The Measure M litigation could end up costing the city tens of millions of dollars. The city attorney’s office found that Measure M was compliant with existing law but courts later found it to be unconstitutional. As city attorney, would have you done anything differently related to Measure M?

In 2018, the City Council decided to put a new tax on the ballot associated with water and sewer service to fill a $14 million hole in the general fund, funds that support police, fire stations and paramedics, libraries, repair streets and sidewalks, keep our parks open and clean, etc. At the time, a number of cities in California had adopted similar ballot measures and none had been challenged in court. The City Attorney’s Office evaluated existing law and advised the City Council on the risks associated with the ballot measure. The City Council chose to put Measure M on the ballot, and it was approved by the voters.  

Then a lawsuit was filed challenging the constitutionality of Measure M. The city attorney defended the measure, which had been approved by the voters, and 479 cities in California filed a brief in the Court of Appeal supporting the city’s position that the tax was constitutional. At the same time, a lawsuit was filed against Sacramento challenging a very similar ballot measure. In 2021, the Court of Appeal in the Sacramento case ruled their ballot measure was constitutional; however, months later, a different Court of Appeal ruled that the Long Beach Measure M ballot measure was unconstitutional. Thus, there is still no clear answer as to the legality of such ballot measures in California.

As City Attorney, I would have advised the City Council on the complexity of the law in this area and the risks associated with the ballot measure, which is the city attorney’s role under the City Charter. The City Council, as the legislative body of the city, is then responsible for making the decision whether to take a particular action.  

As city attorney do you believe that it’s your position to interpret policy to fit the City Council’s request or to protect the city from future lawsuits? When should the city attorney step in to tell the City Council that what’s being proposed is risky for the city?

The city attorney is the sole and exclusive legal advisor for the city, the City Council and all city commissions, committees, officers and employees. As such, the city attorney must review all policies and actions with the lens of the legal risk they pose to the city and advise the City Council, commissions and departments in an effort to minimize legal risk and avoid, if possible, future lawsuits. This is the work I have been doing my entire 30-year career.

The city attorney does not have a vote on or the ability to revise legislative policy decisions made by the City Council. As city attorney, I will advise the City Council on the legality of potential policies that may present liability for the city.

Homelessness is a major concern and public health issue in the city and region. Are there any legal approaches not currently being used that you think could help the city get the people the help they need?

I have assisted a number of cities in California attempting to address homelessness. Federal law in California aggressively protects the individual freedoms of residents, thereby making it challenging for cities to enact local laws to address homelessness. As a result, the city of Long Beach has created a multi-departmental team, which includes the city attorney’s office, to work on creative multifaceted solutions.

Homelessness needs to be addressed on a systemic level, not just by establishing shelters which provide accommodations for a night or a short period of time, after which the person goes right back to the streets. We need to provide access to mental health services and/or drug rehabilitation services, safe transitional housing, job opportunities along with more permanent affordable housing and a path forward from there. The city attorney’s office is a critical member of the city’s team working to create these opportunities.

How would you improve the public’s access to city documents? What kinds of policies would you put in place to ensure that documents which should be made public are made public?

I have worked closely with city and Port of Long Beach Public Records Act coordinators to ensure all staff handling PRA requests are educated as to the requirements of the PRA and the need to produce, and produce timely, all responsive records that are not subject to an exemption. As city attorney, I will continue to push for staff training and resources to fully comply with the PRA. 

What could the city do to lower the amount of money it pays out annually to legal settlements?

The city attorney’s office aggressively defends every action filed against the city to ensure the city is paying no more than necessary in legal settlements and judgments. In addition, the city attorney’s office reviews all claims and lawsuits filed against the city to determine whether changes need to be made by city departments to reduce the city’s risk and exposure to litigation.

First, the office reviews and investigates all claims made against the city and, if the claim has merit, we attempt to settle or resolve the claim before litigation is filed. The claims filed with the city and the description of the actions taken on these claims are posted on the city attorney’s website. If a lawsuit is filed, we review the case to determine the merits of the allegations. If an allegation has merit, we again attempt to settle the matter. We then meet with the leader of the department to explain the situation and discuss actions to be taken to ensure the situation is not repeated.

We also assess the data we gather through our review of claims and lawsuits to spot trends and work with departments to make them aware of any larger issues and any potential policy changes that could address the trends.

The Measure M litigation could end up costing the city tens of millions of dollars. The city attorney’s office found that Measure M was compliant with existing law but courts later found it to be unconstitutional. As city attorney, would have you done anything differently related to Measure M?

As co-counsel on this case, I would simply say the courts have ruled at both the trial and appellate levels that Measure M is unconstitutional. It is unfortunate if the city attorney did not counsel the mayor and City Council concerning the state constitutional restrictions on the assessment of water fees. Additionally, the city attorney should have cautioned the mayor and City Council about their inaccurate statements used to encourage voters to pass Measure M such as Measure M was “not a tax,” “only applied to surplus funds” and “would not raise water bills,” when in fact Measure M is a tax, was not assessed on surplus funds and allowed Water Department to raise water rates to pay for the 12% assessment. Also, misleading statements were made to voters that the city had transferred surplus water funds for over 60 years, when in fact, only the Board of Water Commissioners could decide to do so and historically used such “surplus funds” to fund water department operations and purchase of water.

As city attorney do you believe that it’s your position to interpret policy to fit the council’s requests or to protect the city from future lawsuits? When should the city attorney step in to tell the council that what’s being proposed is risky for the city?

The city attorney shapes every law and policy passed by the City Council. The League of Cities in its publication “City Attorney Ethical Principles” does an excellent job in summarizing that first and foremost, it is the duty of the city attorney to “provide advice and actions with the goal of promoting the rule of law in a free, democratic society. Because the public’s business is involved, within the city organization the city attorney should consistently point out clear legal constraints in an unambiguous manner, help the city to observe such constraints, and identify to responsible city officials known legal improprieties and remedies to cure them…”

The admonitions go further: “If a city attorney finds it necessary to advise the city that a particular course of action would be unlawful, the city attorney should strive to identify alternative approaches that would lawfully advance the city’s goals.”

Everywhere I go in Long Beach, voters tell me they want reform. They want a city government that is open, transparent, and accountable. They want a city government that protects them, makes their neighborhoods safe and reduces and not creates barriers for owning and operating a business.

I will bring that reform. The voters deserve no less.

Homelessness is a major concern and public health issue in the city and region. Are there any legal approaches not currently being used that you think could help the city get people the help they need? 

I am encouraged by the governor’s announcement of the Community Assistance, Recovery and Empowerment (CARE) Court to get people in crisis off the streets and into housing, treatment, and care. CARE Court will provide Long Beach an effective tool to deal with homelessness in a compassionate but firm manner. CARE Court is a new framework to get people with mental health and substance use disorders the support and care they need. 

CARE Court is aimed at helping people who are suffering from untreated mental health and substance use disorders leading to homelessness, incarceration or worse. 

As proposed, CARE Court takes a new approach to act early and get people the support they need and address underlying needs—without taking away people’s rights. 

CARE Court includes accountability for everyone—on the individual and on local governments—with court orders for services.

CARE Court connects a person struggling with untreated mental illness—and often also substance use challenges—with a court-ordered Care Plan for up to 24 months. Each plan is managed by a care team in the community and can include clinically prescribed, individualized interventions with several supportive services, medication, and a housing plan. The client-centered approach also includes a public defender and supporter to help make self-directed care decisions in addition to their full clinical team.

To make this work in Long Beach, we need more programs providing mental health and substance use care, as advocates for the homeless indicate we do not have sufficient programs now to meet these needs. 

As city attorney, I will appoint a task force and include the appropriate city departments to implement the CARE Court in Long Beach.

How would you improve the public’s access to city documents? What kinds of policies would you put in place to ensure that documents which should be public are made public?

The highlight of my service on the City Council was being honored at the White House as one of seven “Champions of Change for Open Government.” I believe deeply in the principles of transparency and accountability. As city attorney, I will make certain that all elected officials, the city manager, and all employees understand and comply with the California Public Records Act and Article 1 of the California Constitution which clearly state “access to information concerning the conduct of the people’s business is a fundamental and necessary right of every person the state.”

It is also critical that elected officials and city employees understand that when they communicate government business through their private accounts or on private devices, that such communications are public records.

The city is also required to make available a listing of all enterprise systems that store information about the public, and to post this catalog on its website. An enterprise system is a software application or computer system that collects, stores, exchanges, and analyzes information that the agency uses. It is a multi-departmental system or system that contains information collected about the public and a system of record.

As city attorney I will establish a Digital Privacy Taskforce comprised of business, nonprofit and community members to validate and provide input on the city’s digital privacy policy and strategy.

Finally, to save residents time and money requesting public records that may have already been released, I will work with the city manager to provide on the city’s website directions for the public to the location on the website where the public record is already posted.

What could the city do to lower the amount of money it pays out annually to legal settlements?

As the news media details yet another settlement paid by the city of Long Beach, voters are asking why isn’t something being done to prevent these claims from happening?

The Office of City Attorney must proactively assess and advise the city on potential risks and to provide training on how to avoid such risks. 

The city currently utilizes what is termed: “Traditional Risk Management” that typically only occurs after an incident has already happened and is done to prevent that situation from happening again. This is a very limited and costly approach.

As city attorney, I will establish a Task Force on Potential Risk Events and Situations utilizing Enterprise Risk Management which looks to the future and attempts to determine potential events and situations that could or are likely to occur. Every effort needs to be made to prevent claims against the city, not just pay them.

ERM is a best practice for government, although not currently required for local governments.

I especially believe that the city attorney needs to create a Legal Exposure Reduction Committee that will establish an annual citywide and departmental legal exposure reduction goal; create proactive city attorney procedures to advise departments on various methods to reduce legal costs; create procedures to discuss areas of potential exposure; develop and implement specific strategies calculated to prevent future claims and lawsuits; provide updated training on new changes in laws and policies for each appropriate department to implement; assess the efficacy of corrective action plans; review management training and implementation of city policies; review lessons learned; discuss areas of potential exposure; and report annually on their progress and efforts.

We need to put in place a requirement before settlement of amounts over $100,000 that the named department will provide a Corrective Action Plan (or CAP) that specifies how the finding(s) or non-compliance issue(s) will be corrected. The CAP must detail policies and/or procedures put into place to ensure the findings have been permanently resolved. More specifically, a corrective action plan explains what the program is now doing differently to ensure the finding(s) do not occur again. The CAP is confidential.

The Summary Corrective Action Plan mirrors the Corrective Action Plan, but removes all confidential information and is intended as a public document that will be posted on the City Council agenda.