Thursday, September 2, 2010

The Monsters We Make
by Keith Higginbotham | City Beat | 12.16.09 |
| Text Size:
+

So in case you missed it last night, the City Council approved moving forward with consideration of an ordinance that will in some way regulate lobbying of city officials.


Oh, and you probably missed the part where the clouds opened, the chambers filled with snow white doves and gleaming sunshine, and unicorns filed in from the side doors. Problem solved. No longer will the evil lobbyists tempt the cherubic purity of city council officials.


Am I the only one that sees this all as backwards? The problem here is not the lobbyists--after all, influencing city officials is what they are supposed to do. That is their job.


The problem here is that a city official took the graft that was offered. I mean do we blame Satan for offering the apple or do we blame Eve for taking it? You can say it was ol' Lucifer's fault all you want, but tempting people is part of his sole reason for being.


So, at some point in the future, we are likely to have some type of ordinance that restricts or regulates lobbying.


And even if the new rules proposed apply directly to city officials, keep in mind that RDA chief Craig Beck broke the existing rules anyway in his vacation snafu. If someone is going to break the rules anyway, what difference does it make how many more you pass?


And yes, you read right. Existing rules.


You see, each and every city employee must sign an ethics oath when they are hired. This page-long oath is like the Ten Commandments (well seven, actually) that tell what thou shalt and shalt not do ethically as a city employee. And from what I can tell, Mr. Beck violated four, maybe five of the seven rules.
 Take a look:
Per the Long Beach Municipal Code, Chapter 2.07, prior to assuming office or employment, all City employees shall pledge, in writing, to follow these principles while acting in their official capacity:
  • To place the best interests of the City above all other interests.
  • To uphold all laws, regulations, and policies.
  • To take no action for the purpose of benefiting the official or employee personally.
  • To make every effort to avoid a conflict of interest.
  • To avoid disclosure of confidential information obtained in the performance of their duties or in their official capacity.
  • To exercise prudence and good judgment at all times.
  • To be fair, impartial, and unbiased in the decision-making process.

We don't need more rules. We need some good old fashioned punishment.


I mean, where did leadership go in this city? This situation with Mr. Beck doesn't need a modern-day Warren Commission. The man broke the rules of his employment. Why will no one stand up and say what needs to be said? 


"You knew what the rules were, Mr. Beck. You broke the rules, Mr. Beck. You're fired, Mr. Beck. Thanks for everything, but get out."


The City Manager has instead placed Mr. Beck on administrative leave.


I remember my father telling me about working for Safeway. One day a clerk walked by the bins of loose candy and popped one in his mouth, all viewed by a manager. The clerk was fired on the spot. Not asked to go home for the day to think about what he had done. He was fired. Why? Because it's s-t-e-a-l-i-n-g. A one cent candy from a bin or the payroll from the safe, it's all the same. And no amount of spin will change that.


So, I don't give a flying leap what Mr. Beck got for free. He broke the rules and he needs to be fired. Forthwith. Immediately. Pronto.


But in this up-is-down world we live in, that would require some leadership. Leadership that understands Mr. Beck's violation of the public trust is actually very serious, no matter what the monetary amount of the gift.

But this is not what we see. We see instead a City Hall that is "concerned" about the "perception of impropriety" regarding Mr. Beck's actions.


What we see are councilmembers saying Mr. Beck is still the right man for the job and he has always been such a professional. Or that he's done such wonderful things for the city. Or we see City Hall managers saying Mr. Beck is a great guy and one of the great department heads.


Ask yourself this, if Mr. Beck moves on to another city and lists on his application under accomplishments that he "violated numerous ethics polices," do you think he would be the right man for that job?


My biggest fear is that many of those at the top levels of City Hall just don't see that what Mr. Beck did was all that wrong. I fear that, behind closed doors, what they really fault him for is simply getting caught. Or, perhaps, for bringing unwanted scrutiny to the way things have been done, with a sly wink-and-a-nod, in the past.


But what makes me really sad, though, is how clearly this whole situation points out the real culprits in creation of the mess that we call City Hall.


We are, fellow citizens. Each and every one of us.


Why?


Because as a whole we are apathetic and indifferent when confronted with the truly feckless nature of the leadership that rises to the upper floors at City Hall.


These are the candidates that are allowed to skate through the campaigns holding babies and shaking hands when they should be pummeled with hard questions from us. These are the officials that are allowed to get into office with a couple thousand votes because we can't be bothered to show up at the voting booths. These are the officials that when they act against the will of the people are given a free ride by each of us, instead of a public lashing.


Take for example the sad little tale of Mr. Beck.


Here is an appointed official of our city, responsible for handling millions of dollars of taxpayer money, that has violated both his ethics oath to the city as well as the public trust.


But are the phones ringing off the hook at City Hall in outrage? Are the City Hall computers overflowing with e-mailed demands that he be fired? Do you think the City Hall mail room is struggling under the weight of all the angry letters?


Of course, not. Because we have all grown apathetic.


And instead of taking action, we make excuses. Typical politics, we say, and shrug out shoulders.


And it goes on, week after week. The budget. The wetlands. Lobbying.


We are the makers of this monster and if it is to be humbled to our will, we must be the diligent keepers of its leash.


We, all of us, need to do something--even something small.


Before that apathy dampens your spark of belief in our democracy one more bit, here are a few suggestions. Take five minutes and call City Hall. Leave a message telling them what you think. Click here for a list of City Hall numbers. 


Or follow the same list to the department you want and send them an email.


I can't tell you what to say, but I do know that we as the citizens of Long Beach have to begin making our views known. We have to let City Hall know, as Paddy Chayefsky's Howard Beale said in Network, "I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take this anymore."


So that's it for the soapbox this week. Now I have to run to make my phone call.


Comments
Click Here to Join the Discussion on this Story

32 Comments so far.
TLGLB.com
The link doesn't work for the list of City Hall numbers. Could you please repost?

Ryan ZumMallen, Editor
TLBLG, the link has been fixed. Thanks for the heads-up!

Luis Maimoni
I LOVE reading a well-written rant! Thank you!

Henry
I have never agree when a candidate is running for a seat and he spents on the compaign more money that what he/she will make in regular salary for the term that is going to be covered. The larger donations for the campaign are from "entities" that has already a "promise" from the candidate to benefit somehow once his candidate wins. Ethics does not work with them. Their own "ethics" are to get the most benefit in the less time possible. After all, they will leave the "seat" but they will like to take the cake with them.

CSULB Student
Ryan, well said!!! Thank you very much for this concise report.

Grumpy Guy
Jeeze Keith YOU'VE got it all backwards. The "rules" you quoted are self-administered. We need real rules that don't depend on the person to follow them but allow transparency for anyone who want's to look. If you make ALL communication between lobbists (of all stripes) and public official a part of the readily accessable public record, then we don't need to depend on the poor tempted official to tell us he/she sinned. If we do this then maybe the tempting "Satans" (lobbyists) will just give up and use their smelly grease some where else.

Pat
But when people like Mike Rhuele brought to others attention a plethora of "Follow the Money" issues, many people just ridiculed his statements. I think this is all about power, slippery careers that require each politician to defend the status quo to preserve their position on the ladder of public service. I guess you could call it eating out of the public trough, they are all piggy's and service to the public is just a cliche. Elections always bring out the "oink" in most of them--save Gerrie who at least had the moxie to stand up to the power.

wile1
Great insight . Its about time we stopped passing laws and enforce the ones we have. City employees must be beyond reproach or should be terminated. Period.

WrigleyWriter
Here, here, Keith! Yes, it's ironic that the common person is largely distrustful of politicians but does so little to demand correct actions and accountability. Most people simply don't understand that municipal government makes huge impacts on the quality of our lives. So they don't vote in local elections. But there's also the question of how much the media needs to be fixed. How can our society tolerate such diverse reporting of the "truth?" How can we make the right choices by our votes? Is it any wonder that voter turnout is so low? I realize this is a different subject, but when the media is called to the same ethical behavior we expect of our elected officials, then things might start to change.

Erin
I agree that Beck should be fired. The DLBA should take action too. These guys are liabilities and they make the city look bad. But I disagree that this is the community's fault at heart. The community is not well respected by city leadership. What's the point of screaming if no one will listen? The city leadership is a black hole that sees no evil, hears no evil, speaks no evil. That is at the very core of our City disfunction. Thanks to Kieth for touching on that truth and speaking up for, let's admit it, Justice.

lbresident1
I don't think it is fair or meaningful to compare taking a penny candy to accepting a discount on a room. As a traveling businessman, I collect receipts for meals and accommodations that my employer pays when I submit them to him. I focus on bringing new business, which is what I was sent to do, not on the expenses that I incur in the process. Based on Mr. Beck's record of bringing business to the city, I think that we should give him the benefit of a doubt. He may not even have been aware of it. We certainly don't want an accountant for a salesperson.

Luis
I would add that it is a problem that needs to be addressed on multiple fronts. The politicians must be held accountable; the money needs to stop and the people need to be informed. One of the problems we are having passing a good health reform measure is the money being poured into the campaign coffers of the politicians and the lack of consequences for the politicians who take the money. This should have been Obama's first order of business; real campaign finance reform that stops the graft and corruption of our politicians. We then may get some who care about the people they represent rather than the corporations who control them.

Capster
lbresident1 - PLeease - have you not read the hard copy email evidence that has surfaced on this issue? I don't care HOW MUCH of anything Beck has brought to this city - if he violates a clear and simple oath - yes EVEN if only for a penny candy - he's fired! He knows the rules, he chose to ignore them, he's finished! And what troubles Long Beach is what troubles the planet - human greed, yes, it really is that simple. Time we stop getting into all the complex seeming issues and break it down to what the base cause is. I want more than you have, so I have to "get" more however I accomplish that. I want cheaper TV's so I get Walmart to get me cheaper TV's, they go offshore to accomplish that, and then I bitch about no one manufacturing products in the USA any more. Walmart didn't cause that - WE DID, and still are. The same greed is what has a Beck, or a whoever, willing to break rules they agreed to play by. And it all starts with me! I can't make anyone else do or be anything, it is not in my power to do so, or anyone else's. The only thing in this entire world any one of has true power in is our own choices - who we choose to be in the world. So, before I can even hope to clean up city government, I have to clean up me. I have to be responsible for every choice I make, including a choice to be involved to some extent in the running of my city. To get off my lazy butt and vote in elections. To read and keep some idea of what's going on around me and to make my thoughts desires about it known. To demand accountability of myself first, and then of those who work on my behalf. Keith - you said it very nicely, thank you for a beautifully written piece!

Bugaboo boo
Grumpy Guy's the one that has it all wrong - Tell him to look up the word and meaning in Webster's Dictionary

Correction?
"The Mayor has instead placed Mr. Beck on administrative leave." Point of information: Mr. Beck works for the City Manager not the Mayor. Thus, he was placed on leave by the City Manager. Frankly, the Charter prohibits the Council and the Mayor from directing City departmental staff.

badapples
i agree with the spirit behind this post. Beck should have been fired immediately. but the sad fact is that this situation will continue to fester....corrupt politicians /staff and voter apathy. If lobbyists were required to report, then maybe Beck's number would have been up after the first trip (though in this case, the lobbyist is a liar too....wont fix that). It just seems like something is better than nothing.

Idiocracy
Why is it so difficult to find ethical and moral leaders? Is this the best we can do? Are these truly the representatives of the public? We're not a democracy anymore; we're an idiocracy. Evidence is purely overwhelming.

Bob Holmes
Excellent observations Keith. More rules and regulations are rarely the answer. Following existing rules and acting like your Mom is looking over your shoulder will solve most of these ethical problems. That and just plain thinking before acting.

Tomas
Mr. Beck should not be fired. He should be given a reprimand and a three day suspention without pay and that should be a lesson to all. Why are you all so quick to demand "off with his head?" I don't know him personally but he is an individual who, if he did not for whatever reason report a gift and in doing so quite possibly made a mistake, I believe he should receive some form of discipline short of termination. I do not believe he should be put in front of a firing squad and executed. My God. Where is your empathy for another individual who could be your next door neighbor or the fellow down the street, or your brother. He has a family. Listen just one second. Harming this man will not get you what you're asking for. Straight steady government will never be the result of mob violence. And that is what I hear scratching from the pens of many of you who have given your thoughts on this matter. Consider that Mr. Beck's record, up to this point, is sterling. And it may yet be if it is found that he did not intentionally try to get over for $149.00. and if it turns out that he did not do as much as he should have to aviod this situation, then he should receive some discipline. As it is, his career will almost certainly be harmed, possibly beyond repair. You who scream, shout and carouse for his head should redirect your wrath to things that will bring permanent change to our City, like following the advice of one of the above parties who wrote that we should go out and vote, and hold our politicians feet to the fire for providing poor leadership. But harming Mr. Beck will only instantly sooth our feelings of disenfranchisement until the next time we decide we don't have the inclination to vote based on a self serving pretext. I ask you to help the City to grow with graciousness and understanding. It will make a powerful difference. Let the matter be solved administratively by City officials. Mr. Beck has for right or wrong, been shamed enough. If it turns out he did the wrong thing, and he pays the fine, I forgive him. We can gain nothing by pillorying him, only by measuring his deeds with information and facts, both of which we do not have privy.

Resident
Considering all of the problems discussed in the previous posts, how many people out there plan to vote for incumbents look to keep their seats in future elections. I am not going to!

John Greet
Very well said, Mr. H! It seems we were deliberating upon the same public policy issue this month! Your point is very well-taken that we need to also focus on swift and reasonable consequences for governmental ethics violations. I would also argue that we do, indeed, need a lobbyist ordinance. Not so much to restrict or to regulate an activity that is clearly and traditionally lawful but simply to help the electorate better monitor that activity. Requiring a lobbyist to register and disclose their activities in no way restricts those activities, it merely provides the voters with more factual information upon which to make their decisions on a candidate or a public policy question come election day. It would simply help to remind all of our public officials that the public is watching and so, for that reason if for no other, they probably *shouldn't* take that discounted trip to Napa with that professional lobbyist who represents a company that has current business before the City, for example. The more tools and information sources available to the voters; the more actively we can participate in the process, the more intelligently we can vote and the more truly representative our government can in that way become. A reasonable and effective lobbyist ordinance will harm no one other than those who stand to benefit by violating it. Good job, sir!

KeithH
Thanks for all the comments. And, as several of you pointed out, it was the City Manager that put Mr. Beck on leave, not the Mayor. I knew that to be the case and for some reason it did not click in my head as I was writing. I am having it corrected in the column.

Phil
I do not agree with the " off with his head" comments regarding Mr Beck. He did make some poor judgment calls but when he was aware of an action that violated the code of ethics he corrected it. I agree that some disciplinary action is necessary to limit any similar action in the future. My experience with Craig Beck has been with both the redevelopment and planning functions. I have found him to be open, fair and considerate of public opinion. Mr Murchison who was the lobbyist involved represents Lodgeworks for hotels in Long Beach. The approval for building these hotels in the city were not made by Mr Beck. He could only recommend approval. It was the decision of the planning commission and the city council. These bodies as well as the RDA board have the power to rule on most decisions made by Mr Beck and he must justify his decisions. The point that I wish to make is that although there will always "friendships" with lobbyists in most city governments. This particular incident is not grave since there are other controls over the decisions for most lobbyist related issues and Mr. Beck I am sure was aware that others would be involved in any final decision on these issues.

Dennis
Just wondering how many lining up to fire Mr. Beck were also in favor of Clinton losing his job for sexual harassment, abuse of power over a subordinant, violation of workplace policies that would apply to other workers in the place of employment? What about Congresswoman Richardson and her not paying taxes, campaign bills or mortgage payments? How about LBPOA head James who had the investment deal with former Councilman Baker? What about all the city employees and elected officials who attend big bashes, such as the Keesal, Young and Logan holiday party, where they are plied with hundreds of dollars of free food and drinks? I certainly don't know all the facts, nor at this point do most of LBPost's intrepid readers or Posters, but I do feel a double standard is ripe to be applied here. So should these others have been fired, forced to resign, impeached or recalled? Or is this another case of enforcing morals, ethics, laws, etc. but only against those with whom you disagree?

John Greet
I can only answer for myself: I am not calling for Mr. Beck's removal or even for his voluntary resignation. I prefer to await the results of the invesitgation currently in progress. Generally speaking, though, a high standard of ethical conduct for *all* government officials must be set and then consistently enforced. Some officials are going on record lately acknowledging that they only accept gifts up to the value allowed by law and report them as required. Governmental ethics laws only set a minimum standard of behavior and we should be setting a much higher standard than that. Nor is an act or omission that is "legal" necessarily also "ethical", it simply represents a *minimum* standard of conduct below which we, as a society, are not prepared to tolerate as a matter of law. Our government belongs to us and, so, the standards of conduct for public officials are ours (as represented by a majority of the electorate) to set and then to enforce.

Don
I have to agree with Tomas and some others who do not see the need to crucify Mr. Beck to the extreme. Like so many things, let the punishment fit the crime and not completely ruin a man's career when something more appropriate will accomplish the same. He is humiliated enough and even staying on the job will not be painless for him. Set the example of fair punishment that will send a message and then go ahead and fine tune a better ordinance, if needed.

fairness
Great article! I feel that Beck should be asked to resign and cleaning house is in order for all those involved. They just not just do wrong they then tried to cover it up with lies, only to be exposed by the truth in their nasty emails. In regards to 'Phil's' comment, "He did make some poor judgment calls but when he was aware of an action that violated the code of ethics he corrected it", he did not correct anything. He could of told the truth and instead went ahead and blamed it on his wife. Bad. I'm pretty sure there is much more where that came from and if the press and investigation is thorough I wouldn't be surprised many more raunchy details uncovered. What really baffles me is that these guys think they are untouchable, so when they lie they believe that no one will uncover their deceit. Maybe they should smarten up and do their dirty deals on personal cell phones and personal email, that way when they lie it will be a bit harder to find the truth. Meanwhile, I hope someone requests all the public information files so all will be brought to the light.

Pigeon
Dennis: The answer to your question is that all of them you cited should have been let go. We would have a cleaner public life and at least some hope for future governance.

TLO
Let the punishment fit the crime - don't hang anyone yet. I'm glad that Keith isn't a member of any City Council.

Scott Alevy
That was an interesting read. I am a Long Beach native who is a registered lobbyist in San Diego. Those of us who are ethical lobbyists and follow the rules of contact, demeanor and disclosure have no problems with full compliance with local, state and federal lobbying ordinances. Advocation is an art and an honorable profession that we all should honor. A number of cities throughout this and other states have adopted advocacy ordinances and they are easy to follow. I have no patience for elected officials, staff and lobbyists who violate the public's trust. You can count on me to always comply with the law. In my business, the loss of honor and credibility amounts to an inability to make a living.

Long Beach View
I hope that the proper people, who have access to the facts, do their best to weigh the rights of the people with those of the individual and make the correct decision regarding Mr. Beck. I disagree with those who believe that the answer to every problem is to write more rules. For every rule, we must have measurement,and for every measurement we need a bureaucracy to collect the data and file the reports that some other bureaucrat has to read, and someone will litigate over it and bit by bit, it all adds up to a huge bill that we all have to pay. Deal with Mr. Beck and move on.

Who's in Charge?
This article was very well written and the comments are interesting. However, several important points are being overlooked. 1) There is an adage that the person that holds the purse stings holds the power. Mr. Beck has direct oversight of tens of millions of dollars per year and contracts that exceed that amount ten fold. Council members know this. You don't cross the person that can benefit your district - so officials turn a blind eye. City policy seems to allow indiscretions if: council members get their pet projects funded, their districts benefit, and the money machine that salves the deep financial problems of the general fund keep coming. Redevelopment is the city's piggy bank to an extreme. 2) In the current city administration comprised of the dynamic duo (Pat West / Craig Beck) the public is glad handed, and made to feel they are being listened to, (lots of smiles) but in fact staff has been permitted to run the city at a more alarming and profound rate than many have witnessed in the past. In this tight symbiotic relationship the city manager can ask the head of redevelopment to expand what is permissible for redevelopment to fund, nearly any initiative, with little oversight as long as the city budget does not fall into a black hole and council members are kept happy. Has any one been paying attention to the reach of Mr. Beck in terms of areas and funds he controls on behalf of the city and how redevelopment feeds those efforts and how the City Manager can control this with very little oversight? To me, this is one of the real ethical issues with this duo. As long as everyone in city hall gets their needs met it seems to be fine to raid redevelopment. This is the state's logic as well - and city officials express great outrage at attempts of the state to steal redevelopment funds when in fact the city itself is already doing this to the very neighborhoods that need it most - the very neighborhoods that fund redevelopment, development projects, a burgeoning redevelopment staff and a growing percentage of general fund activity and obligations. 3) Elimination of blight is pointed at big development rather than addressing the significant and very seriously blighted, forgotten and overlooked areas of Long Beach. The developers are doing well, city administration is doing well. In fact it would be an interesting study sometime for Ms. Doud to see which consultants and developers seem to get contract after contract to do some study or throw up some city hall-centric idea of what they feel would be good for the more challenged areas. And it is the City Manager that approves all those contracts correct? In these areas we are told we want ‘housing’ ‘mixed use’. The couple of areas that have actually gotten the huge developments and cyclical face lifts are happy (yet want more). However, there are areas allowed to languish due to a mix of politics, and what staff seems to think is important. We have been told that the North Long Beach project area has beach front property so developers get assistance to make sure downtown and tourist destinations look nice at the expense of the truly blighted areas. The level of convolution undertaken to get funds in downtown or the general fund is beyond creative. 4) Long Beach is becoming the best city for every issue we can try to hang our hat on and the duo agree to fund - so that city officials can pound their respective chests and say we are the best at this and that. How many tag lines can you add to a glossy, promotional piece for the city? Unlimited, it appears. We see redevelopment resources used for every whim, initiative, city event, city building, city park, street improvement, cause, non-profit and 'vision' the Dynamic Duo manufacture or feel fit to fund from the piggy bank. I am not sure where the designations of 'water capital', most 'bike-friendly’, ‘ tree capital’, and ‘art destination’, toutings stop that justify the pilfering of redevelopment so that those that can 'sell' Long Beach can sell her and sell her out. With little to no public participation we see redevelopment funds expended on just about anything the Dynamic Duo seem to think of or grab onto - often at the whim of creative council members. Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on one piece of art work (that many question the value or benefit of) while we have dilapidated, vacant buildings, with fresh paint, and vacant lots and tidy white rail fences lining our most needy areas in adjacent to graffiti filled walls. 5) Applying little-city administration to a very large city such as Long Beach, seems to be serving the Dynamic Duo very well, but leaving the public tidily out of the process (though obligatory public meetings with partially engaged or interested staff do occur - by law). It is always interesting to see what redevelopment will be funding next - because it is usually a shock and we are helpless to address it because the very tight relationship of the Duo serves many prurient interests with very little oversight. After all you don't want to tick off the folks that have the money that can make or break the quality of your project, block, neighborhood or part of town in a heart beat or 'recommendation' to intentionally manipulated and uninformed boards often with impossibly short deadlines to approve. (Public be damned.) It is with deep sadness that the great hope of redevelopment finds itself siphoned from the very areas it was meant to benefit. Who really is looking after this very huge funding source? The Dynamic Duo and heck you best not question the use of those funds. Doesn't this seem to be the bigger issue here? Don't get me wrong, these are great guys in many ways and either intentionally or not, this is where we find them. This petty action by Beck, in connection with Kojin and Murchisen is first of all indicative of the relationship, that exists as a part of the activity of the Dynamic Duo and city politics and development and the money it controls. The public would be naive to believe this instance is an anomaly - this is business. Yes - I agree that the outrage from city hall has the underlying feeling of being found out rather than what the action really represents. It (almost) is an election year. I’m not expecting too many will speak up. It’s complex and hard to explain. The only thing I can think of that would be worse it the council running redevelopment. At what point though does the public get the accountability they deserve and our elected officials should demand? So who exactly is in charge?

City Beat
Keith Higginbotham takes you inside City Hall and reports weekly on the decisions being made.

Keith Higginbotham is a freelance journalist and writer who most recently served as the West Coast editor for the trade magazine American Shipper, covering the shipping and logistics industries. Prior to this, he served as the Advertising and Multimedia Manager for the Port of Long Beach. He began his journalism career more than a decade ago as the Trade and Transportation beat reporter at the Long Beach Press-Telegram.

Keith's Community

Leadership Long Beach
Friends of Colorado Lagoon


About Us | Contact Us | Policies