HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport on History of Authorized Actions in the Moore v City \VINGT 2000 Main Street,
-. oy Huntington Beach,CA
_.-- e _: City of Huntington Beach 92648
o _ 4 Qi
ANTV0
File #: 23-739 MEETING DATE: 9/5/2023
In response to Dec 20, 2022 City Council direction, report on history of authorized actions in
the Moore v. City, Gates lawsuit and report on review of RWG involvement
City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 1 Printed on 8/31/2023
powered54 LegistarM
p r
r
^l
a
HUNTINGTON BEACH
4
111111111110.
■
PA RT
, (a, in .,„
D . ,• p . ■ . o •.,� �,
1 T 1 .1 ■ . � . . FOR ��•
I ' 7 '. . ■ ' �� . r: Michael E. G r�° ••• <9 ‘<<.•
a■ a . ■ ' - ti 1 City Attorney
O.
in 1 p . 1 CI ■ � �
,
..n . zwil 1.54.101,1 . _ _
iti. ICI ......,- - •
Q
El - /,.., _il : !...... 0• F. o .'• r ■. 0 =
• ill - 1 1 • C• AB - • ••' ,•, .. 0
www.huntingtonbeachca.gov/files/users/city-attorney/Review-of-Steele-RW �v-
, /
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
December 20, 2022, H Item by Council Member McKeon:
A lawsuit was brought in 2018 by former attorneys
Neal Moore and Scott Field against the City of 0 .. .13r . 0
Huntington Beach and City Attorney, Michael Gates. 1 �.z .
For years, City Council met with handling attorneys, ; o' o •• :• "o
including outside attorneys from Greenberg Gross in 1z .2:01. . I lr
.11 Is
Closed Session about the lawsuit. The 2018 City
Council viewed this lawsuit as a frivolous suit, else the
City Council would not have met in Closed Session
multiple times to direct the handling attorneys for
three years to prepare this lawsuit for trial.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
December 20, 2022, H Item by Council Member McKeon:
The City Attorney is the City' s attorney
designated bythe people at election time. The 0 '• o . • • 0
g p p � � ��� .. •. •
City Charter is clear about this and City . • _'�� .
� o •� . .o . •
Council was not at liberty to hire their own + .
T J .•
attorney behind closed doors to conduct any ' •' - „ • ' '
investigations or perform any legal work. This �� _ 4.i.".....I
Steele Investigation, in my view, was nothing
more than a political witch hunt - all done in
secret.
F-.r
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
December 20, 2022, H Item by Council Member McKeon:
Mr. Steele never interviewed Mr. Gates, the person
-. - •
at the center of this "investigation," nor did Mr. 0 • 1. ° •. • • 0
.•g I.r ■ -
_ 1
Steele interview anyone from Mr. Gates's office, 'ram 14. ' D .
any of the Greenberg Gross attorneys, and he did 14.; •I - •� ° • • •
■ • III 1■ t ■�
TT
not interview anyone of the Councilmembers who • •- m • .1 ' .i
F. ° .� •..i° f2
were actually present in the 9 Closed Session
meetings and who made the decisions and
witnessed first-hand Mr. Gates's conduct in the
handling of the case.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
December 20, 2022, H Item by Council Member McKeon:
4-3 Vote, COUNCIL ACTION:
1 . Waive the attorney-client and Closed Session 0..
N. ., o ' '. . 0 3
- - i:•."
confidentiality privileges for the Closed Session . la AI: f, ` '�=
Meetings on the Moore, Field v. City, Gates lawsuit I.
.D L . 0 • • flIFCI• .
for the sole purposes of allowing Mr. Gates to give 1, 441. . I •
his side of the story - to return to CityCouncil with a •' ' ':
public presentation on what was discussed and 0 . 1i _ 1IWm!
decided (by Councilmember votes) in those
Closed Sessions
HE) r.,..,..„
,.
,..
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
December 20, 2022, H Item by Council Member McKeon:
4-3 Vote, COUNCIL ACTION:
- -
2. Waive the claimed attorney-client and any other CI . 1, o .. .. . 0
confidentiality privilege on any and all
communications between City, Councilmembers ; o••� ' o • •• ;. - %
and Craig Steele and his attorneys regarding this a{ •'. le, ,� . 4
• • 1
"investigation." City Manager to preserve all - •.
'F. 0 .'•..i 0' - :,
emails/texts/communications between City and 11 . " 'I - ' •
..iii
Craig Steele and RWG and between former City
Manager Oliver Chi and RWG _..
[--13
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
December 20, 2022, H Item by Council Member McKeon:
4-3 Vote, COUNCIL ACTION:
El 3. City Attorney, after review of the aforementioned o •4•
'•e• •
communications and RWG invoices, return to City "IL 1
.
•
Council with recommendations if any further action ; '' ' o : :: I
could be taken against RWG for the spending of 1, , ' . • :I ,
taxpayer money on the "investigation," done behind - _ mar
F. CI .�•... o'
closed doors and away from the public visibility and 0 •• 'I - ' ..■i
accountability.
F.B
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
Filed in 2018 by attorney Neal Moore, who had voluntarily retired from the City._
:.Attorney's Office in 2017, and attorney Scott Field, who even though having filed a "
lawsuit, continued to work in the City Attorney's Office for 3 more years. Both
alleged age-discrimination and a hostile work environment.
The defense of the case was that those two attorneys, after years of many
attempts at correction, refused to meet the expectations of the City Attorney's
Office; and, after many years of demonstrating "very poor" legal judgment, both
were disciplined for lack of competence, of which had resulted in substantial
monetary exposure to the City. HUNTINGTGN BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM — REVIEW OF RWG
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
All of 2019 and 2020, the Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit had been
: litigated aggressively, and for those two full years, the 2018 City Council
repeatedly voted to take the case to trial and authorized payments for
outside counsel, i.e., that there was no merit to the case or to settling.
(Peterson, Semeta, Hardy, Carr, Posey, Delgleize, Brenden)
Two years and the previous City Council never expressed concerns
over the handling of the case. There was never any concern by anyone
about attorney ethics or conflicts of interest.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
November 3, 2020 - City Election
Kalmick, Moser and Ortiz elected
New City Council sworn in December 2020
Carr, Moser, Kalmick, Posey, Delgleize, Ortiz, Peterson
EB
xUNI1NG10X BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
In an unexpected turn, during an April 19, 2021 , Closed Session, the new 2020 Cites
Council voted 5-2 to settle the lawsuit for $2.5 million.
While the new 2020 City Council voted 5-2 to settle this lawsuit for $2.5 million, which
had been considered "frivolous" by the previous City Council, I refused to settle. I was not a
part of the Settlement Agreement, I did not consent to settlement, and I did not sign the
agreement. I wanted my day in court - I was denied by the City Council decision.
Nevertheless, I was dismissed by the Plaintiff attorney because they were pleased with the
very favorable settlement and wanted to put case to rest.
(Carr, Moser, Kalmick, Posey, Delgleize - Aye; Ortiz, Peterson - No)
HE) „sp.
v �r
HUNTINGTON BEACH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
( -N
City of Huntington Beach
Organizational Chart
Adopted Budget — FY 2021/22
J
THE PEOPLE
` llY CITY CLERK 1 CITY COUNCIL 1 CfrY
Arrr�nNry Mayor TREASURER
MayorPro- em
mom► ►. City Council Members
tic supwrt �. ,/
a dons
J
Recoos [
Lapaoon wprrno j CITY
MANAGER
camnbrev i
ProSecAton r
L,
in ,,,,,e,
I I l I
ASSISTANT
,,JNTINGTON BEACH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
Section 309, City Charter:
City Attorney is Elected by the People to:
" Represent and advise the City Council and all City
officers in all matters of law. . . [and] Represent and
appear for the City in any or all actions or proceedings in
which the City is concerned or is a party. . . "
FE3 ,
xUX11XG10X BEACH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
City of Huntington Beach, AR 201 :
"The City Attorney at his or her sole discretion may choose
to contract with outside legal counsel or provide the legal
services through the City Attorney ' s Office. Once outside
legal services are identified and retained, the City
Attorney ' s Office will provide oversight and monitoring in
order to control quality and costs of the outside legal -
services . "
v
H11MIIpG10X BEACH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
The Court of Appeal stated about our City Charter:
"The City Council may hire other attorneys to help the City
Attorney discharge her official duties, but may not relieve
her of such duties . Any such attorneys hired by the City
Council are under the City Attorneys supervision and have
no authority to give opinions or act independently of the
City Attorney. " (O 'Connor v. Hutton, 1981 )
HUNTINGTON BEACH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
Case Law on Elected Attorney:
The City Attorney ' s powers are plenary. The City Council
cannot usurp the powers or duties of the City Attorney.
Courts have expressly recognized the rule that a public
agency may not contract and pay for services which the law
requires an elected official to perform . (See McQuillin, Municipal
Corporations; Jaynes v. Stockton, ( 1961 ) 193 Cal.App.2d. 47; Merriam v. Barnum, 116 Cal.
619; Montgomery v. Superior Court, ( 1975) 46 Cal.App.3d 657) B „,
HUNTINOTON BENCH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
Also during an April 19, 2021 , Closed Session, newly elected Council
Member Dan Kalmick called for an "Independent Investigation" into the City
-- Attorney's "handling" of the Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit. Council
Member Kalmick alleged "ethical" concerns over "conflicts of interest" and
"overbilling" by outside law firm, Greenberg Gross. Those allegations, even after
thousands spent investigating, were never substantiated.
City Council voted 5-2 to have former City Manager retain an
Independent Investigator to investigate/review the City Attorney and the case.
(Carr, Moser, Kalmick, Posey, Delgleize - Aye; Ortiz, Peterson - No)
HE)
HUNTINGTON BEACH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
"Independent" Investigation .,
May 13, 2021 , Oliver Chi officially hires ' =-
Craig Steele i
o _
of Richards Watson Gershon �,
Notably, the newly seated City Council after 2020 never voted publicly to waive any
attorney-client or Closed Session privileges to allow the "Independent Investigator" to review
any confidential lawsuit documents or related confidential communications. This is important. To
properly waive any privilege or confidentiality by a Council, it must be recorded publicly.
This never occurred - this is important.
-N."- Ff3"`.r" -, .
V --
HUNTINGTGN BEACH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
What is an " Independent Investigation "
Hiring an attorney for an "Independent Investigation" is used to achieve an
OBJECTIVE or IMPARTIAL review of the facts. "Independent" or Special Counsels are
"outsiders" who impartially gather facts and impartially evaluate them. They are
disinterested in the outcome of the investigation and have no financial interest in
working with one of the parties.
Importantly, Independent or Special Counsels do not establish an attorney-client
relationship with the party who retained them to conduct the investigation. We retain
Independent Investigators all the time - there is no attorney-client privilege established.
This is important to what happened here.
HE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
Tr
By,„ i
the way, if retainingSteele was permissible and
y
everything was above board . . .
Why were related documents not disclosed
by Oliver Chi when asked a year later?
FIB
HUNTINGTON BEACH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
In 2022, Oliver Chi was requested repeatedly to
produce records evincing the retainer/work of Steele and 11
RWG (even via CPRA requests) . . . response: there were no
such records or documents.
NOTE: City Attorney asking for documents regarding use of
outside counsel and getting no response.
HOWEVER, what Oliver Chi said was not true -
As will be seen, there were plenty of records!!!
FE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
PROPRIETY OF CRAIG STEELE RETAINER
,......
ac ,, Oliver Chi Oliver Chi
May 7,2021
. ,,,,,,,.KKK. Mal'7,2021
. G , „,,,„.,,., ,.
Our legal relationship and the terms of this agreement
of the State of California.
Exhibit 4
In order for the Firm to work on this matter,please si At the 1�sk tlrrir r 1
letter to me. d�rt'(lion of the
City Cotrncil,b r.,•
I look forward to working with you and the City. C°r/duct in utv + . V.r 2 vote pry gttril 19,2021,RWG is dirn
Mav�,2021 a t4 ati G into the Cit
f$COtt fICI(1V• a?iChnClon' YAtt°r1)e
BY EMAIL C/f Y S overall handlinP u/the
Y ofHuntington/leach
Very truly yours AS l>art of
Oliver Chi that 1'pY1raY,
ManaCer determine if aptttirabie indusir
city /A ass ess internal practices
4
City of Hums^B1O^Beach Y and within the
/or fega(standards are City Attt
g9-1 Durinp,the r consistently
2000 Main Street eview note in
con Beach'r alit°rnia 92 Craig A.Steele within
Hunti^fS the Yothcrirrcpufaritiestha
A reement V Attorne • t are i
Legaj$ervic0s g Y s Office related to
rovlde additi�' The City Mana this case or oth ed as it rel,
Deer ppr.Chi rtun.ty to P This letter Agreed and Accepted: providing gel"s of/ice er matters.
ave the°P� the"city ntheUtet' ' City of Huntington Beach drug docun1ents or w'll co°perute by sch
eawe are very Pleased to h peach lg oth edulin
;ty of Huntington reementsbetwee base er back g interviews
to the legalser-lcesag ill set fortht ground information.
services iCes,this fetter wbasia to the City Mar as deemed t
replace,the existing call"
cstu,,G"1 for. ipa..laed se CBS on an"on
general municipal law sere Date: 5/I 3/aoct1
and staff• Weal municlpallaw issues 64":---
regarding B al fees for these get
resent the City Itereln. Our leg t exceed By:
wevii11reP ecified wp1no iSae
rms sP m this letter a^d 1 amount Oliver Chi
based on the to Beth) n add'tiona which the f irn
at the rates specified
a on Title: City Manager
be billed dollars t51o0, terms uP ices and
thousand We write to set forth the
will bill for our s
'',and the baCitY. sh uP°n which we at the direct") the C
n of
Uq hour! 12262.0004/2442371.1
M mr Aces for the,._..,ire than ten 0 rrah\
" INDEPENDE T" JVESTIGA - . 1
37th Floor
213
Avenue
350 South Grano
213b6.0075
csteele@rwgi,w cornIR lo'An
gates,CA 90071
r vglaw corn
July 31 , 2021 Letter, Steele
i4TTORNEY—CLIENT PRIVILEGE
the role
July 31,2021
CONFIDENTIAL CONFIOENTIAI
This rrwtenar is Subject to the attorneyctent
privilege and/or attorney work product protection
"We take seriously
thathas been assigned t o or otherwise is privileged or confidential not
disclose the contents hereof. Do riot fiiie with i
fly
Oliver Chi a.®y�.;i;,a records
records.
City Manager
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
us and the need to
• • Huntington Beach,California g2648
Re: Review of Moore and Field v. Gates and Cit o Huntin ton Beach matter
provide impartial and
independent legal advice Dear Oliver:
At the City Council's direction,the City of Huntington Beach
and conclusions to the &Gershon("RWG")to provide a review of the handling and s,City")ttlementained of the above- Watson
referenced lawsuit by the City Attorney's office and outside counsel. We take seriously the role
that has been assigned to us,and the need to provide impartial and independent legal advice
• • (such
conclusions to the City Council. Under California Rule of Professional Conduct 1.13(a)the
City C o u n c i I ethical obligation of any lawyer employed or retained by an organization as the City)is to
the entity itself,and not to any individual. The entity acts and directs the engagement through
its duly authorized directors and employees;in this case the City Council and you as the
Council's agent under provisions of the City Charter. However,we do not represent you
individually, or any individual member of the City Council.
The City Council has asked that we provide a letter that briefly outlines the City Council's
authority to commission this review of the t.,,,..,.:. -- ,
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
RWG Report by Craig Steele of July 5, 2022
First Sentence :
"The CityCouncil requested in Mayof 2021 that Richards,
a
Watson & Gershon ( " RWG ") provide an independent review of
the City ' s handling of an employment-related lawsuit against
City Attorney Michael Gates and the City, brought by two
now-former employees in the City Attorney ' s office . "
HE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
Steele Letter of December 23, 2021 to FPPC
First Sentence :
" I have been retained to serve as special counsel to the City
Council of the City of Huntington Beach for a review of the
City ' s handling of a lawsuit. . . "
(***note " handling of a lawsuit" )
tl
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
Oliver Chi hired
Craig Steele
of Richards Watson Gershon
1 . Steele worked with Oliver Chi for years in Monrovia
2. Worked for Mayor Joe Kalmick for years as City Attorney
of Seal Beach
FB ,
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
The California League of Cities advises: refrain from
selecting lawyers to serve as independent or outside
counsel who are friends or colleagues of council
members to avoid the appearance of "cronyism . "
Practicing Ethics: A Handbook for Municipal Lawyers,
League of Cal Cities.
HE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
,
,,
Steele boasts that he worked for partisan : _
" political figures such as U .S. Senators Albert Gore, Jr., Alan
Simpson, and Lloyd Bentsen, Assembly Speaker Willie Brown,
Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, and Honolulu Mayor Frank
Fasi. " - Craig Steele
https://www.rwglaw.com/people-craig-steele
HE3 ,.
„,„
,.
„do.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
RWG Report by Craig Steele of July 5, 2022
Steele was not even qualified to review " litigation " matters! -
Second Paragraph - Steele had NO LITIGATION EXPERIENCE:
" I have been a Municipal Law practitioner for my entire career of
nearly 30 years, with over 25 years as a sworn contract City
Attorney in four cities. I have been the City Attorney in Monrovia
since 2002, where former City Manager Oliver Chi served for a
period as City Manager prior to coming to Huntington B
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
RWG Report by Craig Steele of July 5, 2022
Steele was not even qualified to review " litigation " matters!
!Third Paragraph - Outside of His Expertise:
" I was engaged to look at the record and evaluate how the
litigation was handled, and to advise whether it might have been
handled in a different way. . . "
FE1 "‘„.„.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" ► ESTIGATION
Attorney-Client Privilege - Confidential Correspondence - Moore
/ Field v. Gat
Chi,Oliver
A review of emails with Steele To Carr,Kim Delgleize Barbara Ffi F.Fi �i.
Kalmick,Dan; Posey,Mike Moser,Natalie 6olton,Rhonda
Craig A.Steele icsteele rwglaw.com)
show Ltr to Oliver Chi.PDF
i;E v
Good afternoon Mayor and City Council!
Steele gave the 2020 City .ttached for your reference is a correspondence prepared by outside Craig Steele of the firm RWG,in response tc
made at our 7/20 closed session meeting.The overview is detailed,given the nature of the
questions about the matter,please don't hesitate to let me or Craig know.Also,regarding the review that
Council advice on hiring overall assessment is continuing, situation,and if you he
g and we expect to have additional details to report within the next several weeks.
Please note that Council Member Peterson is not included on this email comes ondence.In discussions
he shared with me his belief that it is illegal and improper for the City Council to be coordinating
him [Steele] urrently engaged. Further withMr.
• • • ,Mr.Peterson specifically and explicitly requested that he be excluded from any and all
orrespondences,discussions,and involvement in the review of the Moore/Fields v. Gates the review that w,
he is not being included on this email distribution.
/City of HA matter.To t
Erik Peterson o t •'s an aside,as you'll read in the attached memo prepared by Craig,it is our opinion that the review that
is both proper and legal.
s being uni
Hope that everyone has a terrific rest of the weekend,and talk soon!
included live
Oliver
•fiver Chi_ _ __
ity Manager
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
City Attorney Issue
A review o f e m a i l s with Steele CA Craig Steele <CSteete@ glaw.com>
Del leiz
9 e Barbara
- Chi,Oliver
S h O W. Reply <e Reply All �_Forts
ONFIDENTIAL:ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE
Mon 12/20.•2
s,
Mayor—
It was a pleasure speaking with you today,As you re
Steele
gave Mayor of the City Council seeking outside legal advise. quested,here is a suggested talking point which advocates for a moderated approach to t
' „I appreciate the input from everyone who weighed in on this issue.In m
to i
recognize.Local government in a my view,there are legitimate
D e I g I e i z e "talking points" ouncilmembersen tweo legal and substantive City
like Huntington can dependglen Beach is complicated and litigiousgsnd a number of important
onopinions
the Cityneedlegal
advice his staffexpertise to helpPortant inter
cainfn en ly,when that Attorneyis.or ias d hiseen to provide that service,but us maketainformed ca decisions about part-time,l volunteeraveo City
entity,like the City, explained to sometimes we cannot. what's best for the City.
the lay me,the California Rules of Professional Responsibility we, s the aa Frequently,
ew instances where that has must
ha take direction fromCity Council have to be able
that entity's Board of Directors—the City dictate that when
• • • veil,protecting his interpretationPPened and v✓e must find a waya lay
advocating hiring him heir actions of the authority to address that. Council in this case.Unfortunately,
represe
must be respected,but the r is note City Charter
stone. Undoubtedly,Mr Gates has articulated eon important y ✓ have sf
may give him over legal matters in the City.The voters ado
•nd I do not believe the of intern
authority in the charter is a clear cut asadopted thatty charter a
hat the City Council"shall have
pretty dear.But with theallocation control of all legal business" Mr.Gates saysat we it is.For ys"to example, 304 b
pretty cle of But Charter should provisionlan may of"employ rpret attorneys" O of the City Charter s
th
is the prima clarify these issues.I respectareas of interpretation. y to take charge of legal issues.That seems
or
op
primary authority.Council,oc.In we hoattorney-client the role of the elected City y Attorney.
And for the good thatf an
hat we can define the circumstances under which the City Attorne . City and the efficient
Cityq relationship the Council
can e give the directionin and should not be advice,te without
byitst la
Attorney. V But I also know in any city the City
Y I think we should draw up Council can seek a second opinion,or Cou
voters ey.approve a common sensethat definition
and
he
o draft a proposed make the charterspecialized legallawyer.I believe
more clear s that il/ ity these ues and we for I bshould
ask s t
P posed charter amendment to that effect as soon ash to os ibe Cityapproval of ti
lieve
Attorney/City Council/City Manager relationship
Let me know what Possible."
you think. and we should ask sty
Craig
Craig A.Steel.
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
CA Craig A.Steele <CSteele@rwglaw.com
To Del leiz
A review o f e m a i l s with Steele Cc Joyce,SaBarbara; Bolton,Rhonda; Kalmick Dan �t Fp,
You forwarded this message on None.
Draft of Potential Charter Amendment Lan
Show. 15 KB 9uege.DOCX
PAG re;i;io ;to Su6committe Draft of Potential Charter
• • • Amendment Language_Revd,DOCX
Steele a s s i ste d Oliver Chi CONFIDENTIAL;ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE
Mayor and Councilmembers:
and 2020 Council I ap°IOg1ze for the delay in forwarding
2 required documents for
COCor until rdda discussion at the subcommittee
citations.I will ID isolationsa i to y I am completingmiaft meeting
tomorrow.I have
revised text of agin confidential draft form.In the meantime,I amto this been deal
myreport document and verifying,
Members with 2022 recommended for charter discussion amendmentwith M report recommends.
Gates.With no compromise,
It goes much further
to than the text the subcommittee
necessary.The highlighted text is new.Toattaching to email tl
revisions fore discussionighligand, promise,there appearsm
close the loop, be no reason toPreviou
presumably,re I am also attaching the previous) r propose less than what
section. V proposed text with
proposed Charter Thanks and,again,I a Mr.Gates prc
apologize for the delay.
Craig
Craig Steele
Amendments
Atro»>ey
la
RICHARDS WriT«,., __
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
Also, recent review of invoices show that from 2020, the
City paid thousands for legal services to Craig Steele and his
law firm, RWG, where he is an equity partner. These legal
services were quietly requested by the former City Manager
Oliver Chi without City Attorney consent or approval, and
therefore no oversight or accountability. HE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
Beginning in 2020, Steele and RWG provided the following services to City,
among others:
• Consulting on Shayna Lathus case
• Preparing 2022 Charter Amendments for 2020 Council
• Advising on Election Law (s)
• Attorney work on Separation Incentive Program
• Attorney work on DBFOM Public Works
• Attorney work on various Personnel Matters
• Consulting with Council Members on Politics
• Providing Talking Points to Mayor re Hiring Outside Legal
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
Those legal services were not authorized by the me or anyone from my City Attorney Office.
They were:
• Initiated without the City Attorney's knowledge or consent
• Signed Retainers without City Attorney's consent
• Services Billed without City Attorney consent or review of invoices
• Billed by RWG without any City Attorney oversight as to what was being
billed and how much was being billed
• Paid by the City without any City Attorney oversight as to what was being
billed and how much the City was paying
• All done at taxpayer expense with no accountability
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
In recently discovered email, Steele revealed
his bias and lack of impartiality, " Independence. "
On December 16, 2021 , Steele wrote to Chi about the
upcoming 2022 proposed Charter Amendments:
"ask the voters to improve the system and then he [Gates]
can take all his arguments and shove them up his ass"
- December 16, 2021 email from Craig Steele to Oliver Chi
HUNTINGTON BEACH
" INDEPENDENT" INVESTIGATION
RWG Report by Craig Steele of July 5, 2022
After the City spent over a year of time on this --=
" Independent Investigation, " and thousands of dollars paid to
RWG, the Steele final Investigative Report concluded . . .
"I did not find evidence of any violation of the law by the City
Attorney, the current members of his office, or the Greenberg
Gross firm." pg . 27 Steele/RWG Report
FE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
HISTORY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS ON MOORE, FIELD
_41
;%;
Brief Case Handling History
-4
HISTORY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS ON MOORE, FIELD
January 10, 2019 - Served with Lawsuit
SAME DAY - I Internally Announced my Recusal
Designated Williams to Conduct RFP
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
January 22, 2019 - Gates announces recusal verbally
and in writing
Council Votes 7-0 for Williams' rec's;
Retain law firm of Greenberg & Gross
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & Delgleiz )
HUNTINGTON BEACH
HISTORY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS ON MOORE, FIELD
What is " Recusal " ? - An attorney steps away from
representing a client due to a " conflict of interest, " which is a
legal determination made by a lawyer. -01
Defendants/Clients still " communicate " and participate
in the attorney-client relationship ( Rules Professional Conduct,
Rule 1 .4)
There was no conflict of interest to participate in the
litigation as a defendant
HUNTINGTON BEACH
HISTORY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS ON MOORE, FIELD
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
June 3, 2019 — Status of Case by attorneys _
No Vote Taken
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & Delgleize) n.
July 1 , 2019 — Status of Case by attorneys
Council Votes 6 - 1 (Peterson absent) to
authorize $200,000 for GG attorney's fees
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & Delgleize)
FB
HUNTINGTON BEACH
HISTORY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS ON MOORE, FIELD
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
March 2, 2020 - Status of Case by attorneys
Council Votes 7-0 to authorize
$750,000 for Greenberg Gross attorneys fees
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & Delgleize)
May 18, 2020 - Status of Case by attorneys
Council Votes 7-0 to reject
$5.8 million demand by plaintiffs
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & Delgleizffl
HUNTINGTON BEACH
HISTORY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS ON MOORE, FIELD
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
September 8, 2020 - Status of Case by attorneys --
Council Votes 7-0 to reject
Renewed $5.8 million demand by plaintiffs
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & Delgleize)
November 2, 2020 - Status of Case by attorneys
Council Votes 7-0 to authorize
$500,000 for Greenberg Gross attorney's fees
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & Delgleiz
HUNTINGTON BEACH
HISTORY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS ON MOORE, FIELD
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
November 3, 2020 - ELECTION
(Posey, Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Moser, Ortiz & Delgleize)
December 21 , 2020 - Status of Case by attorneys
No Vote Taken
(Posey, Delgleize, Kalmick, Carr, Moser, Ortiz & Peterson)
HUNTINGTON BEACH
HISTORY OF COUNCIL ACTIONS ON MOORE, FIELD
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
April 19, 2021 - Status of Case by attorneys
Council Votes 5 -2 to accept
$2.5 million settlement proposal
New Council Majority "orders"
" Independent Investigation "
(Posey, Delgleize, Kalmick, Carr, Moser, Ortiz & Peterson)
FE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
OTHER IMPROPRIETIES INVOLVING STEELE
There were many concerning Closed Sessions held often listed as "Significant Exposure to
Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (2) of Subdivision (d) of Gov. Code Section 54956.9," in which I was
"excused" by the City Council majority; Council Member Erik Peterson also left believing that such a
conference of City Council behind closed doors without the City Attorney present was a violation of -7141
the Brown Act. A review of RWG invoices and emails shows that subject matter discussed was not
potential litigation with significant exposure to the City; rather, they were closed-door discussions
about the Steele "Independent Investigation" of the City Attorney. There is no Brown Act exception
for a Council body to go into Closed Session to discuss and Independent Investigation of another
Elected Official. Based on information, those such Closed Sessions took place on:
July 20, 2021
November 16, 2021
December 21 , 2021
January 18, 2022
April 5, 2022
June 21 , 2022
v :
HUNTINGTON BEACH
OTHER IMPROPRIETIES INVOLVING STEELE
FW: CONFIDENTIAL: Closed Session History for Lawsuit Moore v. Ci
A review of emails with Steelev
co Ohl, Oliver .... . _ _
Tc Fcpi Reply All
Craig A.Steele(csteelealrAfglaw.com) F```
shows: ,
ri Closed Session History for Moore v CHB.pdf Thu 6''r'
°P1E
... Oliver Chi sends to Steele
:?Lver Chi
,ty Manager
my CONFIDENTIAL Closed
rotHunt «nBeach
2000 Main Street
PO.Box 190
Session e m a i l s intended Huntington Beach,CA 92643
Office:(714)536-5575
�,C(310)663-9837
only to be viewed by my From:GTutes,esday,
Michael 20 1 2 12 PM city hb ore>
Sent:Tuesday,April 20,2021 2:12
To:CITY COUNCIL<city.council surfrfcity hb or >
Cc:Hopkins,Travis<thopkins surfcrty hb oro>•
CI ty Council -• i n violation <Mb iphotta(u�surfcity hb oro>- 'Chi,Oliver<oliver.chi(asurfcity hb oro>•
Subject:CONFIDENTIAL:Closed Session History for Lawsuit Moore v.City 'Vigliotta,Mike
CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEY CLIENT COMMUNICATION
of Closed Session rules Dear Honorable Mayor and Members of
city Council
I always appreciate the oDDorti,nitt.r., -
OTHER IMPROPRIETIES INVOLVING STEELS
Confidential - Email Search
A review of emails with Steele
., : __) ----)
Chi, Oliver
shows:
To Mello; Brittany Reply tf1 Reply All
Cc Craig A.Steele(csteele
You forwarded this message �rwglaw com) r,
on 7/12/2021 3;53 PM.
Oliver Chi wrote to B. Hey Bmello!
Sorry tobug,ry but I wanted to see if you could do a confidential email search for us again.
Mello that, over m y This time, I'm looking for any emails between Michael
and Scott from BBK. In Gates and anyone at Greenberg Gross,andarcbetween Mich
particular, I'm looking for recent emails,but why don't we set a search
from March 1 Campbell through present day.
objections based onparamet
The email domains we're looking for emails with Michael Gates includes the following:
@ggtriallaw.com
privilege, she search the ross
CKutla GGTriallaw com
Scott.Cam bell bbklaw.com
server anyway to get my
Thanks!!!
privileged emails Oliver
Oliver Chi
City Manager
OTHER IMPROPRIETIES INVOLVING STEELE
Closed Session Link
A review of emails with Steele
CO Chi, Oliver
Tc Craig A.Steele(csteeleCrwglaw,com) I.
,.. F_) Reply «, Reply All --j FoM shows:
Hey Craig! Tue 7/20,'
Steele improperly FYI,link for closed session is:
1• Click to Join Closed Session
- This link is for closed session. when Council recesses behind dosed doors.
If you need technical assistance. contact Travis Hopkins at(714)475-4112.
attended Closed Meeting ID 927 8121 5041 Passcode: 012av f
We have you set and going on at 5 p.m.!
Sessions with 2020 City Thanks!
Oliver
Council, and without On-- -
City Manager
S
the City Attorney City ��a�
2000 MainStreet
P.O.Box 190
Huntington Beach,CA 92648
Office:(714)536-5575
Cell:(310)663-9837
OTHER IMPROPRIETIES INVOLVING STEELE
A review of emails with Steele
From:Gates,Michael<Michae—s surfcit`r >
shows:
Sent:Monday,July 19,2021 1:06 PM
To:Chi,Oliver<olive�,ch��surfcity lib or >
<MVi liotta —�—� -Hopkins,Travis<thopkins(�surfcity lib ore>;
� Ce <olive lib or >
Subject:7/20 Closed Session Vigliotta,Mike
OBJECTED i n writing to Oliver. I'm informed that your review of the ha
assume since it isn't plainly listed on the Agenda. you have it as a Potential Litigation. What
handling of the Moore v City case is on for Closed Session. I
• Act justification for taking this review of handling a case into
Council
Closed Session? is the Brown
City I'm not aware of a Brown Act basis.
Michael E. Gates, City Attorney
improperly going into CITY OF HU CITY ATTORNEY
HUNTINGTON BEACH
2000 Main St.,Fourth Floor
Huntington Beach,CA 92648
i Closed Sessions in Ph r?j��s— Fx 12
(714 ,
Confidentiality Notice:This email may contain material that is confidential,privileged and or attorney tt-ork-
addressee.Further-this email is protected under review by reliance,or distribution by others fine arle Qoivic others without on express Sections
for the sole use of the
Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C.iolation of the Brown ou
receirethiselianc:sordis $ections��1Uibite Any
communication this is transmission
prohibited are advised that any disclosure,copying, Permission of the author anys strictly
to distribution,or the taking of o prohibited.If upon
as this cammus strictly
If you have received Moreover,any such inadvertent disclosure shall not compromise aeti attorney-client
in reliance the Thank yous c this communication in nfy theor wive the and delete
tmadilege
error;please immediate)�notify sender delete this email.
Act.
v
HUNTINGTON BEACH
OTHER IMPROPRIETIES INVOLVING STEELE
A review of emails with Steele
SNOWS: CA Craig A. Steele <CSteele@rvvglaw.com= :�! Reply Ail Tc Chi, Oliver
(i)You forwarded this message on 8/3/2021 3:08 Pm,
w Steele insisted that I Let's discuss first, but perhaps something like this wou
ld be an appropriate response:
"Michael—
"drop (my attorney- ►appreciate your email
all and, if you feel an additional third party review is necessary, I guess that's up to you,
you that both reviews should "cover the same material and information for accuracy." I was surprised when
client] privilege claim Kutlay of Greenberg Gross told me on July 12 that you had claimed an attorney-client privilege over some d
communications, and prohibited the firm from releasing those records to us. That was pretty surprising since
the firm over$1.3 million to defend you and the City
have some separate interest or attorney client privilege. Hopefudlly,that was some so there never was any rt of misunderstanding isclosure to the City tt
• • part and
regarding my private You will instruct her to drop the "privilege"claim and promptly
that both reviews "cover the same material and information for accuracy."I will then make sure thatyou
P p y release the rest of the documents w�
set of what we have compiled for Mr. Steele.'
attorney emails hav
From:Chi, Oliver<oliver.chi@surfcity hb ora>
Sent: Friday,July 30,2021 4:26 PM
HUNTINGTON SEA
OTHER IMPROPRIETIES INVOLVING STEELE
A review of emails with Steele
Gates Emails To Greenberg Gross
shows: Chi,Oliver
CO Craig A.Steele(csteelerwglaw.com) Fepl, Fepl.::L' - Fcr
Oliver Chi sends my NeVCraig!
Just to confirm...I just uploaded 54 new emails from Gates to Greenberg Gross onto the Box Account,under a file titled"Gates Emails To Greenber
attorney-client Login info is as follows:
Login website:www.app.box com/IoQin
Login username:oliver.chi@surfcity-hb com
privileged emails to Password:RWGRocks!
Talk soon!
Steele notwithstanding Oliver
Oliver Chi
:rtv Manger
my previously place
d City�M� «��
:000 Main Street
'0 Box 190
objecti
ons
v HUNTINGTON BEACH
OTHER IMPROPRIETIES INVOLVING STEELS
FW: The Latest Attack on Michael Gates and the Citizens
A review of emails with Steele Katmick Dan
To csteelef�trwylaw.com , , Reply
sh ows Q Click here to download pictures.To help protect your privacy,Outlook prevented automatic download of some pictures in this message.
This bounced to you—typo in your email.
Dan Ka',nick
Council Members City Counember
City of Huntington Beach
dan.kalmick surfcrty hb or¢
i consultng with Steele (657)35�4796
about personal
2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, C.A.92648
political concerns From:Kalmick,Dan
Sent:Tuesday,March 1,2022 9:48 AM
To:Joyce,Sean<Sean.Joyice surfcity hb oro,•
s
Subject:FW:The Latest Attack on Michael Gates and the Citizens corn
This was sent from the HB Recall Save Surf City Account.
It is an'ad'and missing"who paid for this ad?"and has a donation button at the bottom.
Dan Kalmick
City Councilmember
Citynfu.....:__-__ -
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Take-Aways from Closed Sessions:
• The previous City Council (Peterson, Hardy, Brenden, Semeta, Delgleize,
Carr, Posey) voted regularly to approve the $1 .5 million spent on Greenberg
Gross legal services.
• I recused myself on day one and always acted in the lawsuit as a
defendant - no "conflicts of interest" existed.
• The case was viewed by the 2018 City Council as "frivolous" for two full
years until the new 2020 City Council was seated, then it was settled.
• The $2.5 million settlement yielded a $1 million payout to Scott Field who ran
against me for City Attorney in 2022 and was endorsed by Kalmick and
Bolton.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Again, at the April 19, 2021 , Closed Session, newly elected Council
Member Dan Kalmick suddenly called for an "Independent Investigation" into
the City Attorney's "handling" of the Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit.
41.2
Council Member Kalmick alleged "ethical" concerns over "conflicts of interest"
and "overbilling" by outside law firm, Greenberg Gross.
Yet, neither Kalmick nor Moser and ultimately Bolton were present during
any of the City Council Closed Sessions discussing this lawsuit during the
preceding two years. They would have not basis to have any "concerns."
(Carr, Moser, Kalmick, Posey, Delgleize, Ortiz, Peterson)
HE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Review of Records revealed the following :
1 . On multiple occasions, Oliver Chi forwarded to Craig Steele highly
confidential and privileged Closed Session Memos spanning the two
years prior that had been prepared by the City' s Attorneys. -11
2. Oliver Chi and Craig Steele met in Closed Session with the new 2020 City
Council on numerous occasions (by Zoom) to discuss the "Independent
Investigation," yet there is no Brown Act authority to do so, and no
confidentiality or privilege attaches to such closed-door discussions.
Peterson refused to participate on the objection that such meetings are
illegal.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Review of Records revealed the following :
3. On multiple occasions, Oliver Chi forwarded to Craig Steele highly ,11
confidential and privileged ongoing email communications and
attachments that the City Attorney had directed to City Council.
4. For months, Steele helped develop and provide counsel for all the
2022 Charter Amendments
5. Steele helped Delgleize and others with "talking points" to be read
at the City Council meetings regarding 2022 Charter Amendments
advocacy and ability to hire own attorneys.
FB
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Review of Records revealed the following:
6. Among those Charter Amendments, the initial proposal was to take the
"Elected" City Attorney away from the people and convert the City' s
form of government to an appointed attorney - one hired by the
Council. Steele was involved in helping with this and would have
benefitted financially from it if his law firm was given the legal work. -w
7. While I asserted attorney-client privilege between me and the -=?
Greenberg Gross attorneys, over my rightfully-placed objections, Chi
secretly directed IS staff to access the email server and surreptitiously
take my privileged and confidential emails, then Chi forwarded "54" of
my private email communications with my attorneys to Craig Steel . rill
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Review of Records revealed the following:
8. Oliver Chi and Craig Steele had circulated drafts of the RWG Craig
Steele "Investigative" Report to all City Council, except for Peterson,
soliciting a review and feedback by all Council Members, a meeting
subject to the Brown Act. Council Members did review and provide
feedback. Peterson had requested of Oliver Chi to not include him in
those communications on the belief that it was illegal.
9. Craig Steele and/or his staff met over many months at City Hall and/or
Zoom with Council Members to discuss the "Independent Investigation"
and proposed 2022 Charter Amendments.
HE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Review of Records revealed the following:
10. Craig Steele met with Oliver Chi, Kim Carr, Mike Posey, Dan Kalmick,
pier Rhonda Bolton, Natalie Moser, and Barbara Delgleize to invade prior
1
r attorney-client privileged communications with the City Attorney and
gather information about prior confidential Closed Session meetings with
the City's Attorneys and/or the Greenberg Gross attorneys.
11 . Steele knew or should have known based on the City authorities that
contracting around the City Attorney in violation of the people 's
designation of the City Attorney as City legal counsel was void.
HE) ,.,,
NUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Notably, I was never interviewed by Craig Steele or his firm as part of his
"Independent Investigation" of me. Normally the subject is interviewed.
None of my staff were interviewed. None of the Greenberg Gross
Attorneys were interviewed by Steele. None of the following former Council
Members who were key witnesses to the subject Closed Sessions were
interviewed: Peterson, Hardy, Semeta, or Brenden.
Yet, records show Bolton, Moser, and Kalmick, who were not present
during any of the handling of the lawsuit from 2019 through its settlement, were
not present for any of the Closed Sessions, and had no information about what
had happened, in 2019 and 2020 were interviewed by Steele.
v �r
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Even though Steele claimed to have been an "Independent" "Special" counsel,
when asked for records, he claimed "attorney-client privilege," which is not possible if he
was commissioned to conduct an "independent" investigation. . .
• He worked for Chi in Monrovia, for Kalmick in Seal Beach, and then for Chi again in
Huntington Beach earning thousands for his law firm from our City - he is an equity
partner and has a financial interest, that is not "independent."
• He met with and communicated with Kalmick, Bolton, Moser and Chi regularly - in
person, by email, and during improper Closed Sessions.
HIR
HUNTINGTUN BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Even though Steele was commissioned for an "Independent Investigation:"
• He shared early drafts of his report with the City Council Members (not including
Peterson over his objections) for months before issuing the Steele final report;
• He received highly confidential City Attorney emails and Closed Session attorney work
product memos from years past - while having no attorney-client privilege relationship
as an "Independent" "Special" counsel to protect those;
• In a December 2021 email to Oliver Chi, Steele made a statement against (Gates),
which revealed his bias - undermining his independence;
• He boasted about working for highly partisan politicians in the past.
HE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
MCKEON H ITEM - REVIEW OF RWG
Possible Next Steps:
1 . Steele 's conduct referable to the State Bar I
_
2. City consider a challenge Richards Watson Gershon on legal fees billed
for improperly retained legal services
3. Consider referring the concerns about violating my attorney-client
privilege, possible breaches of Closed Session (s) confidentiality,
concerns about compliance with Brown Act, Public Records Act, and
other laws, out for further investigation/handling
HE3 .,
HUNTINGTON BEACH
Ef3 3,-:
HUNTINGTON BEACH
a � ' ' ' 0 - 4••••a.._ 06 47;
� �f
a . •
I .., INIT . • r . .• v4prair.ardp-
--. .
. . • • ,
• • .. ,.. ,
_ .. . •o o • o•
RAT�t�I • A .1 IN G 7/4'�•7 b41
Ilk
•' JI .6 lilt
•' I Ai; ■y '. c''
■ •
El F, 0 1. •■,.10
. _
THANK YOU . - _ _ ,..
- •• . 17, isfoi , ao• $11
)°
By Michael E. Gates, City Attorne . % , .c.j- /0
I
,l/
Moore, Tania
From: Fikes, Cathy
Sent: Tuesday, September 5, 2023 4:14 PM
To: Agenda Alerts
Subject: FW: Gates part 2 ppt
From: pacj<pacj_03@yahoo.com>
Sent:Tuesday,September 5, 2023 2:29 PM
To: McKeon, Casey<Casey.McKeon@surfcity-hb.org>;CITY COUNCIL(INCL. CMO STAFF)<city.council@surfcity-hb.org>;
Estanislau, Robin<Robin.Estanislau@surfcity-hb.org>
Cc:Gates, Michael<Michael.Gates@surfcity-hb.org>
Subject:Gates part 2 ppt
Dear Council member McKeon,
In view of the email CM Chi sent to Ms Mello, it is imperative that there is some avenue for city employees to seek help
when they are being asked to do something unethical.
She couldn't go to the council. She couldn't go to Gates.
The power point presentation brings up many indiscretions by the former CM and alludes to wrongdoings by council
members.
Do you refer the matter to the OC District Attorney?
Beyond exposing and punishing the wrongdoers we should learn something.
Backroom deals and political retribution are detrimental to the City.
The new city council should move forward with openness. The use of ad hoc committees
should be minimized.
It's time for the council to move beyond this ugly chapter.
Sincerely,
Pat Quintana
i
�oATiNGra 2000 Main Street,
ti ep Huntington Beach,CA
ti. _ . 92648
_ !_ City of Huntington Beach
0GyNTY GPI
File #: 23-612 MEETING DATE: 8/1/2023
In response to Dec 20, 2022 City Council direction, report on history of authorized actions in
the Moore v. City, Gates lawsuit and report on review of RWG involvement
City of Huntington Beach Page 1 of 1 Printed on 7/26/2023
powered by LegistarTM
1%010.4 HE3
`/" ..�: ,,.,.,,a6 ,
HUNTINGTON BEACHRESPONSE TO H ITE .4„............,
N G I
..,k,... ik••••,.. :.
Nilh
O R •
•••04/
Illik
c 0 ••••<9(0 ‘
PART 1 ,,
Michael E. Gates , City Attorney : J qi... •
•
r/W
06 -.0 — ,, - ___,..:51.,,_.— '" • 1111' At
'Svi.... # '140 t — — — i, v 0. ( /
ees• :9 : • `
•••••••••••• 00 ' cNTi10
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
December 20, 2022 H Item by Council Member McKeon:
A lawsuit was brought in 2018 by former attorneys Neal Moore and
Scott Field against the City of Huntington Beach and City Attorney,
Michael Gates. For years, City Council met with handling attorneys,
including outside attorneys from Greenberg Gross in Closed
Session about the lawsuit. The 2018 City Council viewed this
lawsuit as a frivolous suit, else the City Council would not have
met in Closed Session multiple times to direct the handling
attorneys for three years to prepare this lawsuit for trial .
v
NUNiING10X BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
December 20, 2022 H Item by Council Member McKeon:
wir Right after the 2020 November election , the new City
Council decided to settle that lawsuit . Then , that City
Council retained outside attorney Craig Steele of the law
firm of Richards Watson Gershon to " investigate" our City
Attorney, Mr. Gates , regarding the handling of the multi -
year litigation by outside attorneys from Greenberg Gross .
„so. HE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
December 20, 2022 H Item by Council Member McKeon:
The City Attorney is the City' s attorney designated by the
people at election time . The City Charter is clear about
this and City Council was not at liberty to hire their own
attorney behind closed doors to conduct any
investigations or perform any legal work. This Steele
Investigation , in my view, was nothing more than a
political witch hunt - all done in secret. HEI. .Nftie
,,
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
f
gR City of Huntington Beach
-M Organizational Chart
Adopted Budget — FY 2021/22 _
._._ THE PEOPLE
f
c( Nk
CITY CITY CLERK r CITY COUNCIL CITY 1
ATTORNEY Mayor (TREASURER)
Mayor Pro-Tom
AdministrWin City Council Members
Ado sorb Public Support N.. - 1 Investr' nts
&Elections
f 1
Records
MOM Management
'TY
V AN.AGE .
,1
I I ASSISTANT 1 1 -v FB 'Noe"
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
December 20, 2022 H Item by Council Member McKeon:
Mr. Steele never interviewed Mr. Gates , the person at the
center of this "investigation ," nor did Mr. Steele interview
anyone from Mr. Gates's office , any of the Greenberg Gross
attorneys , and he did not interview anyone of the
Councilmembers who were actually present in the 10 Closed
Session meetings and who made the decisions and witnessed —
first hand Mr. Gates's conduct in the handling of the ca441111t
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
December 20, 2022 H Item by Council Member McKeon:
e 4-3 Vote , COUNCIL ACTION :
it 1 . Waive the attorney-client and Closed Session confidentiality
privileges for the Closed Session Meetings on the Moore,
Field v. City, Gates lawsuit for the sole purposes of
allowing Mr. Gates to give his side of the story - to return
to City Council with a public presentation on what was
discussed and decided (by Councilmember votes) in those
Closed Sessions
HE)
-
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
December 20, 2022 H Item by Council Member McKeon:
4-3 Vote , COUNCIL ACTION :
2 . Waive the claimed attorney-client and any other
confidentiality privilege on any and all communications
between City, Councilmembers and Craig Steele and his
attorneys regarding this "investigation . " City Manager to
preserve all emails/texts/communications between City
and Craig Steele and RWG and between former City
Manager Oliver Chi and RWG
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
December 20, 2022 H Item by Council Member McKeon:
4-3 Vote , COUNCIL ACTION :
3 . City Attorney, after review of the aforementioned
communications and RWG invoices , return to City Council
with recommendations if any further action could be taken
against RWG for the spending of taxpayer money on the
"investigation ," done behind closed doors and away from
the public visibility and accountability. ,, FB
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
Filed in 2018 by attorney Neal Moore, who had voluntarily retired from the City -71
Attorney's Office in 2017, and attorney Scott Field , who even though having filed a
lawsuit, continued to work in the City Attorney's Office for 3 more years. Both alleged
age-discrimination and a hostile work environment.
The defense of the case was that those two attorneys, after years of many
attempts at correction, refused to meet the expectations of the City Attorney's Office;
and, after many years of demonstrating "very poor" legal judgment, both were disciplined
for lack of competence, of which had resulted in substantial monetary exposure to the
City. En�• ,� -.so.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
All of 2019 and 2020, the Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit had
been litigated aggressively, and for those two full years , the 2018 City
Council repeatedly voted to take the case to trial and authorize payments
for outside counsel , i .e . , that there was no merit to the case or to
settling . (Peterson, Semeta, Hardy, Carr, Posey, Delgleize, Brenden).
Two years and the previous City Council never expressed concerns
over the handling of the case ; not once . There was never an indication
or a hint of any concern by anyone about ethics or conflicts of int„ • s fib
qp
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
November 3 , 2020 - City Election
Kalmick, Moser and Ortiz elected
New City Council sworn in December 2020
Carr, Moser, Kalmick, Posey, Delgleize, Ortiz, Peterson
„Ns.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
In an unexpected 180 turn, during a April 19, 2021 Closed Session, the new ,
A. 2020 City Council voted 5-2 to settle the case for $2.5 million. And, newly elected
Council Member Dan Kalmick suddenly called for an "Independent Investigation" into
the City Attorney's "handling" of the Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit. Council
Member Kalmick alleged "ethical" concerns over "conflicts of interest" and "overbilling"
. by outside law firm, Greenberg Gross. Those allegations were never substantiated.
City Council voted 5-2 to have former City Manager retain an Independent
Investigator to investigate/review the City Attorney and the case.
(Carr, Moser, Kalmick, Posey, Delgleize - Aye; Ortiz, Peterson, No)
-ter
v ..r
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
While the new 2020 City Council voted 5 -2 to settle this lawsuit, 5.
which had been considered "frivolous" by the previous City Council ,
for $ 2 . 5 million , / refused to settle. I was not a part of the
Settlement Agreement, I did not consent to settlement, and I did
not sign the agreement. Nevertheless , I was dismissed by the
Plaintiff attorney because they were pleased with the very favorable
settlement and wanted to put case to rest.
(Carr, Moser, Kalmick, Posey, Delgleize - Aye; Ortiz, Peters ,
v
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
" Independent Investigation "
Former City Manager Oliver Chi undertook to retain an
"Independent Investigator" to review the City Attorney
(Gates) and the case. Notably, the newly seated City Council
after 2020 never voted publicly to waive any attorney-client
or Closed Session privileges. This is important. To properly
waive any privilege or confidentiality by a Council , it has to
be recorded publicly. This never occurred .
VEF3
V
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
" Independent Investigation "
Hiring an attorney for an "Independent Investigation" is used to achieve an
ott, „pail
N. OBJECTIVE review of the facts. "Independent" or "Special" Counsels are "outsiders"
who independently gather facts and independently evaluate them. They are
disinterested in the outcome and they do not "work with" the party that hired them
either for other work, or to conduct the investigation or prepare final reports.
Importantly, Independent or Special Counsels do not establish an attorney-
client relationship with the party who retained them to conduct the Independent ..
Investigation. We retain Independent Investigators all the time - there is no
attorney-client privilege. This is important.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Indep endent Investigation "
� Win. 1
Oliver Chi hires Craig Steele
of Richards Watson Gershon
1 . Steele worked with Chi for years in Monrovia
2 . Worked for Mayor Joe Kai
mick for years as City Attorney
of Seal Beach
v
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Independent Investigation "p „,„
The California League of Cities advises to refrain from selecting
lawyers to serve as independent or outside counsel who are
friends or colleagues of council members to avoid the
appearance of "cronyism . " Practicing Ethics: A Handbook for
Municipal Lawyers, League of Cal Cities .
v r
»r
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
" Independent Investigation "
Steele boasts that he worked for partisan :
"political figures such as U.S. Senators Albert Gore, jr.,
Alan Simpson, and Lloyd Bentsen, Assembly Speaker
Willie Brown, Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley, and
Honolulu Mayor Frank Fasi . " - Craig Steele
https ://www. rwglaw.com/people-craig-steele ,,r
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
" Independent Investigation "
Invoices show that from 2020, the City has paid nearly
$ 200,000 for legal services to Craig Steele and his firm ,
RWG , where he is an equity partner. These legal services
were quietly requested by the former City Manager Oliver
Chi without City Attorney consent or approval .
XYx1iNG10X BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
" Independent Investigation "
sf
In a recently discovered email , Steele revealed his bias an • ack
of "Independence ." On December 16 , 2021 , he wrote to Chi
about the upcoming 2022 proposed Charter Amendments :
"ask the voters to improve the system and then he [Gates]
can take all his arguments and shove them up his ass"
- December 16, 2021 email from Craig Steele to Oliver Chi FE3
v �
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
" Independent Investigation " , ,,,
, „_
.,
.. -, , —
T ..._,
...
Independent? �,
or Advocate?
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
" Independent Investigation "
RWG Report by Craig Steele of July 5, 2022 Hwy
First Sentence :
"The City Council requested in May of 2021 that Richards ,
Watson & Gershon ("RWG ") provide an independent review
of the City' s handling of an employment-related lawsuit
against City Attorney Michael Gates and the City, brought
by two now-former employees in the City Attorney' s offs "
v v
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
"Independent Investigation"
RWG Letter of December 23, 2021 to FPPC -
First Sentence : .
"I have been retained to serve as special counsel to the
City Council of the City of Huntington Beach for a review of
the City' s handling of a lawsuit . . . "
HE3v
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
"Independent Investigation"
RWG Report by Craig Steele of July 5, 2022
Was Steele even qualified to review "litigation" matters?
Second Paragraph - NO LITIGATION EXPERIENCE :
"I have been a Municipal Law practitioner for my entire career
of nearly 30 years , with over 25 years as a sworn contract City
Attorney in four cities . I have been the City Attorney in Monrovia
since 2002 , where former City Manager Oliver Chi served for a
period as City Manager prior to coming to Huntington Bea[hB
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
"Independent Investigation"
RWG Report by Craig Steele of July 5, 2022
Was Steele even qualified to review " litigation " matters?
Third Paragraph - Tasked Outside of His Expertise :
"I was engaged to look at the record and evaluate how the
litigation was handled, and to advise whether it might
have been handled in a different way. . . "
HE3V V
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
"Independent Investigation"
RWG Report by Craig Steele of July 5, 2022 .
After the City spent over a year of time on this "Intendent
Investigation , " and what appears to be tens of thousands of
dollars paid to Craig Steele and RWG , the Steele final
Investigative Report of July 5 , 2022 concluded . . .
"I did not find evidence of any violation of the law by the
City Attorney, the current members of his office, or the
Greenberg Gross firm." pg . 27 RWG Report ,� .. M ,
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
1-4
Brief Case Handling History
� fBv
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
January 10, 2019 - Served with Lawsuit
SAME DAY - I Internally Announced my Recusal
Designated Williams to Conduct RFP
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 10 times
January 22 , 2019 - Gates announces recusal verbally
and in writing
Council Votes 7-0 for Williams' rec's; �.
Retain law firm of Greenberg & Gross
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & DelgleIe)HB ,.,-
v
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
What is "Recusal "? - An attorney steps away from
representing a client due to a "conflict of interest, "
p g
which is a legal determination made by a lawyer
Defendants/Clients still "communicate" and participate
in the attorney-client relationship (Rules Professional
Conduct, Rule 1 .4)
There was no conflict of interest to participate in the
litigation as a defendant HE3
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
June 3 , 2019 - Status of Case by attorneys
No Vote Taken
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & Delgleize)
July 1 , 2019 - Status of Case by attorneys
Council Votes 6- 1 (Peterson absent) to
authorize $ 200,000 for GG attorneys fees
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & De, I - i 13,
V . Y
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
March 2 , 2020 - Status of Case by attorneys
Council Votes 7-0 to authorize
$ 750,000 for GG attorneys fees
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & Delgleize)
May 18 , 2020 - Status of Case by attorneys 4 .
Council Votes 7-0 to reject
$ 5.8 million demand by plaintiffs
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & D y�
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
September 8 , 2020 - Status of Case by attorneys
Council Votes 7-0 to reject
Renewed $ 5.8 million demand by plaintiffs
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & Delgleize)
November 2 , 2020 - Status of Case by attorneys
Council Votes 7-0 to authorize
$$ 500,000 for GG attorneys fees
(Posey, Peterson, Hardy, Carr, Semeta, Brenden & DWEB
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
y Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
November 3 , 2020 - ELECTION
(Posey, Peterson, Kalmick, Carr, Moser, Ortiz & Delgleize)
December 21 , 2020 - Status of Case by attorneys
No Vote Taken
(Posey, Delgleize, Kalmick, Carr, Moser, Ortiz & Peterson)
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
Discussed in Closed Session with City Council 9 times
April 19 , 2021 - Status of Case by attorneys
Council Votes 5-2 to accept
$ 2. 5 million settlement proposal
" New Council Majority "orders" a
"Independent Investigation"
(Posey, Delgleize, Kalmick, Carr, Moser, Ortiz & Peterson)
v
-.r - s-
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit
Take-aways from Closed Sessions:
Ae
• The previous City Council (Peterson, Hardy, Brenden, Semeta, Delgleize, Carr,
Posey) voted regularly to approve the $ 1 . 5 million spent on Greenberg Gross legal imi
services.
• I recused myself on day one and acted at all times in the lawsuit handling as a
defendant - no "conflicts of interest."
• The case was viewed as "frivolous" until the new 2020 City Council was seated,
then it was settled.
• The $2 . 5 million settlement yielded a $ 1 million payout to Scott Field who ran
against me for City Attorney in 2022 and was endorsed by Kalmick and , .tFE3
v
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Moore, Field v. City, Gates Laws u it
Again , at the April 19, 2021 Closed Session, newly elected Council
Member Dan Kalmick suddenly called for an "Independent Investigation" into
the City Attorney's "handling" of the Moore, Field v. City, Gates Lawsuit.
Council Member Kalmick alleged "ethical" concerns over "conflicts of interest"
and "overbilling" by outside law firm, Greenberg Gross.
Yet, neither Kalmick nor Moser and ultimately Bolton were present
during any of the City Council Closed Sessions discussing this lawsuit during .
the preceding two years. They would have not basis to have any "concerns."
(Carr, Moser, Kalmick, Posey, Delgleize, Ortiz, Peterson) .
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Review of Records revealed the following Preliminary Findings, which will be
reviewed further:
1 . On multiple occasions, Oliver Chi forwarded to Craig Steele highly
confidential and privileged Closed Session Memos spanning the two
years prior that had been prepared by the City's Attorneys.
2 . Oliver Chi and Craig Steele met in Closed Session with the new 2020
City Council on approximately 4 occasions (by Zoom) to discuss the
"Independent Investigation ," yet there is no Brown Act authority to do
so, and no confidentiality or privilege attaches to such closed-door
discussions. Peterson refused to participate on the objection that such
meetings are illegal .
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Review of Records revealed the following Preliminary Findings , which
will be reviewed further (continued) :
3 . On multiple occasions , Oliver Chi forwarded to Craig Steele highly
confidential and privileged ongoing email communications ,
attachments that the City Attorney had directed to City Council .
4 . For months , Steele helped develop and provide counsel for all the
2022 Charter Amendments
5 . Steele helped Delgleize and others with "talking points" to be read
at the City Council meetings regarding 2022 Charter
Amendments advocacy and ability to hire own attorneys . HE3
V
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Review of Records revealed the following Preliminary Findings , which
will be reviewed further (continued) :
6. Among those Charter Amendments, the initial proposal was to take the
"Elected" City Attorney away from the people and convert the City's form
of government to an appointed attorney - one hired by the Council . Steele
was involved in helping with this.
7. While I asserted attorney-client privilege between me and the Greenberg
Gross attorneys, over my rightfully-placed objections, Chi secretly
directed IS staff to access the email server and surreptitiously take my
privileged and confidential emails, then Chi forwarded "54" of my private
email communications with my attorneys to Craig Steele.
VHE3V
V V
v v
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Review of Records revealed the following Preliminary Findings, which will
be reviewed further (continued):
8. Oliver Chi and Craig Steele had circulated drafts of the RWG Craig
Steele "Investigative" Report to all City Council , except for Peterson ,
soliciting a review by the Council Members and feedback, which is in
violation of the Brown Act. Council Members did review and provide
feedback. Peterson had requested of Oliver Chi to not include him in
those communications on the belief that it was illegal .
9. Craig Steele and/or his staff met over the course of months at City Hall
and/or Zoom with Council Members to discuss the "Independent
Investigation" and proposed 2022 Charter Amendments.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Review of Records revealed the following Preliminary Findings , which
will be reviewed further (continued) :
tot
10 .Craig Steele met with Oliver Chi , Kim Carr, Mike Posey, Dan
Kalmick, Rhonda Bolton , Natalie Moser, and Barbara Delgleize to 1.
invade prior attorney-client privileged communications with the
City Attorney, and gather information about prior confidential
Closed Session discussions with the City' s Attorneys and/or the
Greenberg Gross attorneys .
, HE)
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Notably, I was never interviewed by Craig Steele or his firm as part of his
"Independent Investigation" of me. Normally the subject is interviewed .
None of my staff were interviewed. None of the Greenberg Gross
Attorneys were interviewed by Steele. None of the following former Council
Members who were key witnesses to the subject Closed Sessions were
interviewed : Peterson, Hardy, Semeta, or Brenden.
Yet, records show Bolton, Moser, and Kalmick, who were not present
during any of the handling of the lawsuit from 2019 through its settlement,
were not present for any of the Closed Sessions, and had no in formati
v
about what had happened , in 2019 and 2020 were interviewed by Stele.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Even though Steele claimed to have been an "Independent" "Special" counsel, when
asked for records, he claimed "attorney-client privilege," which is not possible if
independent.
Even though Steele was commissioned for an "Independent Investigation:"
• He worked for Chi in Monrovia, for Kalmick in Seal Beach, and then for Chi again
in Huntington Beach earning over $200,000 for his law firm from our City - he is
an equity partner and has a financial interest, that is not "independent."
• He met with and communicated with Kalmick, Bolton, Moser and Chi regularly - --
in person, by email, and during improper Closed Sessions
HUNTINGTON BEACH
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON REPORT
Even though Steele was commissioned for an "Independent Investigation:"
• He shared early drafts of his report with the City Council Members (not including
Peterson over his objections) for months before issuing the Steele final report; 4i
• He received highly confidential City Attorney emails and Closed Session attorney
work product memos from years past - while having no attorney-client privilege
relationship as an "Independent" "Special" counsel to protect those;
• In a December 2021 email to Oliver Chi, Steele made a statement against (Gates),
which revealed his bias - undermining his independence;
• He boasted about working for highly partisan politicians in the past.
HUNTINGTON BEACH
,v4 EB r
Noel ,
HUNTINGTON BEACH
. A:I'll I I TIII
11••.,,. ill iv_..
RgTeTHANK YOU .
o '% iiiik
- % , ,
•
r- y y_
' (,,nt'14- „,:,', 'Y,' 4 0 44144%.* t
-'-'4". ikti,
By Michael E. Gates, City Attorney _ •, '
#.• •, 7 7, 19 09 , ,e
-.'s'e•*••• i` r
0
V`
JYCJNTN „i/
Craig A.Steele
T 213.626.8484 350 South Grand Avenue
F 213.626.0078 37th Floor
E csteele@rwglaw.com Los Angeles,CA 90071
L AW rwglaw.com
August 1, 2023
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
c/o Al Zelinka, City Manager
City of Huntington Beach
2000 Main Street
Huntington Beach, California 92648
Re: Agenda Item 23-612: Richards, Watson & Gershon
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council:
I was informed this afternoon that your City Council agenda tonight includes an item in which the
City Attorney intends to "report" on the history of the City's engagement of Richards, Watson &
Gershon to review the handling of the Moore/Field litigation. This is a matter in which the City
Attorney purported to have recused himself after acknowledging to a previous City Council that
he had a conflict of interest under California's Rules of Professional Conduct for attorneys.
I was lawfully engaged by the City Council to review the matter, and I provided an extensively
sourced 29-page written report, with accompanying exhibits, that was made public by the City
Council. I submitted that report to the City Council on July 5, 2022. In over a year since,the City
Attorney and others have gone to great lengths to impugn my integrity and question my motives,
but never to refute the accuracy of the report. I have this afternoon been provided with a 46-
slide powerpoint presentation in which the City Attorney raises a number of spurious reasons
why my report should not be trusted; he does not show where any portion of the report was
inaccurate or false.
I previously refuted these allegations in a declaration under penalty of perjury, filed with the
Orange County Superior Court. That declaration, my report,and the evidence upon which it was
based, are available in the public record for anyone who is interested in looking at the substance
of the issue. I also have thoroughly refuted the allegations regarding the propriety of the City's
hiring of this law firm in publicly available letters to Mr. Gates' attorney.
Los Angeles San Francisco Orange County Temecula Central Coast Sacramento R I C H A R D S WATSON G E R S H O N
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
August 1, 2023 Page 12
There is one claim in the presentation that I feel I must specifically refute, because the City
Attorney has made it -falsely- over and over again. The City Attorney has claimed that I never
"interviewed" him as a part of the review. This is incorrect. As noted on page 13 of my report, I
met with Mr. Gates on three separate occasions, two prior to the time I drafted my report and
all prior to the time I submitted it. The first two meetings took place in the presence of Mr.Gates'
attorney, Derek Cole, and Interim City Manager Sean Joyce. The third meeting included those
individuals as well as the members of the subcommittee the City Council appointed for this
matter. In every meeting, the City Attorney stated the fundamental premise of his position on
the issue,which is that he "abstained" from acting as City Attorney on the Moore/Field case,and
therefore had nothing to do with the City's handling of the matter. That claim appears again in
the powerpoint presentation. In my report, I documented at least seven closed sessions in which
he participated as City Attorney in the City Council's closed session discussions. Documents
established that he was not participating only as an individual defendant,which would have been
irregular enough, but as City Attorney. Again, those documents and my report were made
available publicly and the City Council waived the attorney-client privilege over those documents.
There is an old lawyers' adage that says: "When the law is in your favor, argue the law. When
the facts are in your favor, argue the facts. When you have neither, pound the table and yell like
hell." It is indeed unfortunate that the table pounding and yelling continues over a year later.
Very truly yours,
raig A. Steele
cc: Al Zelinka, City Manager
99999-0001\2847324v 1.d oc
RICHARDS WATSON GERSHON