LBPOST.com: Tainting The Public Trust

Thursday, March 11, 2010 | Home

Tainting The Public Trust

by Keith Higginbotham | City Beat | 12.23.09 |

| Text Size:

Does anyone remember the first time as a kid when they lied to their parents and were hit with that old adage about "trust is earned?"

Well, I hate to break it to the decision makers at City Hall, but it applies to more than just children.

Trust is the foundation of public governance. We elect officials because we trust them to represent us and work in our best interests. Break that trust and the entire structure of our democratic system teeters.

Does anyone remember Richard Nixon? Not Nixon the statesman--Nixon the crook.

Unfortunately, due to the legacy of people like Nixon at all levels of government, this self-same public trust is very fragile.

Judging by City Manager Pat West's recent decision to demote and not fire Craig Beck for the former-RDA chief's "vacation-with-a-lobbyist" wine tour of Napa Valley, West apparently believes that the public trust of the Long Beach citizenry is thick enough to withstand a solid kick or two.

Mr. Beck breaks the city's ethics oath--put him on administrative leave.

Mr. Beck tells various versions of the incident--highlight his past service to the city.

Mr. Beck is exposed through email documents--find him a new job.

What the heck? The public trust has fallen down and it can't get up--now City Hall is playing a lengthy game of "kick-the-can" with it.

Again, I ask, has City Hall forsaken all pretenses at leadership?

If not for our sake, which I am beginning to believe does not factor in to the process at 333 Ocean Blvd. all that much, then for God's sake, at the very least, let me believe for just one moment that these officials can at least think more than two days ahead for the sake of their careers. I mean if that is all we can get, at the very least, give us that.

It's as if the folks at City Hall can not even imagine that this situation has the potential to be an end-of-days political Armageddon scenario for a lot of people involved.

Because, let's be blunt--this whole affair smacks of cronyism.

Cronyism is defined as a "partiality to long-standing friends, especially by appointing them to positions of authority, regardless of their qualifications." It's one of those words that not enough people use anymore to describe things that happen all too often.

Compare this definition to what we know about Mr. Beck's situation: a city official from a small cadre of political allies has been caught violating established city ethics policies. As 'punishment,' this official is moved to head a bureau he has no institutional knowledge of and in which he will make more than $30,000 above the salary of the previous office holder (given, he did get a 21-percent cut in pay from his RDA salary).

Now, I've already ranted about Mr. Beck and what I believe should be a zero-tolerance policy regarding officials violating ethics policies, but now Mr. Beck's poor judgment is evidently spreading to others.

This decision to "demote" or "reassign" Mr. Beck smells from head to toe.

It is irrational, flies in the face of the public trust granted, and, again looks, smells and sounds like cronyism.

So, should we be happy that at least some people at City Hall recognize the potential damage this could cause to the operations of city government?

Following Mr. West's decision to move Mr. Beck to head a bureau at the city's Gas and Oil department, Mayor Foster said that it was "a difficult and painful decision for the City Manager, but ultimately a very prudent one that moves toward restoring public confidence and staff morale."

One of Webster's definitions for 'confidence' is 'the quality of trusting," so, apparently the Mayor is cognizant of the fact that this whole debacle inaugurated by Mr. Beck has tainted the public trust in City Hall.

That should earn the Mayor one big smiley face sticker.

Unfortunately, it is balanced out by the frowny face sticker he gets for calling it a 'prudent' move.

And, despite the Mayor's hope that the public confidence can be so readily restored, I don't believe that most citizens feel it can be bought this cheaply.

I argued last week that Mr. Beck deserved the same fate that all of us might receive if we willfully broke our employer's policies and then misled our superiors about the details of such a violation: namely we would be fired, as should have happened to Mr. Beck.

However, some of you (including evidently some decision makers at City Hall) took the position that Mr. Beck's career before he was caught doing something wrong should be weighed against the minuscule cost of what he actually did.

Certainly the hotel room he received for free from lobbyist friend Mike Murchison (I'm assuming that two men that hang out after business hours and have fraternity-like code words for people, places and things are friends) adds little to bring the scales of justice down on the side of firing Mr. Beck. But the real cost of his actions weigh much heavier on those scales.

You see, Mr. Beck, in his position at the RDA, was responsible for many decisions that involved the expenditure of public funds. And with each slice of the responsibility pie comes a large helping of the public trust.

Just out of curiosity, I looked up a list of Mr. Murchison's clients and then compared this list to every contract that Mr. Beck recommended for approval to the RDA Board since he took office. Yup, every single one.

Here are just a few samples (from Mr. Beck's first year as RDA chief) that involve Mr. Murchison's clients:

On April 7, 2008, Mr. Beck recommended that the RDA Board approve a contract with EDAW AECOM Consultants not to exceed $600,000 for the preparation of a Downtown Community Plan and Program Environmental Impact Report. At the time, the RDA did not have the necessary funds, so Mr. Beck, in the same item, recommended to the RDA Board that appropriations for the Central Redevelopment Project Area be increased by $200,000 and appropriations for Downtown Redevelopment Project Area be increased by $300,000 to cover the new contract. Mr. Beck's recommendations were approved by the board.

On May 5, 2008, Mr. Beck asked the RDA Board, with Mr. Murchison in the audience, to approve a contract for design and engineering services to upgrade the CityPlace parking structure at the north end of the promenade. One bidder for the contract, URS Corp., submitted a bid of $684,000 while the only other bidder, PBS&J Corp., entered a bid of $1,250,000. Both firms are among the top ranked engineering firms in the nation, but there is no mention why URS--Mr. Murchison's client--came in at nearly 50-percent less in their bid. My experience with city government over more than ten years has shown that when there is such a disparity in bidding, questions are usually asked as to why. However, in this case, no discussion was entered into by the Board on the matter and the contract was unanimously awarded to URS.

At the same meeting, in fact the very next item on the agenda, a six-month exclusive negotiating agreement between the city and the developers of the Hyatt Place hotel project at the northwest corner of 1st Street and Long Beach Boulevard was approved on Mr. Beck's recommendation. Several clients of Mr. Murchison, including Aloft Hotels, Lennar and Hyatt, were involved or potentially impacted by the project.

On Sept. 15, 2008, Mr. Beck recommended that the RDA Board approve an amendment to increase the scope of work and reimbursement level on a contract with Lyon Realty, another of Mr. Murchison's clients. The contract's maximum funding level was changed from $500,000 to $876,850.

Keep in mind that these examples, which represent several million dollars in public money, are just a sampling.

And don't get me wrong, I will be the first to admit that in the normal course of city hall business, contracts like these are signed, changed, amended and awarded all the time.

If you had asked me about these agenda items a year ago, I would have seen absolutely nothing but normal city business.

But this is not a year ago.

This is now and Mr. Beck's ethical lapses have transformed each of these previously innocuous items into a question mark. Were they fairly awarded? Were they handled impartially by Mr. Beck, even though each involved a client of Mr. Murchison?

This is the danger of ethical impropriety. It taints all it touches both retroactively and in perpetuity.

I, for one, hope that each of the above situations was conducted with professionalism by Mr. Beck, but given what I know about him now, how can I look at any dealings he has had with one of Mr. Murchison's clients in the past and not scratch my head.

In addition, given what we now known of Mr. Beck, how can anything he does in his new position demand anything but heightened scrutiny. This is the damage that Mr. Beck has done, this is the confidence that Mr. Beck has strained and this is the trust that Mr. Beck has thrown to the wind.

And as Mr. Beck heads down that long road of political oblivion, how many people will his actions take with him? How many others will his ethical lapses and the fallout from them taint?

Again, I can only urge people to take a few minutes and let City Hall know what you think on this matter.

There are two players at the table when it comes to the public trust, and we, the citizens of Long Beach are most certainly at one side of this table.

If we can not expect our appointed officials to act in accordance with our wishes, then we must demand it.

That's it for the soapbox this week. Happy holidays.

Comments

Click Here to Leave a Comment

lbresident
These city employees including the police (less than 3 in 10 live here) do not live in long beach and do not care about the city save the paycheck it provides them. For 20+ years Mr. Beck has worked for the city but never thought enough of it to live here. We need to institute policies that align city employees with the quality of life in the city. Maybe then we'll have less interest in aggregious pensions and police lawsuits against residents and more interest in quality streets, parks, etc. We can start as they do in Oakland by giving city employee applicants preference if they live in the city. We should build on that to include things like pay scales tied to residency, etc.

Ute9
I have to say, there's plenty to look at with respect to this issue. That said, I believe Murchison is getting wrongly criticized. First, he doesn't have a regulated business, so he's not responsible to anyone but his clients, for whom he appears to have done a very effective job. Second, doing what Murchison does is difficult and requires lots of hours and hard work, i.e., not many people can do it. Third, the City is responsible for educating its employees regarding their independence, in appearance and in fact; the fact that in this case Beck's independence is called into question isn't Murchison's fault. Finally, if this City wants further progress and development to increase its tax base and reverse the trend of unemployment and poverty within its limits, then it should appreciate the fact that Murchison can bring large players to the table with development ideas and projects, whereas now they are only going to lessen that dynamic, not to mention adversely affect Murchison's potential business in this town.

Mike Ruehle
Thought provoking article. Thanks.

Paul
So many of the issues Beck has dealt with over the years have impacted, in one way or another, Murchison and/or his clients. So what?! Is there any evidence that suggests that Beck made recommendations that were NOT in the best interest of the City? His recommendation to approve one bid over another might be more suspect if he'd argued for the approval of the contract with double the pricetag of the other, but making a recommendation that saved the City half a million dollars seems like a good move to me. You speculate a lot here, but you don't have any evidence that points to wrong-doing. Kind of disappointing that Beck is being raked over the coals for something that Council members themselves admit to doing (accepting gifts from lobbyists).

Mike Ruehle
Ute9, Most of the arguments you made in support of Lobbyist Murchison also apply to Pimps and drug dealers. What you forgot to mention is Murchison has a track record of personally making money by furthering the interests of his clients at the EXPENSE of the public. How hard he works at it is questionable. Furthermore, the number of people who can do his job are only limited by the personal ethical standards MOST people have. Bottom line, Murchison is a pimp for who ever pays him. It clearly does not matter to him how much his actions hurt his community, friends or the people Murchison entices with his money and gifts. Considering the spotlight Conway and Beck have come under, Murchison doesn't care whose life or career he destroys as long as he personally makes money and wields influence. You make the godlike claim Murchison's actions "reverse the trend of unemployment and poverty." Yet, it is Murchison's unethical influence which causes scrutiny upon the employment of any city worker that comes in contact with him. Sempra Energy is always looking for lobbyists willing to do ANYTHING to close a deal. I wouldn't be surprised to hear Sempra Energy is one of Murchison's biggest clients.

UCLA Professor Emeritus
Thanks Ryan [Editor's note: Keith Higginbotham wrote this article, not Ryan ZumMallen] for a thoughtful, factual analysis of an ethical issue that has long legs in Long Beach. Unfortunately you presented facts,which are unknown to City Hall decision-makers. Try politics, which is why no one in the City Manager's Office did the work that you did in your article--uncovering a pattern of behavior, that while not illegal, is more than unethical--sleazy is what I call it. What we need in government are elected and appointed officials who will base their decisions on facts, not politics and my experience in Long Beach does not bode well for that happening. Thanks for confirming what I have always suspected, that the collective public is far smarter and wiser than those whom we elect to office.

John Greet
Ryan [Editor's note: Keith Higginbotham wrote this article, not Ryan ZumMallen]: As usual you demonstrate an enviable ability to say things so much better than so many others who are trying to get an editorial handle on this deplorable situation. Your point is so well made that the true damage of any governmental ethics breaches go far beyond any one incident and taint far more than only those directly involved. One government official may be "disciplined" -if one can use that term in this case with any accuracy- but every decision he made and every dollar he spent is now, rightly, called into question as is the manner in which this incident has been handled -one could just as easily say 'managed'- by some others at City Hall. The citizens of Long Beach have every right to ask these questions and because we have that right, those at City Hall would be wise to make answering them a top priority. If they do not, they are likely to find that they, themselves, have been not just demoted but relieved of duty altogether come their respective re-election days.

sebastian
The free hotel room is not what is important here. The real issues are lying to the City Manager and the City Attorney and the perception that one must pay Murchison for access to the RDA. These events have destroyed Beck's career and will make Murchison persona non grata at City Hall.

EconDevel
And this surprises you? Let's look at what we have here: Cronies + good old network + econ difficulties = protectionism. It's a recipe for fraud, favortism, ethics violations and gridlock on meaningful issues where 'risk' is perceived. Real civic and econ development leadership isnt about making friends in high places and avoiding accountability, is it? Yet, LBC is famous for rearranging the deck chairs and throwing a "new ownership" banner up. it's the best political strategy they' ve got - across the board - for everything. All puny tactics and no idea of true relations or strategy. I mean look at the latest effort to get Tesla. Ha ha. Clearly, the leadership lacks vision and execution on many fronts. High time for a sea change.

Naomi Rainey
Good Job. It is important for the citizens of the community to speak up and to say we expect our voices to be heard. Honesty is honesty and our personal private and workplace. Truth is truth and our personal private and workplace. There should be guidelines and consequences. When those guidelines are broken the same consequences should be applied to all. No "sacred cows" and no "good old boys network" should govern the city of Long Beach. I urge all citizens to speak with your vote and to stand up when we know things are not right. Again LBPOST good reporting! Keep up the good work!

long time lb gal
Great job at investigative reporting! I echo the sentiments exactly.

Elizabeth
As stated above ... "Cronyism is defined as a "partiality to long-standing friends, especially by appointing them to positions of authority, regardless of their qualifications." It's one of those words that not enough people use anymore to describe things that happen all too often." What do we call cronyism when we add race?

KeithH
Thanks for all the comments. I just wanted to point out that I am not accusing Mr. Beck of doing anything wrong in relation to the agenda items mentioned in my column. I am only pointing out that Mr. Beck, through his own actions, has raised the specter of doubt over each of them and any he is involved with in the future. And when you add up all of the contracts and other dealings that Mr. Beck brought forth to the RDA Board that involve Mr. Murchison's clients, it amounts to a whole heck of a lot more than a hotel room. This is all on Mr. Beck's head. And, as I pointed out last week, Mr. Murchison was doing his job. It may not be a job many of us appreciate or even like, but he did not break any rules. Mr. Beck is the only culpable party here. I only regret that our City Hall leaders lack the fortitude and will to do what is required to truly begin to heal the damage to the public trust situations like this have caused.

Angel
It looks like the reason for Mr. Beck’s transfer may have been only the tip of the iceberg!? If it is true that “Several clients of Mr. Murchison, including Aloft Hotels, Lennar and Hyatt, were involved or potentially impacted by many other project, it raises other serious legal questions. I agree with Mr. Ruehle that the article is both thought provoking and raises other questions. Perhaps Suja since has stated the importance of “Trust” in government leaders as well as other City Council members would "formally" request Mr. West to conduct an audit of the events as outlined by Mr. Keith Higginbotham in his article to determine fact from fiction. The results of the report be made public and take appropriate follow-up action if necessary.

CHARLIE
HEY KEITH: If you & Ryan think this is bad - Look what the three stooges [Reid - Pelosi - Obama] are attempting to do this week in Washington on the healthcare systems bill - God Help Us ...---...--- Thier Lies & Deals make Long Beach look like kids play; HAIL TO THE CHEAT

badapples
KH great reporting! you are so dead center on this. the whole story reminds me of one I heard in kindergarden about some chick in a garden somewhere with a snake slithering around her ankles offering her an apple. yeah, he was doin his job, but that doesn't mean we want him around. and her? she got us all in a whole lot a trouble but i don't remember the part about her getting reassigned to a new position making way more money than god.

Ute 9
Mike Ruehle, man that was a visceral response. So, in your view Murchison is a pimp, which means his clients are prostitutes, e.g., Fortune 1000 companies, and our fine City are the Johns. Not only do I hope you take a few steps back and a few deep breaths, I hope you don't ever say anything as slanderous to our City and Murchison as you just posted. You can complain about the City if you want, however I take great exception to you offending business people who have a passion for the City and its future.

badapples
Hey Keith...you made someome blush: http://murchisonconsulting.net/ he's under "construction" (read: reinvention) Ute9....u need to catch up on all this. the city is not the john...criag beck is. but unlike conventional "arrangements" the city (i.e taxpayers) pays the 'fee' for being 'serviced'. you obviously don't live here. just another business interest looking to protect its financial interests ("passion") for the city.

Fork Toungue
The Keith H column and the Ryan column are like a stereo paradox illustration of what some in the City is like a snake(s) with fork tounge.

KeithH
Just a quick note: There were not two columns. There was only one column, written by yours truly. It was inadvertently given Ryan's byline when first posted (as Ryan pointed out). And as Ryan also said, sorry for the confusion.

Miss B
Ute9, sounds like you are one of the cronies !

BUGABOO BOO
I'll bet Keith - Ryan & Associates wish they hadn't done this colume...:>)

Betsy
Thank you for your research and your well written article. We need to be made aware so that we can be the watchdogs of government. In an ideal and totally ethical world this might not be necessary. In reality, if we don't watch, abuses take place. Local government is our last bastion of democracy. It should be the foundation of ethical and moral behavior from which we build. Thank you for your contribution to help us be aware and hold our local government accountable.

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.