Sunday, July 15, 2012
Laguna Hills Watch Dog
Laguna Hills City Council Meeting - July 10, 2012
Features Directory
** Special Announcements - For Questions, Concerns and the 20 year LAGUNA HILLS GENERAL PLAN for LAND USE, MOBILITY/CIRCULATION, CONSERVATION and OPEN SPACE, COMMUNITY SERVICES and FACILITIES, SAFETY, NOISE, and HOUSING in the City - Click on http://www.ci.lagunahills.ca.us/documents/depts/commdev/Laguna_Hills_General_Plan.pdf
** Candidate Web sites for Laguna Hills City Council in the 2012 November Election -
Dr. Raghu Mathur: www.mathurforlagunahills.com
Mr. Andrew Blount: www.blountforlagunahills.com
** Citizen Alerts for future City Council Meetings will be listed on the blog site within 4 days prior to a meeting - Consider attending a meeting that interests you.
** Presentations and Proclamations - Presentation of Certificate of Recognition for Laguna Hills Resident Mike Bland for his efforts in chairing Team Dark Horse Battalion Support Committee
** Public Comments - New owner operator of the new Chick-Fil-A located next door to City Hall, A report on the City's July 4 Celebration activities with the City's adopted 3/5 Marines and Team Dark Horse, Residents bothered at night by car horns and barking dogs, Mission Viejo Resident speaking about Benchmarking the Compensation of City Managers.
** LHHS Student Liaison Report - Adam Wong - alternate Amanda Jafee (No more Reports until Sept. 2012)
** Consent Calendar - Warrant Register - $586,537.87
** Items of Interest from the Warrant Register - $13,976l.68 to Faubel Public Affairs for Summer Issue of City Views.
** Items Pulled from the Warrant Register- None
** Items of interest in the Consent Calendar -
Item 4.3 Paseo de Valencia Traffic Signal Synchronization Project
Item 4.4 Civic Center Budget
Item 4.5 - Laguna Hills Civic Center Lease
Item 4.6 and 4.7 - Laguna Hills Civic Center - Accommodation License Agreements
Item 4.8 - Amendment to Retainer Agreement for City Attorney Services
Item 4.9 - Progress Payment # 15 for La Paz Rd. widening at I-5
** Items pulled from the Consent Calendar for discussion - Item 4.3 Paseo de Valencia
Traffic Signal Synchronization Project
** Planning Agency/City Council -
** Planning Agency Public Hearings - MATTERS AGENDIZED AND PRESENTED BY AGENCY MEMEMBERS and CHAIR - Item 5.5.1 - Request for Re-consideration of Master Sign Program for the Hills Hotel on La Paz Rd. from Council Member Bressette
** City Council Public Hearings, Administrative Reports - Item # 6.1 Confirmation of 2012 Weed Abatement Cost Report
**Administrative Reports - Item 7.2.1 - Coyote Management Update
** Matters Agendized and Presented by Council Members -
From Council Member Kogerman - Item 8.1.1 - ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT ISSUED JULY 5, 2012 ENTITLED - "USE OF GOVERNMENTAL INFLUENCE ON A PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION" Laguna Hills City Officials (including one in Laguna Hills which has been identified in the news as Allan Songstad) misused their membership in a non-profit corporation to their politic agenda in an effort to influence officials at a local university and recommended ethical training as a measure to prevent future acts of misfeasance. ** Be Prepared for a long read in a relaxing atmosphere to see what Council Member Songstad, Council Member Kogerman, other council members and citizens with strong views had to say about this very contentious and frequently out of control situation! *Plus more Editor's Notes than we have ever written!
** City Council Member Comments - None
** Closed Session - None
** City Council Members Report Card - How did they score?
* Information, Comments, Questions, Concerns from LH Watch Dog Readers from the previous blog post. PLUS Win-Win-Wednesday! - You can leave comments on the web site or send them to BlandMJ@aol.com We do not use your name in the comments section unless you give permission.
* How to support our 3/5 Adopted Marines and Updates - Team Dark Horse is Collecting Donations Now to purchase personal care products, snacks, magazines, training manuals, playing cards and other supplies for the 3/5 Marines for their next deployment in Sept. to the Middle East.
* News Stories and Blogs about Laguna Hills - find more in the OC Register online under "City-by-City News" - "Laguna Hills" and in the OC Watchdog
* City Council Members Say the Darndest Things in Public
* Crime in your Neighborhood
* Instructions for Writing a letter to the Editor of the OC Register Newspaper
Laguna Hills City Council Meeting - July 10, 2012
All council members were present
==============================
See information for Win-Win-Wednesdays under - INFORMATION, COMMENTS QUESTIONS and CONCERNS from Watch Dog Readers, Contact Laguna Hills City Council Members at - ccouncil@ci.laguna-hills.ca.us
PRESENTATIONS and PROCLAMATIONS -
A Certificate of Recognition was presented to Laguna Hills Resident Mike Bland for his efforts in chairing Team Dark Horse Battalion's Support Committee for the City's Adopted 3/5 Marines by Mayor Carruth. The Certificate thanked Mike for his dedication and efforts including his part in the organizing, planning and building of the Memorial Deck in front of the historic Lt. Capadanno Chapel at Camp Pendleton. There was much applause and Mike responded with, "I sure didn't do this by myself." He said he became involved in memory of his father-in-law Marine Lt. Col. James R. Einum who passed away in 1987. He noted there are so many people to thank in this room. For the Christmas Gift/Toy Collection a couple of years ago, Laguna Hills Resident and Candidate for 2012 City Council, Andrew Blount, collected hundreds of toys. Council Member Bressette helped with the toy collection and Mr. Michael Mofid owner of the Hills Hotel donated rooms for the Marines on the days prior to the Memorial Day Races. Many others have helped. He closed with, "It's really been enjoyable for me and very rewarding."
PUBLIC COMMENTS -
David Sykora said he wanted to introduce himself as the new owner operator of the new Chick-Fil-A located next door to City Hall and announced that the Grand Opening will be on July 26 of this year. He said he is looking forward to serving the community daily.
Mike Bland, Laguna Hills Resident and Chairman of Team Dark Horse, the Support Committee for the City's adopted 3/5 Marines, presented a brief report on the City's July 4 Celebration activities with the City's adopted 3/5 Marines. He showed some overhead photos from the event with commentary about adults and children interacting with the 3/5 Marines including children and Council Member Bressette climbing through the Marines Light Armored Vehicle. He said there were 18 Marines and one Corpsman at the event. He talked about Capt. Jo Jo who is a Marine Cobra Helicopter Pilot and coordinated the Marines presence at this event. Mike said he asked the Capt. to observe the positive interactions of the Marines with the Public and said there were a lot of young Marines at the event who thanked us for the welcome from our City. The Marines said there are places where they are not welcome but felt very welcomed here. The Sergeant who ran the whole thing said he wanted to return next year.
Mike announced that Team Dark Horse issued food vouchers to the Marines this year that they and their families could redeem at any of the charitable organization food and drink booths that were set up at the Community Center for the July 4th celebration so that all the charitable groups could mutually benefit one another. Mike said Team Dark Horse reimbursed the charitable groups with about $150 this year, for the food vouchers, and Team Dark Horse wants to keep this system going in the future. He thanked the City for naming the Memorial Day Race in honor of the Marines because that meant a lot to the Marines. He talked about completing the Memorial Deck in front of the historic chapel in Camp Pendleton that is already being used for Mariner's Church BBQs for the Marines, weddings and company and squad meetings. Council Member Kogerman noted that Mr. Bland did much of the building of the deck himself and Mike responded that the Marines have also been helping as well as other members of the Team Dark Horse Committee including Jonathan Bromberg and Evan Gost who were Military Pilots in Vietnam.
Mike noted a very special book that was written and published by the mothers, wives, children and friends of the 25 Marines/Sailors who were Killed in Action in the last deployment of the 3/5 to Afghanistan. It contains news stories, statements and personal stories of the last deployment to Afghanistan and stories about the Marines/Sailors who were lost. He said it's a tough read but very special and very much worth reading.
Mike announced that Team Dark Horse is currently Collecting Donations to purchase personal care products, snacks, magazines, training manuals, playing cards and other supplies for the 3/5 Marines for their next deployment, in Sept. of this year, to the Middle East. They will be leaving on 3 ships and he noted that if the committee can get the items the Marines can use before the they deploy the items can go in boxes on the ship with the Marines/Sailors so the Team Dark Horse Committee can save a lot of money on Postage. see more about how to help below under * How to support our 3/5 Adopted Marines and Updates
Janice and Ray from Laguna Hills said they are here to ask the City for support. They said they have lived for 3 years above the Alicia Meadows-Via Lomas area and during this time they have been bothered at night by a lot of noise including car horns at all hours of the day and night and incessant barking from dogs. Janice said Animal Control told them they have to get the address of the barking dogs and appear in person to pursue barking dog complaints the dog owner will know who they are so, Janice said she chooses not to do that. They noted that the noise from loud parties used to be much worse and thanked the Laguna Hills Police who have helped with that by coming out to investigate when called and taking care of the problem. Lt. Behrens, Chief of Police for Laguna Hills said they can discuss this further but it's difficult because if Animal Control can't hear the barking they have to go on what you say. Ray said that the dogs don't bark continuously for 30 minutes which is the criteria that the law states so although they have approached this individual over the last 2 years he likes having a dog bark. Ray also stated Animal Control did issue this individual a citation but after that happened there was an increase in horn blowing incidents. Council Member Bressette responded that they can look at getting a staff report with suggestion about making the barking dog ordinance more user friendly.
Larry Gilbert from the City of Mission Viejo talked about benchmarking, a term that is used in the private sector. He said he was here to commend Council Member Kogerman for looking at Compensation Packages. He said we have 33 other cities in Orange County who have City Managers who may say they are entitled to more money. Larry said he called the Governor's office when the last Mission Viejo City Manager's contract was up for more money and got facts and figures comparing the staffing and compensation and at that time with the Governor (Pete Wilson) who had taken a pay cut. Larry read from an item that in 2010 the Governor was receiving $173,987.00. The Governor's salary like that of all elected officials is determined by the CA. Citizens' Compensation Commission on an annual basis. The last time the Governor's compensation changed was in 2009 when the salary and benefits were cut by 18%. He said if we want to do benchmarking, the State budget that was just approved was $92 billion. Laguna Hills with somewhere around 30 employees has an operating budget of around $20 million so there is no way that you can justify that comparison in the compensation of your city manager.
LHHS STUDENT LIAISON REPORT by Adam Wong - alternate Amanda Jafee - No further reports until Sept. 2012.
CONSENT CALENDAR - Warrant Register = $586,537.87
Items of interest from the Warrant Register - $13,976l.68 to Faubel Public Affairs for Summer Issue of City Views. Items pulled from the Warrant Register - None
Items of interest from the Consent Calendar -
Item 4.3 Paseo de Valencia Traffic Signal Synchronization Project -
SUMMARY: Last year, City Council authorized applications to be submitted to the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) for “Project P” eligible traffic signal synchronization projects under Renewed Measure M (M2). Recently, OCTA advised the City that all requested projects were being funded. The Paseo de Valencia Traffic Signal Synchronization project, being wholly within the City’s boundaries, will be administered by the City. The other traffic signal synchronization projects, including on Lake Forest Drive,
Los Alisos Boulevard and Oso Parkway, being multi-jurisdictional, will be administered by OCTA. The total value of all four projects is approximately $1.5 million and a small City a match of $73,118.58, covering for all four signal coordination projects, is required for project funding. The Capital Improvement Program Budget will require an amendment to account for this funding. Authorization to enter into a project specific Professional Services Agreement with Hartzog and Crabill, Inc., is recommended.
Item 4.4 Civic Center Budget - FISCAL IMPACT: The budgeted net income is $81,774. It should be noted that the proposed 2012-13 budget does not require any contribution from the City’s General Fund and also does not anticipate transferring any net income to the General Fund, primarily to the impact on net operating income from lower lease rates.
- Suite 100 will remain vacant.
• Suite 200 will lease effective January 1, 2013.
• Suite 201 will renew.
• Suite 205 will remain vacant.
• Suite 210 will vacate effective January 1, 2013 and remain vacant.
• Suite 230 will renew.
• Executive suite 320B will renew.
• Executive suite 320A will remain vacant.
• Suite 330 will renew.
Item 4.5 - Laguna Hills Civic Center - Lease with Michael D. Shea (Golden key Wealth Mgmt. for suite 330 FISCAL IMPACT: The five year lease generates a net present value to the City of $36,190. In the event the tenant elects the early out provision, the net present value will be $12,793.
Item 4.6 - Laguna Hills Civic Center - Accommodation License Agreement with Julia Knutson for Office 320B FISCAL IMPACT: The user will pay the City $800 per month for the use of 320B.
Item 4.7 - Laguna Hills Civic Center - Accommodation License Agreement with Seniors Helping Seniors for Office 320A - FISCAL IMPACT: The user will pay the City $750 per month for the use of 320A.
Item 4.8 - Amendment to Retainer Agreement for City Attorney Services - SUMMARY: Woodruff, Spradlin & Smart has been providing City Attorney services to the City of Laguna Hills since 1991. Professional hourly rates charged by the firm have been in effect since 2007. The Firm is proposing an increase in the hourly rate for attorneys from $190 to $205. For paralegals, they are proposing an increase from $95 to $115. A survey of area cities shows that the proposed rates are comparable with the market. FISCAL IMPACT: The proposed rate increase will cost the City $18,000 to $25,000 annually.
Item 4.9 - Progress Payment # 15 for La Paz Rd. widening at I-5 = $320,698.23.
Items Pulled from the Consent Calendar - Item 4.3 was pulled and the rest of the Consent Calendar was passed 5 - 0.
Item 4.3 Paseo de Valencia Traffic Signal Synchronization Project was pulled by Council Member Kogerman who had 2 questions. First she said she noted an item in the report re. cameras at intersections and has since learned that these cameras were only to help evaluate the traffic, they were not red light or other traffic enforcement cameras. Her second question was why are we going through this complicated process of synchronizing the traffic signals on PDV now when there is widening of this street is scheduled for later? Ken Rosenfield, Director of Public Services, City Engineer responded that the synchronization is to improve traffic flow now and would have no impact on the widening later. With widening there may have to be some adjustments made to the synchronization but that's in the future plus Measure M2 funds through OCTA are available now and on an every 3 year basis for this kind of project so this is a good opportunity.
Vote - Item 4.3 was passed 5-0
MINUTES - The City Council Approves the Minutes of the previous City Council Meeting for publication on the city web site. The minutes from tonight's meeting will not be approved for publication until the next city council meeting so there is always a significant delay for the public related to timely documentation of information but you can now watch and listen to the City Council Meetings on the City's web site at www.ci.laguna-hills.ca.us
CITY COUNCIL/PLANNING AGENCY PUBLIC HEARING-
MATTERS AGENDIZED AND PRESENTED BY AGENCY MEMEMBERS and CHAIR -
Item 5.5.1 - Request for Re-consideration of Site Development Permit/ Master Sign Program for the Hills Hotel on La Paz Rd. from Council Member Bressette -
SUMMARY: On June 12, 2012, the Laguna Hills Planning Agency approved a Resolution changing Term and Condition No. 13 to read: “No flashing, moving, animated, or intermittently lighted signs are permitted in accordance with the Laguna Hills Municipal Code. The LED reader board message copy shall not change more than 5 times within a 24-hour period.” Council Member Bressette said I am proposing to change the Term and Condition to read: shall not change more than 12 times in a 24-hour period.” After a discussion with the applicant and staff, and after careful consideration, the applicant believes that 12 changes in a 24-hour period would be more appropriate for his needs.
Vote - this item passed 5 - 0
PLANNING AGENCY REPORTS
PUBLIC HEARINGS and Public Comments -
PUBLIC COMMENTS -
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARINGS and Public Comments - Ken Rosenfield, Director of Public Services, City Engineer presented the Weed Abatement Report stating that about 550 residents are contacted annually and this year only 2 failed to comply.
Item # 6.1 Confirmation of 2012 Weed Abatement Cost Report - FISCAL IMPACT:
The cost to be assessed for the properties abated is $743.50 for APN # 627-212-06 and
$457.27 for APN # 627-461-03. This cost is comprised of direct contractor charges and a
$352 per parcel administrative charge. The City will be reimbursed for the total $1,200.77
in costs through property tax collection procedures. The total Weed Abatement Program
costs are budgeted in Fiscal Year 2011-2012 in the amount of $40,000.00 to cover both
the abatement of private and public properties
Public Comments - None
Vote this item passed 5 - 0
ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTS -
Item 7.2.1 - Coyote Management Update - was presented by a Mr. Steele (sp?) who appears to be a city employee who is new or new to speaking at council meetings but was not introduced to the public. In response to Council Member Kogerman's question Mr. Steele explained that hazing which does not harm humans, animals or property consists of human behaviors to let the Coyotes know they are not welcome.
Public Education Campaign - Info. will reportedly be in the upcoming City Views and a hazing (process of motivating Coyote behavioral change) class for residents will be offered in the Fall plus there will be a link on City web site to more education.
Response Guidelines - At this point, staff felt it was important to formalize the general hierarchy of interactions with coyotes:
• Sighting—a visual observation of a coyote(s); this may occur at any time, day or night.
• Encounter—an unexpected, direct meeting between a human and a coyote, without incident.
• Incident—a conflict between a human and a coyote where the coyote exhibits the following behavior: coyote approaches a human and growls, bares teeth, or lunges; injures or kills an escorted/on-leash pet. This includes attended pet loss, but not human injury.
• Attack—an aggressive action that involves physical contact with a human and/or a human is injured by a coyote.
Common sense dictates that different interactions with coyotes require different levels of response. For example, if a coyote is simply heard in an open space area, it is not necessary to contact City staff. However, if a coyote attacks or injures a pet, City staff should be notified and made aware. The general response guidelines for coyote interactions are included as Attachment A of this report.
Trapping - In conjunction with the expanded public education campaign, the City continues to partner with interested homeowners associations to implement trapping programs. Currently, only the Nellie Gail Ranch Owners Association has chosen to conduct trapping efforts. The program includes two possible trapping sessions per year, both occurring during peak activity seasons when most reports occur (spring and fall). If there is a specific area with higher than normal activity, an additional trapping session may occur.
FISCAL IMPACT: No dollar amount reported here - report states only that the costs of trapping and education have been included in the 2011-13 Beinnial Budget.
Mayor-Pro-Tem Lautenschleger commented that he could see the trapping is working along Oso Pkwy. because there are hundreds of rabbits now where there used to be none. Council Member Kogerman stated she was happy to see that the City is now doing more beyond what has been done in the past more than just put your food away and so forth.
VOTE - This Item Passed 5- 0 to receive and file.
Item 7.3.1 - Designation of a Voting Delegate for League of California Cities Annual Conference. The City appointed Mayor Carruth the voting delegate, appointed Mayor-Pro-Tem Lautenschleger the alternate and Council Member Kogerman as the 2nd alternate, at her request, for this conference on Wed. Sept. 5 through Friday Sept. 7 in San Diego.
VOTE was 5 - 0 in favor
Item 7.4.1 -2012 Memorial Day Race Report and a Resolution Authorizing Community Assistance Funding for the 3/5 Marine Support Committee - The Staff Report was presented by Dan Meehan, Community Services Superintendent - A slide show had a technical glitch so could not be presented but hopefully it can be seen sometime in the future. SUMMARY: The 14th annual City of Laguna Hills Memorial Day Half Marathon, 10K and 5K, honoring the USMC Dark Horse Battalion took place on Monday, May 28, 2012. 2,760 participated (ran) in the event. 2924 participated (ran) in the event in 2011 and 2600 ran in 2010. Approximately 100 Marines ran in the race. The highlight of the community expo for 2012 was the presence of the Marines from the 3/5 Battalion, the Marines’ displays, and the presence of the O.C.Sheriff Cadets running in formation in the 5K race. At its November 22, 2011, meeting, the City Council selected a formula of $3 per paid participant for the continued funding assistance of the 3rd Battalion, 5th Marines, 1st Division Support Committee, dba Laguna Hills Team Dark Horse. Based on this formula, $7,767 can be awarded to Laguna Hills Team Dark Horse. Adoption of the community assistance funding Resolution by the City Council will provide staff with the requisite documentation in support of the payment. The City of Laguna Hills and South County Outreach again partnered in a food drive over the Memorial Day weekend. Race participants and spectators were encouraged to bring canned goods and non-perishable food items to benefit South County Outreach. Collection stations were available at the race start line, in the community expo, and at Road Runner Sports during registration and pre-race packet pick-up on Saturday, May 26 and Sunday, May 27 from noon - 4:00 pm. 130 pounds of food were collected. In addition, the proceeds from the sales of beer garden tickets, a total of $1,690, was donated to South County Outreach.
FISCAL IMPACT: The 2012 Memorial Day Race event budget in the City’s current budget cycle for direct expenditures is $145,000 with a budget forecast for event sponsorships and registration revenue totaling $162,050. The actual direct expenses of the event were at $138,605 with the actual revenue at $142,285. Direct expenses were under actual event revenue by $3,680. Also, staff costs are included (this year for the first time) for the event which brings the overall expenses for the event to $169,622. Upon approval of the attached Resolution, $7,767 will be provided to the 3rd Battalion, 5th Marines, 1st Division Support Committee from the City’s General Fund for community assistance funding. As a result, the 2012 Total Event Direct Expenditures as depicted in Table 1 would be revised to $146,372.
Mayor Carruth asked why the participation in the race was down by 164 from last year and asked if we should do anything differently in 2013. Mr. Meehan responded that participation was down in races in other cities as well but better publicity would help. He said the City targeted the runner population on Facebook at minimal cost this year. Carruth noted that it seemed the community was larger at the expo this year and there was a lot of activity around the Marines static display.
PUBLIC COMMENTS - None
VOTE was 5 - 0 to receive and file this report and to Award the funds dedicated to and collected for the Marines to them and the 130 pounds of food collected and the proceeds from the sales of beer garden tickets, a total of $1,690.00 that was donated to South County Outreach.
MATTERS AGENDIZED and PRESENTED by CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS -
From Council Member Kogerman - Item 8.1.1 - ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT ISSUED JULY 5, 2012 ENTITLED "USE OF GOVERNMENTAL INFLUENCE ON A PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION"
*** See the complete Grand Jury Report at: http://www.ocgrandjury.org/pdfs/theuseofgovernmentinfluenceonpei.pdf
Council Member Kogerman's Request re. the Grand Jury's Recommendations - THAT THE CITY COUNCIL: (1) APPOINT A THREE-MEMBER SUBCOMMITTEE CONSISTING OF TWO CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, INCLUDING COUNCIL MEMBER KOGERMAN, AND THE CITY ATTORNEY, TO DRAFT A PROPOSED RESPONSE FROM THE CITY TO THE PRESIDING JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT OF ORANGE COUNTY IN COMPLIANCE WITH PENAL CODE 933.05(a) AND 933.05 (b); AND (2) CONSIDER ANY ADDITIONAL ACTIONS DEEMED APPROPRIATE IN RESPONSE TO THE FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS PROVIDED IN THE GRAND JURY REPORT.
BACKGROUND: On July 5, 2012, the Orange County Grand Jury issued a report entitled the “Use of Governmental Influence on a Private Educational Institution.”
The Grand Jury Report made the following 4 Findings:
F1. City officials apparently misused their membership in a non-profit corporation
established on behalf of public entities to promote their own political agenda by using their
status with that organization in an effort to influence the officials at a local university.
F2. City officials arranged a meeting with the office of a university president indicating
they were to introduce the executive director of the non-profit entity, when their intentions
were to influence the university to investigate and discredit the report where students were
assigned as interns to a political campaign by the Masters in Public Administration department.
F3. The influence wielded by city officials appears to have been an attempt to cause the
officials of a local university, to exert influence on a member of their faculty.
F4. City officials may not have been forthcoming with the Orange County Grand Jury in
their testimony about the primary purpose in meeting with university officials and the facts
and circumstances related thereto.
The Grand Jury Report made the following 3 Recommendations:
R1. The Laguna Hills, California, City Council and the Tustin, California, City Council
should review the conduct of their city officials and determine what action should be taken
so as to prevent future acts of misfeasance.
(**Editor's Note - From the Free Online Legal Dictionary by Farlex - Misfeasancehttp://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/misfeasance
mis·fea·sance n. Improper and unlawful execution of an act that in itself is lawful and proper. A term used in Tort Law to describe an act that is legal but performed improperly. Generally, a civil defendant will be liable for misfeasance if the defendant owed a duty of care toward the plaintiff, the defendant breached that duty of care by improperly performing a legal act, and the improper performance resulted in harm to the plaintiff.)
R2. Elected officials in Laguna Hills, California, and Tustin, California, should refrain
from attempting to exercise influence over public and private educational institutions.
R3. Additional efforts, including additional hours of study and training, regarding
continuing ethical training should be required of those elected officials delineated in recommendation No. 1
REQUIREMENTS AND INSTRUCTIONS
In accordance with California Penal Code Sections §933 and §933.05, the 2011-2012 Orange County Grand Jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency requires responses from each agency affected by the Findings/Conclusions and Recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court, “Not later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section §914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations.”
As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one
of the following:
(1) The respondent agrees with the finding.
(2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore.
As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall
report one of the following actions:
(1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding
the implemented action.
(2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation.
(3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report.
(4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore.
(**Editor's Note - The discussion on this issue was so lengthy that we have to ask that you listen to the tape on the City's web site if you wish to hear all the details. We can describe the situations to give you the flavor of the discussions and capture most but not all the verbiage here related to time and space.)
Council Member Kogerman Comments - began with it gives me no pleasure to present this report. Mr. Songstad's testimony to the Grand Jury is a matter of record and his veracity is questioned as "not forthcoming". Mayor Carruth interrupted and said she wanted to remind the council that both Kogerman and Songstad are subjects of this report so perhaps it's inappropriate for Mr.Songstad and Mrs. Kogerman to make comments.
(**Editor's Note - If Mayor Carruth was concerned re. the inappropriateness of allowing comments from Songstad and Kogerman she could very have easily requested advice from the City Attorney who was sitting 3 seats to her left, but she did not do that, she continued to conjecture about this, seemingly debating it with herself?) Kogerman insisted that under this council's procedure in this category of MATTERS AGENDIZED and PRESENTED by CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS, the council member who created the report and is making the recommendation is allowed to present it. Carruth interrupted again. The argument between Kogerman and Carruth continued, still, with no request for advice from the City Attorney) Carruth continued to conjecture about what she thought they could or could not do and accused Kogerman of giving a long tirade. Carruth then asked Kogerman to limit her comments to include only the formation of a committee to respond to the Grand Jury. The argument continued still without asking for any advice from the City Attorney which as we understand it is the prerogative of the Mayor or can be requested by a council member but only through the Mayor. Carruth coninued that Kogerman was the subject of this report because she requested the investigation. There was an argument over the Original Compensation Report of all City Managers in Orange County and Carruth asked Songstad if he felt comfortable responding but still did not ask for the advice of the City Attorney. Songstad said he would like to respond to what had been said already. Carruth then asked Council Member Bressette if he felt comfortable going forward. Bressette answered that he thought it was fully appropriate for Mrs. Kogerman to address her motion, but he didn't see the need for a long introduction as everyone is familiar with this information that has been widely publicized. Carruth then called on Mayor Pro-Tem Lautenschleger for his views. Lautenschleger said he thought there was a prejudicial aspect to this but the City Attorney was still not asked to comment. At this point Carruth declared there was a conflict and Kogerman had a bias. Kogerman then requested to ask the City Attorney's advice - Does the chair have the right to refuse to permit a City Council Member from presenting a report? Carruth interrupted again stating this is not a legal issue it's an ethical issue. More arguing, Bressette said City Council members are well within their rights to present their own reports.
FINALLY - ENTER GREG SIMONIAN, CITY ATTORNEY, who said the Mayor as the presiding officer and the chair of the meeting has control over the meeting and the way the meeting progresses and is managed, but having said that and listening to the deliberations so far I haven't heard that the Mayor is denying the Council Member the opportunity to speak but what is being addressed at this point is whether or not there is a conflict of interest for Council Members Kogerman and Songstad to remain on the dais and engage in the deliberation and debate concerning this agenda item. He said his preliminary opinion was there was not a conflict of interest and no legal requirement that either of the 2 council members recuse themselves although he has seen before that when there is a strong appearance of a conflict council members have voluntarily recused themselves.
Mayor Carruth continued that Kogerman should narrow her comments because everyone already knows all about this and we don't prejudice the rest of the discussion . (**Editor's Note - It's never true that "everyone knows" and as painful as it may be to hear lengthy detail of this report it would appear to be important, related to transparency, to have this information in the official record of this city council meeting because it is the result of an Orange County Grand Jury Investigation and the City Attorney said that he knew of no conflict of interest in presenting/discussing the information.) Council Member Kogerman insisted upon presenting her report without interruption and warned Carruth that if the Chair ruled she could not present her report she would go into the audience to find people who would present the report in her place. Carruth continued to object but eventually gave up and Kogerman did present her report.
Council Member Kogerman's began her report again saying she was elected at the end of 2010 and her campaign for City Council focused on Excessive Compensation of Senior Management in Laguna Hills. She said she knew that some members of the City Council and the City Manager were upset with her study but the Grand Jury Report revealed the extent of Attorney and Council Member Songstad's activity related to manipulating the process, pressuring a University President, bullying a Professor and threatening public administration graduate students' employment prospects to defeat Kogerman at the polls. Kogerman continued that when those attempts failed about 10 months later she learned that Songstad, Lacy Kelly from ACC-OC and others were attacking Brandman Professor Fred Smoller. She brought these concerns to this City Council at the Oct. 25, 2011 meeting and the press reports about Songstad's meeting with Chapman University James Doti and pressure on Dr. Smoller by the ACC-OC were discussed but the Council Voted 4 - 1 against the removal of this City from the ACC-OC.
Kogerman continued that at the Oct. 25, 2011 meeting Mr. Songstad said Mr. Smoller's complaints were laughable but she had noted adverse effects on Dr. Smoller's health related to being hospitalized after a collapse and also noted that the 2 interns who worked on the Compensation Report had not been able to find jobs in Orange County. At this point the Grand Jury has accused Songstad of misfeasance of office which is indisputably unethical. She added that Songstad will likely say the Grand Jury got this all wrong and that Kogerman is the unethical one for at one time crediting the students with authorship of the original Compensation Report, however the Grand Jury discounted this argument by stating that the authorship issue was "magnified beyond its significance apparently for political reasons". She said Songstad maintains that he did not pressure anyone yet language used in the Professor's resignation letter was exactly the same as the language used in Songstad's letter (**Editor's note - The Grand Jury report does not say "letter" it says "communications") that was subpoenaed by the Grand Jury, quote "The history of communication is evidence of the pressure brought to bear upon the University and the Professor." Songstad may also say that he has the same right as any citizen to speak with anyone but through all this the Grand Jury found that Songstad was acting as a representative of a tax supported non-profit corporation so misused his government authority. Kogerman reported another quote from the Grand Jury Report from Songstad saying “it was obvious to all concerned that it was not the best thing for them to do, i.e. to be criticizing city managers when they are the ones that do the hiring. And that the university president and the professor were bright individuals who could see the relationship and that it wouldn’t be smart to slam city managers. He acknowledged that there wasn’t any threat but it was just sort of self evident.” She added that the 2 Grad. Students who worked on the Compensation Report never found employment in Orange County and read a statement from one of those students. Kogerman was interrupted again by Carruth, but continued with will the Laguna Hills City Council that has been criticized for the 3rd time in 2 years by 2 different OC Grand Juries, continue to deny that anything is amiss and say as Mr. Songstad is saying, they got it all wrong? (See the Grand Jury findings and recommendations above.) Kogerman stressed it is not the purview of this council to retry Songstad because this has been decided by the Grand Jury where Songstad's rights were protected and our job now is to respond to the Grand Jury Findings and Recommendations.
Council Member Bressette questioned Kogerman re. paraphrasing the Grand Jury Findings as opposed to reporting them as written and Kogerman said she paraphrased by inserting the names of the persons involved since the report did not identify the subjects by name, but by elected position. Mayor Carruth accused Kogerman of being "unethical" related to undermining the integrity of an educational institution by using the Grad. Students and crediting them in the report. Carruth then incorrectly stressed that the word the Grand Jury used was "unethical". (**Editor's note - FACT CHECK- Mayor Carruth was Wrong. The Grand Jury did NOT use the word "unethical" related to Kogerman. It was Professor Smoller who used the word "unethical" in his letter and what the Grand Jury said about his letter on page 10 of their report under the heading of Analysis was this - "From the wording in these communications, it appeared that the city councilman from Laguna Hills, CA was influencing certain actions of the professor in that some of the exact language that was to be used in the professor's letter was the same as that which was communicated by the councilman." In that same paragraph the Grand Jury continued with, "The issue of crediting the students with authorship of the report on the cover page, notwithstanding the rather elaborate explanation in the attending forward, was magnified beyond significance, apparently for political reasons." It was also Very Interesting to Note on page 4 of the Grand Jury Report that the LAGUNA HILLS CITY MANAGER LODGED THE 1st COMPLAINT - "On the same date as the release of the report, a complaint by the city manager of the subject city was lodged with the professor. The complaint was a concern that the cover page of the report stated that it was 'by' the students from the university, thereby indicating that it was authored by the students and gave the report undeserved and unsanctioned credibility. This concern was raised in spite of the explanation and clarifications contained in the foreword immediately following the title page.")
Mayor Carruth continued that Mr. Smoller is a politician, he's a paid political consultant that is well known in Orange County so he is a politician and "This is Politics at its Worst." Carruth told Kogerman we are here because you wrote this report and contributed it to others. (**Editor's Note - Carruth's Opinion was Not confirmed by the 19 members of the Grand Jury which, again, is clarified in their statement - "The issue of crediting the students with authorship of the report on the cover page, notwithstanding the rather elaborate explanation in the attending forward, was magnified beyond significance, apparently for political reasons."
PUBLIC COMMENTS -
Dr. Raghu Mathur, Laguna Hills Resident began by disclosing that he is running for City Council but wished to state that he was glad this item was being discussed and commended the City Council for doing that. He said the basic issue in all of this is that when Public Agencies spend taxpayer dollars the taxpayers are entitled to know how their money is being spent. He added that as a long time educator it is a good idea to involve the students, especially students who are majoring in Public Administration so that they gain practical experience. He noted that the Compensation report was widely covered and indirectly led to the discovery of some compensation issues in the City of Bell. All that publicity also resulted in some City Managers and Council Members who had substantial compensation packages being upset. That led to a couple of City Councilmen questioning the credibility of the report and the Professor, who is unfortunately no longer in charge of the program. That led to filing the complaint and to the Grand Jury Report, which found that based upon their investigation, the council members acted unethically. He said he sees a silver lining in all of this in that we can learn from this experience and the lesson is the need for transparency. He noted that he sees a need for the development and adoption of a code of ethics for council members, administrators and managers. He added he has been researching the codes of ethics in cities that do have them and as he understands Laguna Hills does not have one but should develop, adopt and follow one. He encouraged the council to do that before the next election.
Mayor Carruth said she had a couple of questions for "Mr. Mathur" and proceeded to ask if he had read the Grand Jury report to which he answered yes. Carruth asked if he had been a Chancellor or connected with a college? He answered he had been Chancellor of the South Orange County Community College District and served on the Saddleback Valley School Board. Carruth asked if he had any problem with one of the strong recommendations from the Grand Jury which was - elected officials should refrain from attempting to exercise influence over private educational institutions? Dr. Mathur responded he did not have a problem with establishing relationships and partnerships. Carruth responded, "So you're in disagreement then with the finding of the Grand Jury?" Dr. Mathur said that he was not necessarily in disagreement but likes the idea of different agencies communicating and working with each other but we have to be careful as to what we are seeking. If the outcomes produce undesirable results then we have to assess and evaluate the purpose of that communication. Carruth then suggested that Dr. Mathur imagine that the name of the faculty and your institution was on a report that you did not produce, would you be troubled by that in terms of preserving the integrity of that institution? (**Editor's Note - Carruth was attempting to rehear the case for Songstad, that the Grand Jury has already considered and decided, with a question to which the Grand Jury has already clearly responded -"The issue of crediting the students with authorship of the report on the cover page, notwithstanding the rather elaborate explanation in the attending forward, was magnified beyond significance, apparently for political reasons.") Dr. Mathur noted that he would be concerned but Council Member Kogerman apologized for that. (**Editor's Note - It should be noted that Kogerman's apology occurred on August 1, 2010, long before the Grand Jury found that the issue of the cover page was "magnified beyond significance, apparently for political reasons". It should be noted that Kogerman correct the problem that caused the authorship complaint and it should also be noted that we have never heard an apology from Songstad regarding the issue of the cover page being "magnified beyond significance, apparently for political reasons"?) Carruth became more insistent saying, I'm not asking about an apology and repeated her question with more emphasis! Dr.Mathur said, I understood your question, and Carruth interrupted with "an apology"! Dr. Mathur continued that she didn't hear his complete answer, he answered that he would have accepted that apology. Mayor Pro-Tem Lautenschleger asked if it isn't not only your right but kindof your duty to exercise control over another establishment to try to make your point whatever issue it is? Dr. Mathur answered he was not going to attempt to be a mind reader for the 19 members of the Grand Jury but already stated his answer and he encourages communication. Carruth jumped in with another question for "Mr. Mathur" and this time Dr. Mathur responded that he would appreciate be addressed as Dr. Mathur. He asked if Carruth had a problem recognizing somebody's qualification because he had earned that. Carruth continued to ask him to imagine again that he was back being a Chancellor and continued to repeat the same question she had previously asked and repeated several times now. Dr. Mathur responded that he had already answered that question. Carruth concluded with, but you'd be glad someone brought you information and thank you very much and emphasized - "Doc-TOR Mathur."
(**Editor's Note - Mayor Carruth, This response was just RUDE, and Dr. Mathur refers to you as "Mayor", but perhaps you would be more comfortable with everyone refering to you accurately but generically as Ms. Carruth? We have always thought that the Madam Mayor thing was a bit over the top, but we never heard you complain when addressed that way, so your reaction now is confusing? We remember a council meeting in 2010 when Col. Bill Kogerman confronted former City Council Member Craig Scott about a great many of Kogerman's missing election yard signs. Craig Scott's response was anything but polite. After that meeting you gave us a detailed explanation re. classes council members must take about how to behave and stressed to us that no matter how the public behaves, council members are always required to behave well. We sure do hope continuing education credits in those behavior classes are required for City Council Members inclulding you!) Council Member Bressette asked Dr. Mathur if he wrote an ethics code for the Board of Trustees and the employees when he was Chancellor. Dr. Mathur answered that there was already an ethics code in place and he worked on revisions to that with the Board of Trustees. Council Member Kogerman asked if someone gave you a letter and asked you to have an instructor use the language in the letter as an apology or whatever, would you consider that undue influence? Dr. Mathur responded, "Yes, that would be inappropriate."
Mr. Larry Bertino, Laguna Hills Resident and former member of the OC Grand Jury in 2009 also served in Laguna Hills as a Commissioner on the Parks and Rec. Commission. - He said he was speaking here on behalf of Allan Songstad . He said he is not a close friend of Allan, but knows him pretty well related to serving on a number of committees with him. He said I can attest to the fact that Allan is one of the most honest, intelligent and dedicated people that I have ever met. He said he believes that Allan is one of the best public servants that any City could ever ask for. He said he believes this is an attempt to besmirch the name and reputation of Songstad and is being done by someone who by her own admission has said I sit in that seat to cause problems and descention, that you call Stirring the Pot. He said he felt that was a disgraceful motive to have for being a member of the City Council. He said he read an article yesterday in the Register that said a document that was circulated during the last City Council Election that was reportedly authored under the auspices of a college of Chapman University. According to the article it was authored and edited by Mrs. Kogerman and then presented with a deceptive cover sheet. He said he understood that Mrs. Kogerman has since apologized for this attempt at deception but he said he didn't notice where or to whom she apologized. He said he never saw the apology and it didn't get a 2 page write up in the Register. Mr Bertino continued - So, I would like tonight to offer you an opportunity Mrs. Kogerman to apologize for the deception you attempted to perpetrate and he also suggested that she accompany the apology with a letter of resignation, because the stench of deception is so strong when attached to a public official that it can't be dissolved by a simple apology. (** Editor's Note - FACT CHECK - Kogerman's Apology did appear in a News Story in the OC Register Newspaper on August 1, 2010 entitled - Barbarta Kogerman: I regret confusion over the city manager report http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/report-260135-city-interns.html)
Council member Kogerman responded that she never called herself Barbara Stir-the-Pot Kogerman and never said I set out to cause distention or anything like that. She said you are taking a reporter's characterization and attributing to me and that is not actually correct. Never used those term, don't like those terms, that's what I'm stuck with. She said the report was never attributed to the school. It was the graduate students at that school who wrote that report or assisted with the report. The students worked for 3 months and many many hours so it was appropriate to give them credit but that was misinterpreted as trying to pretend that they wrote the report, but if you read the forward, it was very clear in the forward that they compiled the information and data and helped me reach conclusions. The Orange County Register did publish my letter that was requested by Dr. Smoller. The letter that Dr. Smoller used was basically dictated by Mr. Songstad according to the Grand Jury testimony. The Grand Jury Report Findings were unanimous that was an excuse to impugn Kogerman, discredit her report and thereby discredit her. The Grand Jury's conclusion was "The issue of crediting the students with authorship of the report on the cover page, notwithstanding the rather elaborate explanation in the attending forward, was magnified beyond significance, apparently for political reasons." Kogerman noted that neither Dr. Doti nor Dr. Smoller ever said there was anything wrong with the actual Compensation Report.
Mayor Pro-Tem Lautenschleger asked Mr. Bertino if he had read the Grand Jury Report. Mr. Bertino answered No. He said he only knows what he read in the paper but said he believes in the accuracy of the paper, that everything was accurately quoted and he said he has more faith in the reporter than Mrs. Kogerman does.
(Editor's Note - Please click on this link for the Newspaper Story to which Mr. Bertino is referring - City Officials Abused Power, Grand Jury says from OC Register Newspaper July 6, 2012 http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2012/07/06/city-officials-abused-power-grand-jury-says/158361/ We read this same story many times and agree that it was reported accurately but we did not interpret it in the same way that Mr. Bertino apparently did. We also read the Grand Jury Report many times.)
Col. Bill Kogerman began with Mayor, you are not going to badger me as you have done all evening with others. He re-focused the council on the issue that was before them which was a motion to do something rather than deflect the issue, as they have done tonight to a council person who had nothing to do with what the Grand Jury decided. He noted that if there is anything unethical this evening it is that conduct. He continued that what you are here to listen to and decide is to form a committee, determine which of the Grand Jury recommendations are appropriate and get on with it. You are not here to retry the facts, that has already taken place, so stop that. The issue is simply what are you going to do and how are you going to do it relative to what the Grand Jury said. He noted that the issue is not the student's names being on the 1st page when the entire Forward says that Barbara Kogerman wrote that report. If there was any guilt there it was for giving too much credit to students who worked so hard for months more than they had anticipated. That was a misjudgment and there was any apology published. (**Editor's Note - Apology was published in the OC Register Newspaper on August 1, 2010 entitled - Barbara Kogerman: I regret confusion over the city manager report http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/report-260135-city-interns.html.)
He added that is not the subject of what's happening here tonight, Mayor. Mayor Carruth responded, you are absolutely right Mr. Kogerman.
For the Complete Grand Jury Report Please see - OC Grand Jury Report entitled - The Use of Government Influence on a Private Educational Institution at http://www.ocgrandjury.org/pdfs/theuseofgovernmentinfluenceonpei.pdf
Council Member Songstad's Comments were -
Council Member Songstad began with -This report is addressed to the City of Laguna Hills and Laguna Hills has nothing to do with this. (**Editor's Note 1- Unfortunately this does have something to do with the City of Laguna Hills now because Mr. Songstad was a member of the Laguna Hills City Council when he suggested, in this discussion with Members of a non-profit group (later identified in news reports as the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities). According to the Grand Jury Report on page 4 - "The City (where the election is taking place) is extremely upset that (the university) could be so irresponsible and that the Orange County Register would put a Watchdog column on the front page of the Orange County Register.")
Songstad continued - It wasn't a City matter, the City Council has taken no action on this, anything I did, I did on my own. (**Editor's Note 2 - FACT CHECK - Songstad was not alone in this according to pages 4-5 of the Grand Jury Report where it is stated that On Wed. May 19, 2010, at a publicly funded non-profit corporation meeting, a past President and current director of the non-profit who was also a current councilman from Laguna Hills brought the attention of the Board to the subject of the City Manager's Compensation and discussed that the City where the election is taking place is extremely upset and the councilman and current director "suggested that a response is necessary in a significant fashion". A decision was made to follow up with the university and the professor to address their concerns and the councilman from Tustin agreed. A meeting was scheduled for July 8, 2010 with the president of the university, said meeting to include the councilman from Laguna Hills, which was the subject of the report, the councilman from Tustin and the existing exec. director of the local division of the non-profit corporation. Also see Finding #1 from the Grand Jury above)
Songstad continued - with regard to the findings that everybody has been told regarding my credibility there is nothing that deals with my credibility and my testimony before the Grand Jury (**Editor's Note 3 - FACT CHECK - Please see page 10 of the OC Grand Jury Report noted above where is states under "Analysis" - "From the wording used in these communications, it appeared that the city councilman from Laguna Hills, CA. was influencing certain actions of the professor in that some of the exact language that was used in the professor's letter was the same as that which was communicated by the councilman." Also see Finding # 2 and 4 from the Grand jury above.)
Songstad added that Mrs. Kogerman seems to know an awful lot about the Grand Jury testimony which is supposed to be completely confidential, it's sealed and I don't know how she knows about all this stuff. Apparently she has a source. (**Editor's Note 4 - It appears to us that Kogerman's source is the Grand Jury Report because it's all there. At this point we are seriously wondering if Songstad read the Grand Jury report?) Songstad then said the findings she's referring to where she says I was found to be not forthcoming, this is what it says, this is the Grand Jury Report - City Official's may not have been forthcoming with the Orange County Grand Jury in their testimony about the primary purpose in meeting with university officials and the facts and circumstances related thereto. (**Editor's Note 5 - We are relieved to hear that Songstad did read at least some of the Grand Jury Report, but he needs to direct his attention to page 5 where it reports that Communications from the city councilman of Laguna Hills, CA directed to university officials reflected his intentions to see that the local newspaper reject the original report as not being scholarly. Some of the language used in these communications was included by the professor in his subsequent communications. It was represented to the Orange County Grand Jury that this particular language was "dictated" to the professor by the councilman from Laguna Hills, CA.)
Songstad continued, first of all I didn't set the meeting up, it couldn't be my testimony, I was there, I was invited to attend a meeting with James Doti, Doctor Doti, and I attended. Songstad said he only had one purpose in mind and that was to be sure that he (Dr. Doti) knew that there was a report out there that was supposedly a Brandman Report that wasn't by Brandman so there's no (something?) about my credibility in this report (**Editor's note 6 - Songstad has been identified by multiple sources as the Laguna Hills City Council Member noted in this Grand Jury Report as a past President and current director of the non-profit who was also a current councilman from Laguna Hills and it goes on to say he was one of the parties involved in the discussion of the need for the meeting that was scheduled with the university. Songstad has admitted he attended the meeting. If any further doubt remains that Songstad was identified by the Grand Jury see Editor's Note 1 - On the Laguna Hills City website is is stated - Council Member Songstad also serves as Past President of the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities. From Songstad, Randal Coffee & Humphrey, LLP at http://www.sr-firm.com/songstad.html - Songstad is identified as a Member of the Board of Directors of the League of California Cities. Whether Songstad did or did not "set the meeting up" does not appear to be an issue, the issues are about the fact that he attended the meeting and what he "communicated".)
Songstad continues - There's a suggestion that this report has been approved by a Superior Court Judge and County Council. That's absolutely false. This is the finding of a group of people, the Grand Jury. There is no Superior Court Judge that has ever ruled on anything in this report and I have never spoken to a Superior Court Judge and I would know one when I saw one because I'm a lawyer and I never saw anyone from the county council's office there. (**Editor's Note 7 - On page 12 of the Grand Jury Report it says "In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 993 and 993.05 the 2011-2912 Orange County Grand Jury requires responses from each agency affected by the Findings/Conclusions and Recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court.")
Related to Grand Jury Procedures in General we have received a statement from Council Member Kogerman re. Grand Jury Normal Procedure that states - After a report is written by a committee of the Grand Jury it goes through an approval process by the entire Grand Jury. Once the entire Grand Jury approves the report, it goes to the County Counsel. He or she studies the report and determines whether there are any issues related to jurisdiction, libel, rights of the individuals involved, etc., and determines whether there are any offenses that warrant an indictment. Once he or she signs off on it, the report returns to the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury then submits it to the Presiding Justice of the Superior Court, and he or she must give it final approval before it can be released. Any of these steps can involve considerable give-and-take, with the next entity making suggestions and the report being re-submitted after the Grand Jury makes requested revisions. After the judge finally approves its release, it goes confidentially to any parties named, such as the governing board of the City of Laguna Hills, either by mail or FAX, 48 hours before it is publicly released.
Songstad continued - It's been suggested that somehow the ACC-OC is involved but it was not formed until 2011 and this election was in 2010 so it could not possibly have had anything to do with any of these activities. (**Editor's Note 8 - Members from the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities were involved in forming the ACC-OC so the 3 people described in this Grand Jury report as being from a generic non-profit who were later identified as Allan Songstad, Jerry Amante and Lacy Kelly in the July 6, 2012 OC Register Newspaper Story as being from the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities were the same 3 people who became members of the ACC-OC according to our information. So, technically the ACC-OC organization was not involved but members of the Orange County Division of the League of California Cities who became members of the newly formed ACC-OC were.)
Songstad - I have never, it's been said that I wrote or dictated a letter to Dr. Smoller or that I wrote to Dr. Smoller, I have never written a letter to Dr. Smoller, I have never written a letter to Dr. Doti, never! He couldn't possibly have used any language that I suggested. I've spoken to Dr. Smoller once when he called me at my home and asked me what I thought about the report and I told him. That's the only conversation I've ever had with Dr. Smoller. (**Editor Note 9 - Council Member Kogerman did incorrectly refer to a "letter". The Grand Jury Report refers to "language used in communications" and to "electronic communication and phone calls" but not letters. It is possible to communicate and to dictate a response by phone and/or by electronic communication.)
Songstad - It's been suggested that I bullied Dr. James Doti, President of Chapman University, I find that incredibly hard to believe, he's a pretty substantial guy. Bullying Professor Smoller, I don't think that's possible either as it's been said here Dr. Smoller is a very sophisticated guy, he's a political consultant he worked for a few years for Forde & Mollrich the same company that Bill Kogerman worked for. Maybe they worked together it's a PR consulting firm that's being paid a million dollars a year by the Great Park Board, a Board Mr. Kogerman sits on.
Col. Bill Kogerman stated - I object Mayor, and was quickly hushed by Mayor Carruth who ironically instructed him regarding how he should behave and said "We have rules here that we abide by in the chamber."
Songstad continued so that gets us back to what really happened here and I think it's important to have a timeline. Dr. Smoller didn't resign until Oct. of 2011, almost a year after Mrs. Kogerman was elected. How anything I said or did or whatever to Dr. Doti could affect Dr. Smoller a year later I have no idea but I think one of the things that is the most telling is what did Dr. Doti say about it , and "the Grand Jury, amazingly enough never said what Dr. Doti said about the meeting which was all these horrible things happened".
Songstad then read from a news story from the OC Register Reporter that calls Kogerman - Stir-the-Pot Kogerman, (which would be Teri Sforza the OC Watchdog, but Songstad did not give the name or date of the story for documentation), he began reading - it says they also groused about, talking about myself and Jerry Amante and Lacy Kelly, who was at that time with the League of CA Cities. They also groused about the data, that it was poorly done and poorly written and the interpretations were wrong. This is Dr. Doti - I asked for a copy of the actual report and I get one from Brandman, not from me, from Brandman, lo and behold it has the students who wrote the report on the cover, now I have never spoken with Fred about this I have just communicated by e-mail.
I e-mailed Fred, quote I never represented to the League of CA Cities they're claiming it was not written by the students but I have it in front of me and it says Brandman. It says it's by students and that Kogerman wrote a forward. The League of CA. Cities gets a quote it says, it has no problem with students being involved, and I have no problem with them working on a campaign for their internship. It’s very valuable experience. I wasn’t concerned about that, but the authorship issue is a big deal. So Fred e-mailed back that he made it clear on his blog that Kogerman wrote the report, that it was not a Chapman product. I wrote back, ‘Gee, I’m aghast, I’m outraged. How could she put our students names on the cover, and ‘Brandman, part of the Chapman University system’? It seemed like it was intentionally done to give more credibility, and more academic weight, to the report.
He said, ‘Yeah, I’m upset about it too. But they did a good job gathering the information.’ Since my issue, back to Doti, was not with the students doing it, but with the authorship, I asked if he would think about sending an official letter stating it wasn’t written by the Brandman students, and that it was unethical to give that impression. I didn’t demand; I just suggested. He didn’t respond to that, but he sent letter to the Register and copied me on that, saying this was not a Chapman report. Now, as far as I’m concerned, the case is closed. It’s been characterized as people being out for Fred’s neck, but he’s a tenured member of the faculty and he did on the whole a great job. The students have been on TV reporting their results, and now the LA Times is reporting that something similar is going on in Bell, and everyone’s discussing it. Then he goes on and says “My impression of the numbers in the report itself? to paraphrase the rest of it he thinks that City Managers are terribly underpaid.
(**Editor's Note 10 we found the story from which Songstad was reading the link to it is http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2010/08/03/doti-tells-all-in-flap-over-city-compensation-survey/62111/ and the Title is - Doti tells all in flap over city compensation survey and it was posted on August 3rd, 2010. In this story Doti does basically say what Songstad has reported above but also says some things that Songstad left out - (see below)
“I’m an innocent bystander!” Doti tells us as he recounts his meeting with the League of Cities representatives. And here’s how the story unfolds, in his own words: “I see this report, I read it, and I think that it’s a good thing that our students are doing this kind of useful public service work, gathering data that helps inform the public and leads to more informed decision-making as to what they should pay city managers. It’s not unlike what I do with our Center for Economic Research. “Now, I was asked if I would meet with three representatives from the Orange County chapter of the League of California Cities. I’m not going to mention names; they may have thought the meeting confidential.
“They did not demand Fred Smoller’s head. Nothing like that. The gist was, ‘Jim, how much do you know about this report?’ And I said, ‘Just what I read in the papers.’ They wanted to alert me to the fact it was not written by Chapman students, but by Mrs. Kogerman. I said, ‘Really? It said the students wrote it.’ They said, ‘No, she wrote it.’ And I said, ‘Let me check into it.’
“They also groused about the data, and the validity of the data, that it was poorly done and poorly written, that the interpretations were wrong. “I asked for a copy of the actual report, and I get one from Brandman. Lo and behold, it has the students who wrote the report on the cover. Now, I’ve never spoken with Fred about this – we’ve just communicated by email. I email Fred, ‘I met with representative of the League of California Cities, they’re claiming it was not written by the students, but I have it in front of me and it says it’s by the students, and that Kogerman wrote a forward.
“The League of Cities had no problem with students being involved, and I have no problem with them working on a campaign for their internship. It’s very valuable experience. I wasn’t concerned about that, but the authorship issue is a big deal. “So Fred emailed back that he made it clear on his blog that Kogerman wrote the report, that it was not a Chapman product. I wrote back, ‘Gee, I’m aghast, I’m outraged. How could she put our students names on the cover, and ‘Brandman, part of the Chapman University system’? It seemed like it was intentionally done to give more credibility, and more academic weight, to the report. He said, ‘Yeah, I’m upset about it too. But they did a good job gathering the information.
“Since my issue was not with the students doing it, but with the authorship, I asked if he would think about sending an official letter stating it wasn’t written by the Brandman students, and that it was unethical to give that impression. I didn’t demand; I just suggested. He didn’t respond to that, but he sent letter to the Register and copied me on that, saying this was not a Chapman report. Now, as far as I’m concerned, the case is closed. It’s been characterized as people being out for Fred’s neck, but he’s a tenured member of the faculty and he did on the whole a great job. The students have been on TV reporting their results, and now the LA Times is reporting that something similar is going on in Bell, and everyone’s discussing it.
(**Editor's Note 11- It is probably important to note that the word "unethical" came into play while Doti was talking with Songstad, Amante and Kelly but as reported by the Grand Jury, they (The Grand Jury) did not agree with Songstad's characterization of "unethical" related to Kogerman and determined in their report - "The issue of crediting the students with authorship of the report on the cover page, notwithstanding the rather elaborate explanation in the attending forward, was magnified beyond significance, apparently for political reasons." The Grand Jury did not believe the charge of Kogerman being unethical, and the issue here is about responding to the Grand Jury re. their findings about Songstad. The Grand Jury notes say that they reviewed multiple communications that they did not publish so we can't tell you what those are and we assume Songstad can't either?)
Songstad continued that Doti is the one who asked Dr. Smoller to write something to the Register. Songstad then read what Dr. Smoller wrote in a Letter to the Editor of the OC Register saying Let me try to set the record straight on a series of stories and editorials by the Register about city manager compensation. These and other related stories were inspired by a report authored by Barbara Kogerman. Kogerman is a candidate for Laguna Hills City Council. I placed graduate students in Brandman University's Masters in Public Administration Program in Kogerman's campaign.MPA students are encouraged to get internships so they can get real world "hands on" experience, which can lead to full-time employment. As unpaid interns, the students gathered data from the cities. However, the final report was written by Barbara Kogerman. The analysis is hers. Kogerman also made the final decision on how city manager compensation was calculated. Let me be clear: this was not a Brandman University report, and it was unethical of the campaign to try to pass it off as if it were. Also, I was wrong for not immediately publicly criticizing the Kogerman campaign for doing so. This was a political tract, not a scholarly study. Despite this, I believe the students' efforts and the Register's reporting (which has been accurate) has served a much larger public interest by highlighting the need for citizen engagement and transparency in local government.
Songstad continued - with regard to Smoller's resignation The Grand Jury didn't ask Brandman what happened so Songstad went back to the OC Register again and this time used a story from an Orange County Supervisor Meeting where he says he is quoting a Gary Brahm, Chancellor at Brandman University who says the last meeting he had with Smoller ended with Smoller continuing at Brandman as MPA Director and Brandman would also hire a director of Government Relations. The next day Dr. Smoller Resigned and said Brandman valued it's Academic Freedom. Songstad said the Grand Jury report is incomplete, it has a lot of may and might haves, apparentlys, so not findings and Grand Juries should be more restrained. He said he thought this was a very poorly written report but if the council thinks we need to respond to it they should respond. Songstad maintained that he didn't see how you could respond to it because it is not a City Council action. He concluded if you want to believe the Grand Jury, that's fine but he insisted that means you have to not believe a number of other people and believe that he manipulated Dr. Smoller and again he insisted that he did not write a letter and loudly challenged anyone to produce a letter that doesn't exist!
(**Editor's Note 12 - As we said noted previously the Grand Jury never said he wrote a letter they used the term "Communications" and mentioned multiple communication including phone and e-mail so a letter is not an issue). Songstad said the Grand Jury got it wrong and it has been tortured by Kogerman this evening in her report. He restated some the things he had mentioned earlier and ended.
(**Editor's Last Note # 13 on Songstad's Rebuttal to Kogerman's Report and Recommendations for a response to the Grand Jury- The Problem with the "WHO DO YOU BELIEVE" scenario that Council Member Songstad presented at this City Council Meeting is that, if this is his best argument, this is essentially what he should have presented to the Grand Jury when he was called to testify based upon what he knew at that time and his skills as an Attorney. If he did not do that he failed to make the best use of his chance to convince the Grand Jury and if he did use his best argument, the Grand Jury was not convinced, so either way, rehearing this case, at length and at this time is not the issue. What is needed now is a draft of a credible response to the Grand Jury's Findings and Recommendations from the City and we will keep you posted on that.
We would also like to point out that it is our opinion that if there had been no issues of transparency related to the City Manager's Total Compensation in Laguna Hills and if the Laguna Hills City Manager's compensation had been in line with other similar cities in the area there would not have been wide spread attention given to the Compensation Report Results and no need for anyone, including Songstad, to be "extremely upset" by those results. In the years we have been following Council Member Songstad's votes at Laguna Hills City Council Meetings we have not found him to be a friend of transparency - below we have noted some examples of his votes regarding transparency in the past 3 years:
On 6-26-2012 - Songstad voted Against following the recommendation of the Orange County Grand Jury to make the City's Public Official's Compensation Report more transparent for taxpayers.
On 1-10-2012 - Songstad voted Against a citizen friendly revision of the City's Public Official's Compensation Report
On 7-12-2011 - Songstad, as Mayor, voted Against the appointment of a Labor Negotiator to attempt to re-negotiate the City Manager's Contract.
On 6-28-2011 - Songstad, as Mayor voted Against the Citizen Friendly item of Reviewing the City Manager's Contract for possible changes.
On 6-14-2011 - Songstad, as Mayor, voted Against a Citizen Friendly Motion to Delay Adoption of the City's Biennial Budget until the next Council Meeting when the results of the City Employee Compensation Study should be available.
On 3-22-2011 - Songstad, as Mayor, voted Against publishing the City's goals for the citizens at the beginning of the year rather than at the end.
On 12-14-2010 - In his Comments as incoming Mayor for 2011 Songstad noted his next goal was to increase transparency and trust.
On 8-24-2010 - Songstad voted Against amending the City's Purchasing System to make it more transparent for taxpayers related to the purchase of the $60,000 car for the City Manger, and Voted Against Council Member Bressettes recommendation to provide, in an easily understandable format, full and complete detials as to what the taxpayers are paying in salaries and benefits to the City Council and City Management.
Council Member Kogerman made her original motion re. a response to the Grand jury and said she would wait to comment on what Council Member Songstad said until the City Council Comments Section of the Meeting.
Council Member Bressette made a motion to assign Mayor Carruth and Mayor Pro Tem Lautenschleger to draft a response to the Grand Jury using the City Attorney as their attorney.
Carruth said we don't have a lot of facts to go on and she would be deeply troubled if Kogerman was a part of a committee for this, etc. She asked how can we be impartial if we already have strong views.
Kogerman noted that Carruth and Lautenschleger made it clear related to their strong views.
It was noted that they have to respond to a presiding Judge within 90 days from the date the report was issued. Council Member Bressette added that he is expecting Carruth and Lautenschleger to do this job without any prejudice and added that he is disgusted with being a part of the findings and recommendations because he wasn't anywhere close to this.
Vote was 4 - 1 with Council Member Kogerman refraining from voting that Carruth and Lautenschleger draft the response with the City Attorney as their consultant.
Carruth asked for comments and closed the meeting. Kogerman missed hearing Carruth mention comments so was not allowed to comment on Songstad's statements.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS - None
CLOSED SESSION – None
The Next regular City Council Meeting is Tuesday, August 28, 2012 7 pm, at City Hall.
Contact Laguna Hills City Council Members at ccouncil@ci.laguna-hills.ca.us
================================
CITY COUNCIL and CITY MANAGER REPORT CARD - Categories - (T) Transparency for Citizens, (A) Accountability to Citizens, (CI) Championing Citizen Related Issue, (AG) Achieving Citizen Related Goal Grades - (P) Pass, (A) for Authoring a Citizen Friendly Item, (F) Fail, (A+) Extra Credit. City Manager will be scored related to online and agendized Staff Reports and Requests.
Bressette - A+ for reconsidering the signage request at the City Council meeting of June 12, 2012 regarding the number of times the message would be allowed to change on the Hills Hotel sign and suggesting, and getting passed, a change from 5 times to a maximum of 12 times a day. P - for voting to pass the maximum number of changes on the Hills Hotel Sign from 5 to 12 per day. P - Vote for improved Coyote Public Education Campaign. P - Vote to award the additional $3 per runner fee in the Memorial Day Event that was marked for the City's adopted 3/5 Marines and to give the 130 pounds of food were collected and the proceeds from the sales of beer garden tickets, a total of $1,690, that were donated to South County Outreach. P - Vote to draft a response to the Grand Jury
Carruth - F - for ignoring your own rudeness to the public while admonishing others for their behavior. F - for wasting so much of everyone's time without asking for the advice of the City Attorney related to any conflict of interest regarding allowing Kogerman and Songstad to speak about the Grand Jury Report. P - for voting to pass the maximum number of changes on the Hills Hotel Sign from 5 to 12 per day. P - Vote for improved Coyote Public Education Campaign. P - Vote to award the additional $3 per runner fee in the Memorial Day Event that was marked for the City's adopted 3/5 Marines and to give the 130 pounds of food were collected and the proceeds from the sales of beer garden tickets, a total of $1,690, that were donated to South County Outreach. P - Vote to draft a response to the Grand Jury
Kogerman - P - for voting to pass the maximum number of changes on the Hills Hotel Sign from 5 to 12 per day. P - Vote for improved Coyote Public Education Campaign.
P - Vote to award the additional $3 per runner fee in the Memorial Day Event that was marked for the City's adopted 3/5 Marines and to give the 130 pounds of food were collected and the proceeds from the sales of beer garden tickets, a total of $1,690, that were donated to South County Outreach. A+ Authoring an item to encourage a response to the Grand Jury Findings and Recommendation's re. Council Member Songstad and getting it passed P - Vote to abstain from voting related to the draft of a response to the Grand Jury by 2 council members who have expressed that they strongly favor Songstad.
Lautenschleger - P - for voting to pass the maximum number of changes on the Hills Hotel Sign from 5 to 12 per day. P - Vote for improved Coyote Public Education Campaign.
P - Vote to award the additional $3 per runner fee in the Memorial Day Event that was marked for the City's adopted 3/5 Marines and to give the 130 pounds of food were collected and the proceeds from the sales of beer garden tickets, a total of $1,690, that were donated to South County Outreach. P - Vote to drafting a response to the Grand Jury
Songstad - P - for voting to pass the maximum number of changes on the Hills Hotel Sign from 5 to 12 per day. P - Vote for improved Coyote Public Education Campaign.
P - Vote to award the additional $3 per runner fee in the Memorial Day Event that was marked for the City's adopted 3/5 Marines and to give the 130 pounds of food were collected and the proceeds from the sales of beer garden tickets, a total of $1,690, that were donated to South County Outreach. P - Vote to draft a response to the Grand Jury
City Manager - F - Lack of transparency in not reporting the $ amount for taxpayers re. costs for Coyote Control.
** INFORMATION, COMMENTS QUESTIONS and CONCERNS from Watch Dog Readers:
About the OC Grand Jury's Recommendation that the City of Laguna Hills make its online Employee Compensation Report more transparent for the taxpayers
Anonymous said...
Hey Watch Dog, you reported that only Kogerman and Bressette were willing to even consider the OC Grand Jury's Recommendation of making the City of Laguna Hills' online Public Officials Compensation Report more transparent. I'm thinking that's because they don't want to bring anymore attention to the fact that Laguna Hills pays both the Employer and Employee contributions to all the City Employees compensation plans in addition to the overblown compensation for the City Manager and Assistant City Manager. Have you read these new stories in from the OC Register Watch Dog?
Local governments must report billions in pension debthttp://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2012/06/26/local-governments-must-report-billions-in-pension-debt/157917/
Ripping veil from hidden employee pension costshttp://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2012/06/25/ripping-veil-from-hidden-employee-pension-costs/157626/
"The printed version of this story in the OC Register Newspaper states Many Agencies are also asking workers to pick up more of the costs of their pensions - and workers are doing so. It's one of the pillars of recent pension reform efforts."
Pension promises can be altered, legal scholar sayshttp://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2012/06/29/pension-promises-can-be-altered-legal-scholar-says/158198/
Apparently Songstad, Lautenschleger and Carruth don't want us to know any more about this but the new OC Grand Jury Report - Transparency Breaking Up Compensation Fog - But Why Hide Pension Costs? http://www.ocgrandjury.org/pdfs/transparencybreakingupcompensationfog.pdf says on page 37 that Laguna Hills pays 11.271 % of current Employee Payroll the Employer must contribute to CalPERS in 2011 and we know Laguna Hills Employees have 2 pension plans and pays both the employer and employee contributions for both so apparently this is only 1/2 the story? We need to know the total % paid by the City and the total amount of the City's unpaid Pension Liability. What's it gonna take for taxpayers to get this information? I am so disgusted with playing these games. I'm thinking getting rid of the Songstad, Lautenschleger and Carruth and getting council members that are honest with us can't come fast enough. Has anybody considered a recall?
About Public Humiliation of Businesses and Citizens by City Council Members
Anonymous said...
What's gong on with all this airing of the laundry in public at council meetings? First Mayor Carruth slamming a business owner in public, then Councilmember Bressette slamming the citizen with the old barn. Doesn't this city have departmental procedures to handle things and should council members be rehashing everything publicly? Should all of us now expect that any time a citizen or business owner has any problem with the City he or she has to encounter this kind of public humiliation from these council members? What are they thinking?
About Lack of Needed Public Information
Anonymous said...
You hit a real hot spot with me this time, related to lack of information from the city to the public. This has always been true and never changes. If most of the city council members aren't interested in the County's Emergency Plan, fine, they can opt out, but a huge part of their job, especially related to safety, is to INFORM THE CITIZENS. If they can't figure out how to do that they better opt out of the city council as well.
About the young man found hanging in the Laguna Hills Playground
Anonymous said...
This was recently posted on Utube regarding the Family and Friends of the 25 year old man found, in January of 2012, hanging from playground equipment in Laguna Hills asking the City for help with Sheriff's Dept. Investigation of his death.:http://www.youtube.com/watchv=rC0mpn0RWco&feature=youtube_gdata
Anonymous said...
Regarding suicide case in Vittoria park: http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2012/07/khalid_flimban.php
About the Laguna Hills Watch Dog
Anonymous said...
Your site is really good and the posts are just wonderful. Thank you and keep doing your great work.
Anonymous said...
You should keep it up forever! Good Luck.
** WIN WIN Wednesday is an ongoing series of restaurant fundraisers that allow the Laguna Hills High School PTSA to fund many worthwhile programs such as "EVERY 15 MINUTES" (a vividly realistic drunk driving prevention presentation), the Award Winning "I CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE" program and the SAFE and SOBER all night "GRAD NIGHT" that keeps our kids not only safe but in Laguna Hills and on campus continuing a 23 year tradition that makes us HAWK Proud! ** For Weekly Flyers & Schedule go to our web site at www.WinWinWednesdays.com and please be sure to "LIKE US" on Facebook!
** Bring the WWW!! flyer to these participating restaurants on these dates and a portion of the proceeds will be donated to the LHHS PTSA and you can now get durable and attractive business card size Win-Win-Wednesday Fan and Supporter Cards that contain all the info. for W-W-Wed on one side including how to subscribe to W-W-Wednesday to get your flyers, dates and Restaurant Information sent to you weekly on Wednesdays and the other side of the card will serve as a universal flyer, if you forget to bring a flyer. You can sign up for an e-blast at WinWinWednesdays@gmail.com to have the weekly schedule and flyers for Win-Win-Wednesdays e-mailed to you.
July 18 - La Rana Mexican - Laguna Hills
July 25 - Villa Roma Grand Re-Opening - Laguna Hills
August 1 - California Pizza Kitchen - Laguna Hills Mall
August 8 - Mimi's Cafe' - Laguna Niguel
August 29 Original Pancake House - Laguna Hills
September 5 - Blends Soft-Serve Creations - Albertsons' Grocery Store Muirlands, Mission Viejo
**Don't forget to see our "WWW Everyday" Partners like Its a Grind Coffee House, Alpha Cleaners and Golden Baked Hams on our web site. Bring the flyers for these everyday partners and Support the businesses that support us! Sneak Peek at GRAD NIGHT Preview Nite event: Wednesday, June 13th, with our delicious participating restaurant sponsors.
** HOW TO SUPPORT THE 3rd BATTALION, 5th MARINE DIVISION - Adopted by the City of Laguna Hills
*** Team Dark Horse is Collecting Donations Now to purchase personal care products, snacks, magazines, training manuals, playing cards and other supplies for the 3/5 Marines for their next deployment in Sept. to the Middle East. They will all be leaving on a ship and he noted that if the committee can get the items they need before the Marines deploy the items can go in boxes on the ship with the Marines/Sailors so Team Dark Horse Committee can save a lot of money on Postage.
Donation checks can be made specifically to "Laguna Hills Team Dark Horse" and mailed to - Team Dark Horse, 27251 Lost Colt Dr., Laguna Hills, CA. 92653. The Non-profit Corporation 501 (C) (3) status has been approved so all donations are tax deductible. E-mail Mike Bland at 35bland@gmail.com with questions, suggestions, etc. The city's e-mail for the 3/5 is 3/5-support@ci.laguna-hills.ca.us City Clerk Peggy Johns is the City Liaison to the 3/5 Support Committee. Go to the City web site by clicking on this link - http://www.ci.laguna-hills.ca.us/
**Go to the Team Dark Horse web site at http://teamdarkhorse.org/ to see how your donations are helping, and see the Laguna Hills 3/5 Adopted Marines Facebook page by clicking on this link - http://www.facebook.com/pages/Laguna-Hills Team Darkhorse/132765660119128
** NEWS STORIES AND BLOGS ABOUT LAGUNA HILLS: Click on the links below to see the stories.
City officials abused power, grand jury says July 6th, 2012, 1:22 am · · posted by Teri Sforza, Register staff writer http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2012/07/06/city-officials-abused-power-grand-jury-says/158361/
Reader's weigh in: OC lacks will to battle 'shadow governments' Fred Smoller has been thinking about how to make local governments more efficient and accountable for some time. http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2012/05/05/readers-weigh-in-o-c-lacks-will-to-battle-shadow-governments/154356/
City among worst for alcohol fueled crashes
Fullerton and Laguna Hills had the worst rates of crashes that involved underage drinkers
Read more at: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/cities-348774-crashes-among.html
New Reports with 2011 Statistics for the 70 year old Orange County Animal Shelter that Laguna Hills still uses for it's citizens
Fewer Animals Killed at OC animal shelter in 2011http://www.ocregister.com/articles/fewer-338291-killed-shelter.html?pic=1
Total euthanasia rate of 53%. Fewer were killed in 2011 because fewer were impounded at the County Animal Shelter in 2011. January 31, 2012 Teri Sfzora
Three out of four cats still don't leave shelter alive http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2012/02/16/three-out-of-four-cats-still-dont-leave-shelter-alive/148403/ Teri Sforza OC Watchdog
Kill Rate for Cats at the OC Animal Shelter in 2011 was 74% and only 17% adopted, down from 19% in 2010
Euthanasia Rate Stuck at Nearly 50% at O.C. Animal Care http://ranchosantamargarita.patch.com/articles/shelter-euthanizes-fewer-animals-in-2011 County Shelter finally admits killing animal for space in this story.
Fred Smoller,The Brandman University Professor of Public Administration, "who offended the power elite" when his Master's Degree students won awards assisting Council Member Kogerman to research the total compensation of City Managers in Orange County has just resigned from his post. Why did this happen? - Click on http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2011/10/12/professor-who-offended-power-elite-resigns-post/109833/
LAGUNA HILLS CITY WORKERS: 12 PERCENT UNDERPAID? http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2011/09/01/laguna-hills-city-workers-12-percent-underpaid/95765/
Which city council makes the most money? http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2011/07/11/which-city-council-makes-the-most-money/88311/#comment-169311
LA Times: Laguna Hills City Manager Salary http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-oc-salaries-20110621,0,1126677.story
In O.C., city pay can be steep, but it’s not ‘abusive’ June 20th, 2011 http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2011/06/20/in-o-c-city-pay-can-be-excessive-but-its-not-abusive/85631/#comment-165059
June 9, 2011 ORANGE COUNTY GRAND JURY REPORT - Compensation Study of Orange County Cities http://www.ocgrandjury.org/pdfs/comp-study-oc-cities/Compensation-Study-of-Orange-County-Cities.pdf
City manager says compensation is fair http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-303264-channing-compensation.html
Political rebel faces an uphill battle http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-303262-kogerman-channing.html
Councilwoman: Public pay report inaccurate, self serving http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-299908-report-council.html
OC Watchdog Lavish health benefits slashed in Laguna Hills, Tustin http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2011/05/12/lavish-health-benefits-slashed-in-laguna-hills-tustin/82833/
After attacks, city-manager-compensation sleuths win state award March 21st, 2011, posted by Teri Sforza, Register staff writer http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2011/03/21/after-attacks-city-manager-compensation-sleuths-win-state-award/78545/#comment-139633 Click on http://www.publicceo.com/ for more of this story.
No more $60,000 SUVs for city manager? http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2011/02/09/no-more-60000-suvs-for-city-manager/75030/
Gold-plated benefits? New councilwoman just says ‘no’ http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2011/01/18/gold-plated-benefits-new-councilwoman-just-says-no/72532/
OCREGISTER: Laguna Hills councilwoman says no to health benefits http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-282972-benefits-council.html
O.C. cities lavished health benefits on council members http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2010/12/06/oc-cities-lavished-health-benefits-on-council-members/69544/
Who has the best-paid city council in California? (updated) http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2010/12/02/who-has-the-best-paid-city-council-incalifornia/69418/ In Laguna Hills the Taxpayers pay the entire cost of heath care premiums for the elected part time city council members and their families. In addition, the City Manager's contract states "To the extent that payment of all or any portion of the dependent rate of premium, is not approved by the city council for all city employees, Channing shall be entitled to a salary increase or cash payment sufficient to cover the amount of premium or rate for dependent coverage not provided by the City plus applicable income taxes on that amount."
OCREGISTER: Chris Norby: Local officials susceptible to 'Bell syndrome http://www.ocregister.com/opinion/elected-276253-city-syndrome.html "Bell syndrome thrives where elected boards vote in lockstep, where groupthink is elevated, and skeptics are ostracized, and where top staff are seen as irreplaceable experts – with rubber-stamped salaries to prove it. Bell syndrome thrives when self-congratulation trumps self-examination."
** CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SAY the DARNDEST THINGS IN PUBLIC! - Memorable and surprising Public Quotes from City Council Members
February 14, 2012 - Mayor Pro-Tem Lautenschleger said, about concerns from grandparents regarding exhaust fumes from Alicia Pkwy. blowing onto the sports field at the Community Center - "The prevailing wind is always off the ocean blowing East so it's blowing from the soccer fields onto Alicia and across that way."
Another fact checking problem. The Santa Ana Winds which are most common from
October through March blow from the East to the West - from Alicia Pkwy. and Paseo de Valencia right on to that sports field.
November 27, 2011 - Regarding the ordinance establishing parks as “Child Safety Zones, Council Member Joel Lautenschleger stated, “Let's make one thing perfectly clear, there have been no sex crimes against children in the City since we incorporated."
Should have done some fact checking before speaking so boldly, Mr. Lautenschleger.
According to information from the OC Sheriff's Dept. there have been 32 child molests in Laguna Hills in the past 11 years. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts.
January 10, 2012 - Council Member Songstad said, "I find it interesting that we are in a discussion where we are being asked to provide less information rather than more information, I thought transparency was all about providing more information."
To clarify for Council Member Songstad "Transparency" is not simply an amount of information - Merriam-Webster Dictionary (Transparency) - free from pretense or deceit, easily detected or seen through, obvious, readily understood, characterized by visibility or accessibility of information. Wikipedia (Transparency Behavior) - Transparency is operating in such a way that it is easy for others to see what actions are performed. All organizations have a transparency culture, but few have a culture of transparency, i.e., a culture of being aware of transparency and incorporating it routinely into how things are done.
October 11, 2011 - Regarding Intent to Vacate Public Service Easements (Tree Pockets) along Paseo de Valencia and between Alicia and La Paz. Mayor Songstad concluded with, "Alright its been moved and seconded. Everybody understand what the action is here? We're setting a public hearing, blah, blah, blah. All in favor"
June 10, 2008- Mayor Allan Songstad said "We have to go through a bidding process and sometimes the low bidder is not always the best contractor, but sometimes that's what we're stuck with."
Thank you Mayor Songstad, that is exactly what we have been trying to tell you about the Laguna Hills City Council "sticking " the residents with the same bad vendor - The Orange County Animal Shelter for the past 20 years.
October 25, 2005 - Mayor Allan Songstad, speaking about the Laguna Hills City Council said, "When you've been doing business in a certain way for 13 years you're not likely to change that."
So true, Allan, so unfortunately true unless you change members of the city council.
August 19, 1994 - LHCC Member Allan Songstad - From the Los Angeles Times Newspaper Article Collections - Orange County Focus - August 19, 1994 LYNN FRANEY - Laguna Hills Councilman Declines to Run for Reelection With Councilman L. Allan Songstad Jr. declining to run for reelection, at least one newcomer will gain a seat on the City Council this fall. Songstad said he never intended to run for a second council term and that he is not a "career politician." That leaves space for at least one of the challengers, Cindy Greengold, Saeid Hariri, Grant R. Marcus or Charmane Riggs.
Now, in 2012 with 19 years on the Laguna Hills City Council we are guessing Council Member Songstad has changed his mind about being not being a "career politician."
**CRIME IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD - For a roundup of Laguna Hills police calls check the Saddleback Valley News every Friday or click on -www.ocregister.com/news/saddleback You can contact the Sheriff's Dispatch at 949-425-1800.
WRITE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR of the Orange County Register Newspaper Letters to the Editor: E-mail to letters@ocregister.com Please provide your name, city of residence and phone number (phone numbers will not be published). Letters of about 200 words will be given preference. Letters will be edited for length, grammar and clarity
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
21 comments:
Carruth was itching to discredit Raghu when she got into his past relationship with the Southern California Community College district but stopped just short of crossing the line. But for the fact that more and more citizens are aware of the shenanigans by the career members of this council she would have not been so circumspect. That said...keep up the good work....
Did everyone see this?
Battle lines drawn over city manager report
July 14th, 2012, 12:30 am · · posted by Betty Talbert, letters editor
http://letters.ocregister.com/2012/07/14/battle-lines-drawn-over-city-manager-report/
Didn't Songstad commit the same type of misfeasance in office as cited in the Grand Jury report last night when he spoke about Bill Kogerman's employment with a political consulting firm and a million dollar award? It struck me that his comment was not on topic, had no bearing on the issue at hand and was intended solely to discredit Bill and Barbara.
I think there's there is to much of a similarity of intent between Songstad's comments to Dr. Doti and staff at Brandman and the comments he made last night about Bill Kogerman to let pass..In both cases his purpose is to discredit and smear his opponents from a position of authority.
The guy who spoke in defense of Songstad and asked for Barbara's resignation. He's a proud past member of the Grand Jury but did that organization a great disservice by dismissing their report about Songstad's abuse of power as not much more than poppycock.
What has happened to Mayor Carruth? She used to be a voice for citizens but seems to have made a radical change, why? She made it clear at the July 10 council meeting that she strongly defended Allan Songstad, and asked for a response to be made without prejudice to the Grand Jury but then took on that job herself. How is that going to work?
I attended that council meeting on July 10 and I expected a much better response from councilman Songstad. There were so many holes in Songstad's response that I was embarrassed for him. He said he did this alone when the Grand Jury and all the news stories showed him doing it with the Tustin councilman and the woman from the League of Cities. He said this was not a Laguna Hills matter but he was representing Laguna Hills saying how upset the City was, on and on and on. Is it that he can't see the holes in his own argument or does he assume the citizens are not paying attention and won't see them either? I can't imagine that Carruth and Lautenschleger are going to acknowledge all those holes in their response to the Grand Jury. This whole thing plays like a really bad B movie.
Hey, Watch Dog, I believe that it's just Songstad that doesn't want transparency. Other than Kogerman, I don't hear any of the others demanding it. They've been in office way too long with way too much to hide.
If Songstad was angry at being exposed then going after the professor and the students was retaliation, but if he wanted TRUTH providing all the correct information about the compensation should have worked for him. If you haven't been transparent before you can't expect people to believe you now. Sorry Songstad but my answer to Who Do You Believe is NOT YOU.
Did you see this story? Laguna Niguel placing more salary info online
http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-364318-grand-employee.html
"More detailed information about city employee salary and benefits will be available on the city's web site in response to an Orange County grand jury report that graded Laguna Niguel poorly. At Tuesday's meeting, city staff showed the council websites of other Orange County cities that received better grades from the grand jury. For example, Costa Mesa, which got straight A's."
You would never catch the City Staff telling the Laguna Hills City Council about other cities that got better grades, not on Channing's watch. It's good to see there are some cities that pay attention to Grand Jury Reports and respond appropriately. When Laguna Hills response is always NO to increasing transparency one has to wonder what more they have to hide.
Battle Lines Drawn Over City Manager Report
http://letters.ocregister.com/2012/07/14/battle-lines-drawn-over-city-manager-report/
3 comments - One from a Political Activist, Another from the Orange County Employee Association General Manager - both agreed council members Allan Songstad and Jerry Amante misused their positions to pressure Professor Smoller, 3rd one from a Laguna Hills resident was pro Songstad.
Hope you have seen all these -
On the CA. Grand Jurors' Association web site a report is posted from NORBERTO SANTANA JR. - Voice of OC.org - Divided Laguna Hills City Council Takes Aim at Grand Jury Report
“It makes me sick,” Songstad said. “I don’t like being part of the [grand jury] recommendations.”
Songstad further urged City Council members to avoid responding to the grand jury, but City Attorney Gregory Simonian told members they were required to respond.
http://cgja.org/feeditem/orange-co-divided-laguna-hills-city-council-takes-aim-grand-jury-report
On the California Grand Jury News web site
Orange Co City officials abused power, grand jury says byTeri Sforza, Orange County Register staff writer
http://cgja.blogspot.com/
From OC Weekly Bolgs by Matt Coker
Jerry Amante, Tustin Councilman, Has Grand Jury "Misfeasance in Office" Finding Marked With Call for His Head and Hiring as a Lobbyist
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/2012/07/songstad_amante_kogerman_grand.php
Why was there no story on the July 10 Council Meeting in the Orange County Register Newspaper? The Grand Jury Report is important information for the community. I know they reported on it in the OC Watchdog but to just ignore the opinions and comments from the council members at that council meeting is doing the community a disservice.
I would also like to congratulate council member Bressette for his reconsideration of the Hills Hotel sign in changing the number of times a day the message on the sign can change from 5 to 12. I can't imagine that changing the message on a sign either 5 or 12 times per 24 hours would cause any traffic problems and it is to Mr. Bressette's credit that he reconsidered, admitted an error in judgement and corrected it. I never hear of any of the other long term council members doing the same. It appears they believe they are incapable of ever making an error. I am also very proud of council member Kogerman who is doing exactly what we elected her to do which is obviously very unpopular with Songstad, Lautenschleger and Carruth. For Kogerman it takes a lot of courage and character to expose long term problems that others have fought to hide for so long and to try to make changes. For Bressette it takes courage and character to reconsider his opinions and to support at least some of the changes from Kogerman. Hope to see him supporting Kogerman more in the future.
I thought this would be of interest to you. I hope the City Council continues to publish agendas, etc. because according to this Brown Act Suspension, they will not have to do so. See Below.
http://www.davis-stirling.com/Newsletters/2012Newsletters/BrownActSuspended/tabid/3590/Default.aspx#axzz21sgAhTcE
July 29, 2012
Concerns have been raised because the California Legislature suspended the Brown Act (claiming it will save $96 million over the next three years). The suspension means that boards no longer need to (i) post meeting agendas, (ii) include a description of items to be discussed in closed session, and (iii) disclose what occurred in closed-session meetings.
What impact does this have on homeowner associations? None. The Brown Act applies to governmental agencies not common interest developments. HOAs are governed by the Davis-Stirling Open Meeting Act, which has not been suspended. Association boards are still required to post agendas and report what occurs in executive session meetings. Boards affected by the legislature's suspension of the Brown Act are county boards, school district boards, water boards and city councils.
COMMENT: I can think of better ways for California to balance its budget. Hiding behind closed doors is not one of them.
Did you see this in the Orange County Register? Hooray!! It's about time!
http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-367130-hills-laguna.html#article-comments
Published: Aug. 3, 2012 Updated: 8:53 p.m.
LAGUNA HILLS COUNCILMEN Lautenschleger, Songstad WON'T SEEK REELECTION
by Chris Boucly - THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
Found the on-line info on Songstad & Lautenschlager withdrawal...not really that informative. Wonder if we'll ever know what the real motives were? Regarding Dore Gilbert I would suggest that perhaps the most effective description of Gilbert would be "the Status Quo candidate".
August 6, 2012
Kogerman responds to announcement
Songstad, Lautenschlegger to give up Laguna Hills City Council seats
Note: On Thursday, Aug. 2, long-time Laguna Hills City Council members L. Allan Songstad and Joel Lautenschlegger announced that they will not seek re-election in November.
Council Member Barbara Kogerman has issued the following statement:
“As long-term Council members Songstad and Lautenschlegger transition from the Laguna Hills City Council, the entire community and I can thank them for the roles they played helping launch the city 21 years ago, guiding its development and overseeing the completion of the Community Center.
I also applaud them for their decision to limit their tenure in the spirit of term limits, particularly at this time when critical issues dominate the attention of the Laguna Hills City Council, including compensation abuses, lack of transparency and erosion of civility. These are issues that are best served by a fresh approach with comprehensive reform.
Now it’s time for our Laguna Hills residents to determine the candidates who can best chart the city’s future. As we approach the election in November I am urging your support for two candidates I believe will most effectively carry out reform in senior management compensation, business development and improved services for seniors, youth and animal owners-- Dr. Raghu Mathur and Mr. Andrew Blount. They have my enthusiastic endorsement.”
Council Member Barbara Kogerman, author of Laguna Hills’ term limits ordinance, was elected to City Council in 2010 on a platform of compensation reform and transparency.
Quote from councilman Lautenschleger in the OC Register 8/3 -"Laguna Hills has benefitted greatly since incorporation and I am confident the people will select someone dedicated to continue the mission we have established and to lead with the same commitment to do what is best for all our residents," he said.
Besides misspelling "benefitted" Lautenschleger got the whole message wrong. This is a great opportunity for Laguna Hills Residents to elect people who will benefit residents, by telling them the truth, and listening to them rather than believing that the council members "know what is best for all our residents". We've had 21 years of those who believed they knew it all and kept our residents in the dark.
It's interesting to note that as of Aug. 7 there are no comments on the Aug. 3 ocregister.com story about Lautenschleger and Songstad not running for reelection. No one, other then themselves, congratulating them on a job well done. It was a good decision for them to leave before they were voted out.
http://www.ocregister.com/news/city-367130-hills-laguna.html#article-comments
Published: Aug. 3, 2012
Aren't politics interesting. Bill Hunt has the endorsement of Craig Scott (Laguna Hills City Council Member who was defeated in 2010) and one of Bill's priority's is: advocate that future city employees enroll in 401k’s rather than expensive public retirement systems. Craig Scott assisted the Laguna Hills City Manager as a Labor Negotiator year after year and we now know about the over the top contract the City Manager has plus Bill Hunt would have had a Defined Benefits Plan that guarantees a monthly retirement benefit as an Orange County Deputy Sheriff, not a 401k. Hunt also has the endorsement of Songstad and Lautenschleger who voted for less transparency and supported the City Managers big salary and benefits so how does he make sense of all these things, I sure can't.
this is a very effective and helpful service.
Post a Comment