During its Sept. 17 meeting, the Long Beach City Council bade farewell to outgoing City Manager Patrick West, approved an acting city manager and approved a contract with the police officers association for pay raises and benefits. The contract is a controversial agreement because it allows police personnel to be notified when a public-records request concerning them is made, including the identity of the person or group making the request.
Farewell
Because Tuesday’s city council meeting was the last one during his tenure as city manager, the council and staff presented a farewell ceremony for Patrick West.
Staff played a video featuring numerous department heads speaking about West, who has been city manager since 2007, after having served as executive director of the city’s redevelopment agency for two years. One theme of the interviews in the video was West’s emphasis on teamwork and a fun work environment.
After the video screening, Deputy City Manager Tom Modica, who will serve as interim city manager beginning next week, said West has been “a number of things” to city staff, including a mentor.
“He imparts his Pat wisdom on us almost every single day,” Modica said. “He does that a lot through storytelling– sharing the experiences that he’s had over 39 years [in the public sector] and creating those teachable moments.”
Representatives from several state legislators then spoke about West and presented proclamations recognizing his years of service.
Donation
The council voted 7-0 to execute an agreement with Long Beach Unified School District for the donation of a cyanoacrylate fuming chamber, with an estimated value under $1,000, for use by the Millikan High School forensic-science program.
Mayor Robert Garcia indicated that 6th District Councilmember Dee Andrews had to recuse himself for the vote but did not explain why.
Police MOU
The council also adopted a resolution approving a 2019-2022 memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the Long Beach Police Officers Association (LBPOA).
Human-Resources Director Alejandrina Basquez said the MOU was the result of 13 negotiation sessions between the city and the LBPOA since May.
“The POA agreed to a three-year contract term that provides structural wage increases that are in part offset by having employees pay a portion of the City’s pension costs,” Basquez said. “The general wage increases include: 4% effective Oct. 1, 2019; 3% effective Oct. 1, 2021; and 2.5% effective April 1, 2022. There are no structural increases in year two. Instead, the agreement includes a one-time payment for all employees, with some exceptions, of $2,000, effective Oct. 1, 2020.”
Basquez added that the agreement also includes several changes to skill pays, an additional paid holiday, changes to overtime-bank maximum, adjustments to parental leave for those who qualify and a provision for “classic safety employees” that represent approximately 70% of POA membership to pay an additional 3% toward the City’s employer contribution to the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPers).
Basquez then turned the presentation over to Modica to speak about a provision concerning Senate Bill 1421.
Effective Jan. 1, 2019, SB 1421 requires disclosure of records and information, in response to a request under the California Public Records Act, relating to incidents such as the discharge of a firearm at a person, use of force, sexual assault or sustained findings of dishonesty by a peace officer or custodial officer.
“Back in April […], the POA requested that, as this information [goes] out, because it is public record, that they also have the ability to have access to those records,” Modica said. “We worked through our city attorney and came up with a process that we believe fully complies with SB 1421 but also provides that balance to give officers the ability to have access to those documents, especially because some of those are going to be coming out, and giving them some time for their families to prepare for some major information that has not been released before out in the newspapers.”
Modica explained that the process city staff created was to notify the officer the same time the request for records is made.
“That officer would have, at the end of the process, five days to review the documents,” he said. “But I want to clear up some confusion. They cannot change those documents. They cannot delay those documents. They cannot ask for documents to be withheld, and, if they do, that will not be honored. The only way we would do any of those things is if a court is ordering us to do that and they go through a due-process system to order the city to do that. If the employee cannot review [the documents] within those five days, the city would release the documents anyway.”
Modica said the city believes this approach provides a balance between full compliance with SB 1421 and officer safety and wellness, adding that there are six other agencies in the state that use this policy.
Numerous residents criticized the agreement during public comment.
“The MOU’s curious decision to undermine public-safety protections, including SB 1421, [is] offensive,” Stefan Borst-Censullo said. “For a city department plagued by scandals involving excessive force and a complete disregard for mutual-discovery rules, this MOU’s inexplicable terms allowing both a five-day head start and the identity of any requested party after a Public-Records Act request lacks any conceivable public interest. As a defense attorney and a resident of this city, I’m at a loss as to why this policy is being proposed tonight.”
Another resident, Corliss Lee, contrasted the provision with policies at her former place of employment.
“At the company I worked at, the ethics coordinator instructed us to always tell the truth and, further, to avoid the appearance of impropriety,” Lee said. “This is the appearance of impropriety, when you go off and change the way that this law was intended to work.”
Other speakers also called for the removal of the provision from the contract and referred to the policy as “a dangerous mistake and dangerous to the residents of the city,” “another way to hide from public accountability” and one that “dis-incentivizes constituents from requesting public records.”
After the public-comment period, 3rd District Councilmember Suzie Price acknowledged the speakers’ concerns about the police department’s knowledge of who makes public-records requests and asked staff if citizens can indeed do so anonymously. Modica responded that anonymous requests are possible “on the city manager’s side” but that option has not been activated on the police department’s side. He said that option can certainly be “turned on” as an improvement.
Price then indicated that she was, at that moment, logged in on the city manager’s website but that the process is not user-friendly.
“We will make that easier and certainly upfront so that people can understand that right away,” Modica said.
Second District Councilmember Jeannine Pearce inquired as to how long it will take to make that change, to which Modica replied that staff would “immediately look at the issue.”
Pearce asked if it would be possible to approve the police contract as is but still have staff make the change to anonymous filing, but staff indicated that any change made to the MOU would require further negotiations. Pearce then indicated that she would therefore be a “no” vote on the agreement, garnering applause from the audience.
Price then added that she will try to file an anonymous public-records request through the City’s website in a few days, and, if the process is not easy, she will bring an item back to council to address that issue.
The motion passed 7-1, with Pearce dissenting.
City manager
The council also approved Modica as the acting city manager, pending the hiring of a new city manager. City Attorney Charles Parkin indicated that, pursuant to the government code, the salary of the acting city manager shall be $276,815 for a 12-month period.
The Long Beach City Council meets at 5pm on Tuesdays, with the exception of the last Tuesday of the month, at City Hall, 411 W. Ocean Blvd.
