Treseder Proposed Changes to Irvine’s Ethics Rules Miss the Point

The Anaheim cabal case is making other cities look internally at avoiding Anaheim’s plight but ignores the unique situation Anaheim had and this is a point of tonight’s Irvine City Council meeting.

Dr. Kathleen Treseder is proposing a number of changes regarding the way the city works with lobbyists and proposes an ethics panel.  Much of her plan doesn’t seem realistic and, if passed, is going to make it harder and more expensive for companies to work with the city on development efforts and city business.

 

Memo
To: Oliver Chi, City Manager
From: Kathleen Treseder, Councilmember KT
Date: September 5, 2023
Re: Lobbying Ordinance Reform and Ethics Committee Establishment

The City of Anaheim commissioned an independent review of corruption and inappropriate conduct in the proposed sale of Angel Stadium following the federal investigation of Harry Sidhu. An independent law firm was selected to investigate in August 2022 and made their findings public on July 31, 2023.

Upon review of the 315-page report, the City of Irvine was named 11 times in the context of a cannabis-related proposal in April 2018. In connection with this proposal, Melahat Rafiei, a political consultant, was indicted and pleaded guilty to a felony charge for attempting to defraud one of her political consultancy firm’s clients. She further admitted in court documents that she agreed to bribe two members of the Irvine City Council in 2018 on cannabis-related matters.

Upon review of the City of Anaheim investigation, there were several recommendations made by the law firm, including:

•Creating an Ombudsperson/Public Affairs Ethics Officer position.
•Adding protocols to prevent Council Members from directing staff, asprohibited by the Anaheim City Charter.
•Enhancing the IT/Electronics Policy related to digital equipment, cellphones, tablets, laptops, computers, and other items.
•Adding Subpoena Powers in Administrative Investigations.
•Amending the City’s Lobbying Ordinance to require employees who arelobbied to report this activity to the Ombudsperson/Political Affairs EthicsOfficer.
•Facilitating greater public input on major City Council actions (such as thesale of Angel Stadium).
•Amending the manner in which Council Members may agendize items.
•Considering a contractual supermajority to remove appointed City Officials.
•Enhancing the contract’s scope of work;
•Prohibiting providing public money to the Chamber of Commerce before anaudit and safeguards are put into place.
• Prohibiting providing public money to Visit Anaheim before an audit and safeguards are put into place.
• Enhancing the City’s ticket distribution system; and
• Revisiting the City Manager’s signing authority.

Based on the recommendations presented in the Anaheim report, I request that the Irvine City Council consider adding safeguards to increase transparency and undue political influence here in Irvine.

I request the following item be added to the September 12, 2023, City Council Agenda for Council review:

DISCUSSION REGARDING STRENGTHENING THE CITY’S LOBBYING ORDINANCE AND CREATING AN INDEPENDENT ETHICS COMMITTEE

As part of this request, I am asking the City Council to direct the City Manager to review the recommendations in the Anaheim report and develop for City Council consideration the establishment of an Ethics Committee, along with provisions that would strengthen disclosure and procedural requirements associated with our own Lobbyist Ordinance. This review should be conducted within 60 days of the passage of this item and brought back to the Council.

Regarding Irvine’s Lobbyist Ordinance, our current regulations require persons to register as a lobbyist if they receive compensation of $10,000 or more in a calendar quarter from a client for lobbying the City. At a minimum, the Lobbyist Ordinance should be strengthened to include:

• Reducing the compensation thresholds that trigger disclosure/registration requirements to require an individual who receives compensation of $500 or more in a calendar month for lobbying to register as a lobbyist.
• Requiring that any contractual engagement that provides a “success fee” in lieu of direct regular compensation be a triggering requirement to register as a lobbyist.
• Requiring anyone presenting before the Council on behalf of an organization as its designated representative to be an organization’s employee presenting before the City Council or register as a lobbyist.
• Adding a provision to the Lobbying Ordinance making certain violations a misdemeanor, with associated financial penalties.
• Mandating that all reports of lobbying activity required by the Code must be certified as true under penalty of perjury.
• Increasing the penalties associated with violating the City’s Lobbying Ordinance.
• Requiring that the newly established Ethics Committee conduct bi-monthly meetings to review, announce, and disclose all individuals who have registered as a lobbyist.
• Further, requiring the newly established Ethics Committee to administer City and State laws relating to campaign financing, contracts, governmental ethics, and lobbying.
• Amending the City’s Public Records Act policy to make all communications between registered lobbyists and elected officials and any communication between lobbyists and City Staff subject to public disclosure.
• Strengthening whistleblower protections for the public, City Staff, and elected officials who have seen violations of the Lobbying Ordinance or other illegal attempts to influence the Council (e.g., illegal threats of independent expenditures against a Councilmember unless they agree to vote a certain way on an issue before the City Council, businesses being told they have to retain a particular lobbyist or else their contracts will be held up, etc.). Staff should also develop a process to vet and report such claims should they be found to have merit.

Please place this item on the September 12, 2023, agenda for full City Council consideration.

A considerable number of these suggestions are not realistic or very cost-prohibitive.  And it shows Treseder’s weakness on issues of business dealings she doesn’t encounter in academia.

Treseder’s memo here misses the point.  The bigger concern of lobbyists and companies doing business with the city of Irvine (or any city for that matter) is dark money in political campaigns.  She comes close in the last bullet, but my translation here is this: she was told, “You won’t get elected unless you hire Melahat Rafiei” and “You can’t get anything done in this city unless you work with Patrick Strader.”  Am I close?  And there have been a number of anonymous mailers sent to residents of Irvine — for years — targeting Council member Larry Agran.  No return address.  No committee identifications.  Treseder’s proposals will have no impact on these anonymous mailers whatsoever.

Treseder’s initial entry into her council candidacy was all Progressive Solutions and Melahat.  I have every email and Treseder positive gushes over the opportunity to work with Rafiei.  And while it’s documented I’m not a fan of Mr. Strader, if the Good Doctor wants to see Beyonce’ in Irvine, LiveNation is really the way to go (with a re-negotiated deal more favorable to the city). If Strader is compensated to represent the best live entertainment company seeking a presence in Irvine, so what?  If he represents the company for no fee, so what?  I still think LiveNation is where we go but with a re-negotiated contract. Otherwise, you get Kool & the Gang with the Village People (like the Hollywood Bowl did this year).  My preference is keep the venue we already have.

This effort is Treseder’s payback for the city council voting not to investigate Rafiei as she wanted.  There’s a lot of pouting if she doesn’t get her way on a city council vote or action from the OCPA, and for someone who likes to say “I’ve heard a rumor that…” setting herself up as a bastion of ethics is hyprocritical.

It’s been nearly a year since Treseder talked about an FBI investigation in Irvine that’s goine nowhere except for a disclosure that city manager Oliver Chi was interviewed by the FBI.  At a Democrats of Greater Irvine meeting earlier this year, Treseder let members know the FBI told her there’s an FBI file on Irvine Mayor Farrah Khan, fueling the notion Khan is a target of an FBI investigation (no such target leter was ever sent to Khan).

Of course there’s an FBI file on Khan; she’s a Muslim woman who’s traveled aboard on city business and met President Biden on the tarmac at John Wayne Airport during the 2022 election cycle.  There’s no way Khan would have been allowed to welcome Biden personally if she was the target of an investigation.  Shot, I have an FBI file  — my PR firm specializes in cybersecurity and I’ve had clients in Moscow, Budapest, Stockholm, and Tel Aviv so of course I have an FBI file (confirmed by a source).  The problem with Dr. Treseder sharing FBI details is the FBI will not confirm anything which gives her safe harbor to start the very rumors that helped get her elected.  I will ask once again — what federal crime was committed in Irvine?  And when will the FBI let us know anything (here’s the spoiler…even if its nothing, the FBI will not confirm or deny an investigation; if nothing happens by 2026, Treseder will be called on to explain.

The effort to make drastic changes in Irvine’s approach to ethics — which is already one of the strongest in the county — attracted the attention of former Irvine Mayor and Council member Beth Krom, who posted this statement on a social media feed: