for the Rose Float and monies stemming from the Water fund for the fireworks.  There is no budgeted plan for these expenditures in the future.  How are they going to pay for these expenses?

Q. Who are your primary donors?   

• Eng: I received a check from my first individual donor.
• Herring: I’m honored to have the support of the Torrance Police and Firefighters Association.
• Rizzo: I’m supported by the Torrance Police and Firefighters Associations.
• Griffiths: I’m supported by several individual donors.  I am not receiving contributions from any unions.
• Dagastino: I’m supported by the Torrance Police and Firefighters Associations as well as the National Women’s Political Caucus.
• Sheikh: I don’t have any major organizational donors.

Side note: Interestingly, Councilmember Griffiths received the endorsement of the Police Officer Association in the last election, but as he noted not in this election.

Prior to closing, the moderator conducted what he termed political theater.  He said a few hardball questions about the Furey issue were received from the audience.  He noted that the panel seemed relatively disinclined to engage on the first question about the Furey’s and didn’t think they would be willing to offer much more, but said that he didn’t want to overrule the sentiment in the room by not asking the questions.  He asked the audience if they really wanted to put the candidates on the spot and ask the questions or was it that only a few people wanted to hear them.  He did not reveal what the questions were. Only a handful of the about 50 or so people in the room raised their hand acknowledging that they wanted the questions asked. I learned afterward that the questions received by the audience, but not asked were:

1. Have you ever hired Patrick Furey, Jr. as your Campaign Manager?
2. Should the Council recommend that Patrick Furey, Jr. resign his position on the School Board Personnel Commission?
3. Should Mayor Furey be recalled if the DA investigation reveals further adverse findings?