Malibu has paid nearly $2 million over the last decade to a glad handing Sacramento consultant firm with minimal accountability, contrary to commonly accepted governmental practices,
The firm of California Strategies and the city of Malibu City stated when queried that there have been no written reports or evaluations in the near- ly 13 year relationship, despite rising calls echoing locally and across the State for more public transparency.
However, both firm principal Ted Harris and Malibu City Manager Reva Feldman declared that “updates and political context” have been provided verbally, with the Feldman stating in an e-mail that she “speaks with California Strategies multiple times a week.” Though she noted “we do not keep written logs of those calls or of meetings in Sacramento.”
In reviewing the City Council’s past agendas, as well as extensive documents in Freedom of Information requests of the city, uncovered was an item dated June 18, 2013 submitted by then city manager Jim Thorsen requesting a contract with California Strategies providing “government relations consultation,” be renewed and amended to include lobbying.
An attachment to the recommendation cited “vital” efforts by the firm on several pending State issues, and included monitoring Coastal Commis- sion actions. It concluded that the firm was “making friends in Sacramento” on the city’s behalf to obtain permits and grants. No follow could be located to the dated item.
Meanwhile, the firm’s Harris declared in an email in reply to a city request I prompted for “any responsive records” to a Freedom of Information inquiry (3.13.17) that was attached, “we do not have a written list of the City’s goals, objectives, and priorities in our files.”
In variance to the statement, Harris signature is on the firm’s recent contract with Malibu in which goals, objectives and priorities of the city are prominently listed. The executed contract further states “all files of the Consultant pertaining to the City shall be and remain the property of the City,” and “the consultant will control the physical location of such files.”
While there was scant details what services were actually performed and achieved under the contract, California Strategies like clockwork sub- mitted invoices each month for $12,500, for the last 154 months since July 2004, and totaling $1,925,000. There was an instance of the firm double billing, but this was caught by a Malibu city clerk and corrected.
In addition, a scan of reports obtained in the FOI request indicated tens of thousands of dollars have been expended by councilpersons Lou La Monte and Laura Rosenthal on numerous trips to mostly Sacramento, and also to San Francisco and Washington, D.C. Not found was any reference to California Strategies.
While their expenses were documented, with every Starbuck’s coffee, gratuity and hotel bill listed, no notation could be further found indicating what particular venue visited, what was discussed, and how it might affect Malibu. There have been brief oral remarks at Council meetings, of events attended but no specifics recorded.
In addition to the FOI request, the Internet was searched for any item involving the firm’s relationship to Malibu. Disclosed was an agenda item of a Council meeting several years ago in which the firm’s latest contract was up for renewal, and an earlier item, in 2004, when the original contract was announced and the firm promoted by then Mayor Sharon Barovsky.
There was a news report revealing the firm’s representation of U2 guitarist David Evans, better known as the Edge, in his 2009 quest to build five homes on the bluffs overlooking the Malibu coastline.
California Strategies also was under contract at the time with Malibu, which pressed by residents had added its voice in opposition to the project. A question of a conflict of interest was raised by Malibu, only to be rejected by the firm.
More questionable is the lack of accountability and transparency in the relationship between the firm and the city, especially since their contract calls for weekly and biweekly updates. It is hard to fathom that there were no written reports and records of alleged conversations, which since there also were no recordings would have to be rejected as hearsay.
My experience as a reporter for the New York Times, a federal regulatory agency official and later as a consultant to several firms and founda- tions, is that it was essential all correspondence and communications be at least dated and recorded, if only for billing.
Also queried in confidence were several venerable consultants and administrators. They replied that reports to clients were generally written, and the few oral would be logged and usually documented.
They added for the client this was what is called “a reasonable expectation of service, “ particularly in the public sector, which is more prone to inquiry. “Cover yourself,” is the guiding rule
One public administrator observed in general, and without reference to Malibu, the problem in many small cities is that elected officials tend to be inexperienced and vain, and easily manipulated by consultants. He added in his extensive experience a few unfortunately had nefarious motives.
As for staffs, he added that though possibly competent, they frankly tended to let consultants do their “heavy lifting” and anything that called for an extra effort, like advocating their city. He noted this has become a relatively simple matter in the age of the internet.
“These small cities, especially the wealthy ones, have become a honey pot for termed out legislators and former agency heads haunting Sacra- mento, and I guess most other state capitols,” he concluded in candor. At the same time, he and others observed that lame duck officials alert to post public service employment opportunities tend to be friendly to well connected consultants.
In conclusion, Malibu and the City Council should be concerned.
Raised is the question how indicative is City Hall’s relationship with California Strategies of its administration; its liaison with other consultants; and its own operations?
Needed to be addressed in particular is the contract with California Strategies. It has only a few months remaining, and can be suspended or terminated with five days notice, or amended to be more accountable.
In addition, what could be described as road shows, or simply the perks of select councilpersons and administrators, be monitored as to their actual value to the city, and generally a stricter cost benefit analysis be applied to municipal initiatives.
Meanwhile, the Council should review the prerequisite for diligent professional oversight of Malibu’s municipal operations and governance.
IN CONCLUSION, MALIBU SHOULD BE CONCERNED.
This report was prompted by a modest city press release announcing Mayor Lou La Monte, Council Member Laura Rosenthal and City Manager Reva Feldman “are heading to the state capitol to ensure that Malibu’s concerns are heard.”
The release (1.18.17) detailed the three having been appointed to select League of California Cities committees, and listed other public posts require travel to Sacramento, San Francisco and Washington DC on behalf of Malibu.
Noting that Malibu has a long-standing contract with the Sacramento-based consultant firm, California Strategies, for a broad scope of services involving governmental operations and representations, engendered several questions concerning city policy and priorities.
Not recalling any relevant public discussions, or municipal oversight, I initiated a search as a credentialed journalist and concerned citizen. This included two detailed Freedom of Information requests to the city, protracted reviews of Council Agendas, the Internet, and select interviews.
