Loading...
SR-11-10-2015-8A City Council Report City Council Regular Meeting: November 10, 2015 Agenda Item: 8.A 1 of 5 To: Mayor and City Council From: Rick Cole, City Manager, City Manager's Office, Administration Subject: Selection of Outside Advisor(s) Recommended Action Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Select one or more outside advisor(s) to conduct an i ndependent review regarding best practices of California charter cities with a Council-manager form of government in light of potential issues raised by the Elizabeth Riel matter and enforcement of the Oaks Initiative 2. Authorize the City Manager to negotiate and execute a professional services agreement with the selected outside advisor(s) at an hourly rate between $225 and $750 to undertake preliminary review services 3. Direct staff to provide the Council with the outsider advisor’s completed preliminary report and subsequent proposal for additional phases of work Executive Summary In the context of good governance practices, the Santa Monica City Council has authorized hiring an outside advisor to conduct a review of local government best practices. Six individuals/firms are now presented to the Council for consideration. Staff recommends that the Council consider the experience, expertise, and relative cost of the six possible advisors and select one or more to conduct a preliminary review regarding best practices of California charter cities with a Council-manager form of government and return with recommendations for additional phases of work. Since the six responses fall broadly into two categories of expertise and proposed scope, the Council may wish to consider hiring more than one advisor to work together or separately toward the desired outcome. Discussion On September 29, 2015 the Santa Monica City Council authorized hiring an “appropriate outside adviser to conduct an independent review and write an 2 of 5 independent report to be presented at a public meeting regarding the best practices of California charter cities with a council-manager form of government in the wake of resident concerns about the Elizabeth Riel matter and enforcement of the Oa ks Initiative. The person hired to conduct the review and write the report shall be selected by the City Council in open session and shall have the power to obtain documents upon request and interview staff, elected officials, appointed officials, and third parties as necessary.” Council’s articulated desire to engage an individual to conduct an independent and balanced review of City practices aligns with the good governance principles of accountability, transparency, responsiveness, and the highest idea ls of public service. While Santa Monica has not been embroiled in widespread scandals or reports of malfeasance, this action was taken in the context of specific concerns that the Council believes should be addressed in pursuit of transparency, accountability, and public trust and confidence in City governance. The City, as detailed in the August 18, 2015 Institute for Local Governance (ILG’s) “Good Governance” checklist, practices almost all of the recommended actions, and many of the best practices, that promote public trust and confidence. Members of the Council have suggested a number of individuals likely qualified to undertake the review. Six individuals/firms have provided information regarding their interest and availability for promptly undertaking the review, proposed financial terms, and their relevant experience or expertise. One suggested individual, Judge Dikram M. Tervizian, is not available. Biographies of each candidate, along with their letters to the Council, are attached to this report. Four of the submissions come from attorneys (Gibson Dunn, Harris & Associates, Hueston, and Jones Day) and their firms having deep and extensive experience and expertise in probing the legal, operational and ethical issues involved in matters of public concern. This background could be of significant value if the emphasis in this review is on analyzing what has already occurred to establish accountability, transparency and clarity as the basis for moving forward. On the other hand, two of the 3 of 5 individuals (Sonenshein and Stern) have a much deeper background and understanding of not only what constitutes best public sector practices, but also how to foster those best practices through both formal mechanisms (rules, reporting, regulation, enforcement etc.) as well as a durable and influential “culture” of “doing the right thing.” The Council may want to focus on one or the other of these dimensions - or perhaps combine the two by engaging more than one advisors to either jointly conduct the review, coordinate on separate reviews or simply produce two different complimentary work products. Once the Council selects an independent advisor (or advisors), an agreement for a preliminary review of the facts would be executed. Work would begin promptly. Staff would transmit a report summarizing the advisor’s preliminary review to the Council, as well as the advisor’s proposal for completing the review, the cost and scope of which would be determined by the findings of the preliminary review. If two or more advisors are chosen, the division of labor and guidelines for collaboration would be identified. Council would then have the opportunity to direct and authorize additional phases of work. If other issues or findings arise during the review process, the scope of work would be expanded to be responsive. Staff recommends that the Council consider the experience, expertise, and relative cost of the six possible advisors and select one (or more) to conduct an independent review regarding best practices of California charter cities with a Council-manager form of government. 4 of 5 Financial Impacts and Budget Actions The agreement to be awarded to the outside advisor for preliminary review services is for an hourly rate between $225 and $750. Funds are available in the FY2015-2016 budget in the Council Office. The agreement will be charged to account 01201.579000 (Council Discretionary Funds.) Staff will return to Council with specific budget actions related to any additional phases of work. Prepared By: Rick Cole, City Manager Approved Forwarded to Council Attachments: A. Good_Governance Information Item B. Advisor Candidate Bios C. Gibson Dunn D. Yang-WomenInInvestigations-GIR-4-1-15 E. Gibson Dunn Professional Profiles F. CaliforniaPowerhouse-GibsonDunn G. Yang-Top100-2014-9-10-14 H. Harris Associates I. John Hueston J. JonesDay 5 of 5 K. Raphael Sonenshein L. Robert M. Stern M. September 29, 2015 13-item (web link) N. john-hueston(1) (002) Information Item 1 Date: August 18, 2015 To: Mayor and City Council From: Danielle Noble, Deputy City Manager Subject: The Institute for Local Government’s (ILC) Good Governance Checklist Introduction The Institute for Local Government has created a checklist to help local government’s address two fundamental questions: 1. What practices can a local agency put in place to promote public trust and confidence? 2. What practices can minimize the risk of missteps that could undermine or damage this trust and confidence? Once the Good Governance Checklist has been completed, an agency can determine their standing in relation to the practices required by law, and those considered best practices which exceed the minimum statutory requirements. Thus, the checklist can aid municipal organizations in identifying potential shortfalls in areas related to public trust and confidence and respond. The City of Santa Monica has completed the checklist, and this information item is meant to inform the Council of the results. Background The Institute for Local Government is an nonprofit 501(c)(3) research and education affiliate of the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties. The organization’s purpose is to promote good governance throughout 2 California at the local level. For over 50 years, the institute has provided local governments with pertinent information and best practices to facilitate effective public service. Discussion The checklist is divided into four areas: 1. Stewardship of Public Resources a. Financial Practices b. Use of Public Resources c. Procurement d. Contracting 2. Transparency a. Open Government Practices b. Meetings c. Decision-Making 3. Education, Training, and Personnel 4. Campaigns The City is compliant with most of the standards listed under “Minimum Standards/Good Practices” in each of the four areas. Out of the 106 minimum standards, only 12 are currently unmet: 1. Agency creates and documents accounting policies and procedures 2. Legislative body members make required brief report of meeting attendance at the agency’s expense at the next meeting of the body 3. Agency institutes a policy for receipt of free tickets/event admissions for officials and ensures reporting compliance on the FPPC Agency Report of Ceremonial Role Events and Ticket/Admission Distributions (Form 802). 4. Agency officials maintain regular office hours 5. Agency Report of Appointments (form 806) is posted on agency website 3 6. Decision-makers consider potential impacts to the resources of other local, state, or federal tribal agencies when making decisions. 7. Agency provides information on policies, including ethics policy, upon onboarding 8. Ethics values are included in the agency’s mission statement 9. Agency has adopted a value-based code of ethics 10. Ethics are part of agency’s hiring practices and interview process 11. Agency has adopted a whistleblower protection policy and posted in on the agency website 12. Agency supervisors and staff are familiar with legal protections related to whistle- blowing activities and receive ongoing training. For almost all of the unmet standards, work to meet the standard is in process. Six of the unmet standards fall into the category of ethics. A Code of Ethics is currently being developed that will meet the expectations of “Minimum Standards/Good Practices”. The rest of the items that are not being addressed are simply not applicable to the City. For instance, one recommendation states an agency should institute a policy to provide officials with free tickets and event admissions to maintain reporting compliance the FPPC Agency Report of Ceremonial Role Events and Ticket Admission Distributions; but, the tickets have not yet met the threshold for reporting under the code. The one standard that is unmet, applicable to the City of Santa Monica, and not being currently addressed by the City is: 6. Decision-makers consider potential impacts to the resources of other local, state, federal or tribal agencies when making decisions The City does pay heed to the potential impact of the surrounding area, particularly the western portion of LA County. The consideration of surrounding cities is evidenced by the City’s active participation in the Westside Cities Council of Governments. However, there are no specific mechanisms in place to consistently measure the impact of decisions made by Santa Monica and members of the WCCOG regarding resources from state and federal agencies. 4 The City of Santa Monica is also compliant with the majority of standards listed under “Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices” in each of the four areas. These standards essentially represent the best practices to ensure public trust and confidence. Out of the 95 items, 67 were met by the City. Thus there are 28 unmet “Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices”. The recommendations that are not being addressed relate to additional training, ethics beyond the minimum, and collaborations with outside agencies. 1. Managers are given information and training to take responsibility for internal controls 2. Manager involvement follows GFOA’s best practices including a. Trainings for all employees b. Documentation of internal controls c. Practical means for employees to report management override of internal controls that could indicate fraud. d. Periodic evaluation of internal controls 3. Agency officials receive training and information of how to review and/or comment on a budget and question to ask 4. Staff and elected officials receive periodic reminders on the provisions of the policy that most likely apply to them 5. Members make a brief report on meetings and conferences attended agency expense, underscoring the value received. 6. Officials decline overly generous or duplicative allowances/benefits that could create public perception issues or present ethical concerns. 7. Orientation of newly elected officials, newly appointed officials and newly hired staff address the issue of permissible and impermissible uses of public resources 8. Vendors receive information about ethics standards for doing business with the agency 5 9. Agency creates a “transparency portal” on its website that provides anticipated information the public needs from all agency departments in one easy to find location 10. Agency makes Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700) disclosures available on agency website 11. Agency makes Ticket/Admission Distribution form (Form 802) available on the agency website 12. Agency makes Payment to Agency Report (Form 801) available on the agency website 13. Agencies participating in joint use or shared services provide online access to documents and materials about cross-agency relationships 14. Agency has or creates youth commissions as an opportunity to connect with younger generations about public services and needs. 15. Agency collaborates and partners with other local agencies to engage shared constituencies, through activities such as joint meetings and newsletters. 16. Agency website contains a dedicated page for links to other local, state and federal agencies, clarifying the functions and services of each agency and makes referrals to other agencies where appropriate 17. Agency distributes the Local Appointments List broadly through social and print media, ethnic media, community-based organizations, and clergy and congregations. 18. Agency publicizes unexpected vacancies broadly through press releases, social and print media, ethnic media, community-based organizations, and clergy and congregations 19. Agency staff creates a map of the 500-foot boundaries for each decision-maker to help him or her determine if there is a potential conflict of interest in a decision 20. When appropriate agency shares training services and costs among neighboring local agencies 21. Agency conducts join education and information sessions among city, county, school and special district elected officials about roles, responsibilities and 6 purpose of each local government agency to clarify and raise awareness among decision-makers 22. When appropriate agency shares training services and costs among neighboring local agencies (e.g. computer classes for fundamental software programs) 23. Elected and appointed officials receive basic overview training within two months of assuming position 24. Certificates of compliance are easily accessible to the public and media (for example posted on the agency website) 25. Agency requires top level staff to participate in training on ethics laws and principles as relevant to their duties within the agency 26. Compliance is a condition of continuing appointment (for appointed officials) and reimbursement (elected officials) 27. Agency coordinates with other local agencies to provide AB 1234 training to all local officials and designated staff, including cities, counties, schools and special districts 28. Staff participates in professional associations that provide guidance on ethics as it relates to their role in the organization Summary Taken as a whole, the checklist demonstrates the City of Santa Monica’s practices both maintain and bolster the integrity of the organization. And, the checklist has provided a clear direction for the City to strengthen its practices to best cultivate public confidence and trust. Work is underway to meet expectations thus far unmet, most notably the development of a Code of Ethics. Once the Code is finished and implemented, the City will have satisfied almost all of the standards that foster public confidence and trust in not only the services provided, but in the individuals providing the services. Prepared By: Colin van Loon, Intern Attachment: The Institute for Local Government’s (ILC) Good Governance Checklist What practices can a local agency put in place to promote public trust and confidence? What practices can minimize the risk of missteps that could undermine or damage this trust and confidence? The Institute for Local Government (ILG) has created a checklist to help elected officials, county administrative officers, city managers, agency counsel, local agency staff and the community-at-large answer these fundamental questions. Some of the “good practices” are those necessary to comply with California law. Others set the agency’s sights higher and take good practices to a level of “better practices.” Whenever possible, the checklist offers references for further information on a topic. The checklist is divided into the following areas: 1 Stewardship of Public Resources (Financial Practices, Use of Public Resources, Procurement and Contracting) 2 Transparency (Open Government Practices, Meetings, Decision-Making) 3 Education, Training and Personnel 4 Campaigns This checklist can be used by elected officials and staff to evaluate the current practices of an agency, identify deficiencies in policy and procedures, set goals and foster communication within the agency about its practices. The checklist combines legal requirements included in California law as well as practices suggested by the following resources: •Government Finance Officers Association’s best practices, available at www.gfoa.org/best-practices •Institute for Local Government’s “Ethics Law Compliance Best Practices,” available at www.ca-ilg.org/ethicsbestpractices •League of California Cities City Managers Department, “Transparency and Your City Self-Assessment Checklist,” draft version available at www.cacities.org/Resources-Documents/ Member-Engagement/Professional-Departments/City-Managers/Transparency-Subcommittee/ Transparency-and-Your-City-checklist •California Special District Leadership Foundation, “District Transparency Certificate of Excellence Checklist,” available at www.sdlf.org/transparency.htm •Sunshine Review, “2013 Transparency Report Card,” available at http://ballotpedia.org/Transparency_report_card_%282013%29 In addition, the League of California Cities helped develop an extensive fiscal assessment tool designed to probe more extensively into local agency fiscal conditions. This tool is available at www.californiacityfinance.com/Diagnostic1405.pdf. Good Governance Checklist: Good and Better Practices 2 ABOUT THE INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT The Institute for Local Government is the nonprofit 501(c)(3) research and education affiliate of the League of California Cities and the California State Association of Counties. For more information and to access the Institute’s resources on ethics visit www.ca-ilg.org/trust. If you would like to access this resource directly, go to www.ca-ilg.org/goodgovernance. The Institute welcomes feedback on this resource: • Email: ethicsmailbox@ca-ilg.org Subject: Good Governance Checklist: Good and Better Practices • Mail: 1400 K Street, Suite 205 ▪ Sacramento, CA ▪ 95814 THANKS TO OUR SUPPORTERS The Institute for Local Government would like to thank the following partners for their support: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Institute appreciates the contributions of the following individuals whose time and effort contributed to this publication: Rebecca Burleson, City of Signal Hill; Hal Conklin; Shelley Desautels, City of Claremont; Susan Garcia, City of Lemon Grove; Rod Gould, City of Santa Monica; Brenda Haggard, City of Elk Grove; Maricela Hernandez, City of Calabasas; Randi Johl-Olson, Legislative Director, California City Clerks Association; Michael Kasperzak, City of Mountain View; Debra McNay, City of Rancho Cucamonga; Dave Millican; Beth Minor, City of Palo Alto; Jeanine Plute and Jerryl Soriano, City of Desert Hot Springs; JoAnne Speers; William C. Statler; and Jeff Vincent, Center for Cities + Schools. HOW TO USE THIS INFORMATION Although the Institute endeavors to help local officials understand technical and legal concepts that apply to their public service, these materials are not technical or legal advice. Officials are encouraged to consult technical experts, attorneys and/or relevant regulatory authorities for up-to-date information and advice on specific situations. Aleshire & Wynder, LLP Best Best & Krieger, LLP Burke Williams & Sorensen, LLP Hanson Bridgett Kronick Moskovitz Tiedemann & Girard Liebert Cassidy Whitmore Meyers Nave Renne Sloan Holtzman Sakai, LLP Richards Watson & Gershon The Institute for Local Government receives funding from a variety of sources. Its public service ethics program relies on support from private donations like the ones acknowledged above, as well as publications sales and training fees to produce resources to assist local officials in their service to their communities. 3 FINANCIAL PRACTICES | GENERAL Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Consistent with generally accepted accounting principles, agency fully and accurately discloses both positive and negative financial information to the public and financial institutions including: •Summaries of all municipal funds, fund balances and changes •Summaries of all municipal revenues and expenditures •Five year financial forecast •General status of reserves and any un- funded obligations (for example, pension obligations) □Agency creates and documents accounting policies and procedures Resource: •www.gfoa.org/documenting- accounting-policies-and-procedures □Agency discloses budget and financial documents on agency website. See Government Finance Officers Association’s (GFOA) Best Practice: Using Websites to Improve Access to Budget Documents and Financial Reports, available at www.gfoa.org/sites/default/files/ CCIUsingWebsites.pdf □Agency prepares five year financial forecasts for both general and other funds, examining issues such as overall economic trends, environmental and regulatory risks, unfunded liabilities, adequacy of fee levels, fund balances, cost deferrals and infrastructure condition □Agency officials discuss forecasts, comparing actual results to forecasts, accompanied by a broader discussion of risks that could affect core agency service levels and facilities during public meetings □Agency officials and the public they serve are clear on the financial implications (short and long term) of the policy and other decisions being made; management and decision-makers support a culture of transparency regarding the agency’s financial situation □Agency engages in energy efficiency and conservation measures to save money and natural resources Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/energy-efficiency-conser- vation STEWARDSHIP OF PUBLIC RESOURCES 4 FINANCIAL PRACTICES | INTERNAL AGENCY CONTROLS Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency segregates duties among staff to minimize risk of error or misconduct □Agency has created a system of authorizations, approval and verification for transactions □Diligent reconciliation process requirements are in place and followed to compare various sets of data to one another; discrepancies are identified and investigated and corrective action is taken when necessary Resource: •www.osc.state.ny.us/agencies/ictf/docs/ intcontrol_stds.pdf □Managers are given information and training to take responsibility for internal controls □Manager involvement follows GFOA’s best practices including: •Trainings for all employees •Documentation of internal controls •Practical means for employees to report management override of internal controls that could indicate fraud •Periodic evaluation of internal controls Resource: •www.gfoa.org/getting-management- involved-internal-control FINANCIAL PRACTICES | PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORTS Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □A certified public accountant prepares agency annual financial reports in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles □Agency officials receive periodic financial reports (mid-year at a minimum) □Reports provide a clear and complete picture of the agency’s assets and liabilities □Periodic financial investment reporting occurs in open meetings □Agency complies with the Government Finance Officers Association, financial reporting best practices. For more information see www.gfoa. org/conforming-governmental-accounting- auditing-and-financial-reporting-standards □Agency posts and archives periodic reports on the agency website □Reviewing officials receive training/information on how to evaluate reports Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/FinancialReportingand Accounting STEWARDSHIP OF PUBLIC RESOURCES 5 FINANCIAL PRACTICES | BUDGET Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency makes complete current fiscal year budget available on agency website □Agency has a clear capital financing and debt management policy that addresses how it selects external consultants such as bond counsel, financial advisors, trustees, engineering consultants and underwriters □Capital financing and debt management policies address disclosure and relations with rating service agencies □Agency complies with Government Finance Officers Association’s, “Best Practices in Public Budgeting” available at www.gfoa.org/services/ nacslb/ □Agency makes budgets for the past three years available on agency website □Agency officials receive training and information of how to review and/or comment on a budget and questions to ask Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/budget-creation-and- monitoring (materials and informational video) □Agency provides information on the budget to the public through a variety of channels, with an emphasis on presenting the information in plain and understandable terms Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/engaging-public-budgeting □Agency holds public budget workshops to get community input on perceived needs FINANCIAL PRACTICES | EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT POLICY See Use of Public Resources section below STEWARDSHIP OF PUBLIC RESOURCES 6 FINANCIAL PRACTICES | AUDITS Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency auditing practices meet California State Controller’s requirements Resource: •www.sco.ca.gov/ard_local_info_ resources.html □Agency secures independent audits of financial reports no later than 180 days after year end □Agency fully cooperates with state and federal audits □Agency posts most recent audit, including opinions on internal controls and other matters, on agency website as well as making such reports available at libraries □Agency periodically changes auditors to provide a fresh view of agency finances (no less than every six years)1 □Agency governing body meets with auditor to review results of audit in a full and frank manner during a public meeting; officials treat any issues identified as opportunities to improve agency practices and not as opportunities to blame staff □Agency auditing practices exceed State Controller’s requirements Resource: •www.sco.ca.gov/ard_local_info_ resources.html □Auditors review agency procedures for handling potential conflicts of interests among agency staff □Agency posts the past three years’ audits on agency website □Agency officials receive information and training on how to review and comment on an audit Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/audits STEWARDSHIP OF PUBLIC RESOURCES 7 USE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES* | EXPENSE REIMBURSEMENT *AGENCY FUNDS AND ANYTHING PURCHASED WITH THOSE FUNDS Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency has required travel and expense reimbursement policies for elected and appointed officials,2 as well as for staff Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/SampleReimbursement Policies □Agency provides the expense reimbursement policy to all new employees and officials □Staff carefully and consistently reviews compliance with expense reimbursement policy and receives support from top management and governing body in doing so □Compliance with expense reimbursement policy is subjected to independent verification □Legislative body members make required brief report of meeting attendance at the agency’s expense at the next meeting of the body3 □Policy and organizational culture emphasizes the value of being conservative about using public resources Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/reimbursementpolicy •“Buying Meals for Others on the Public’s Dime” available at www.ca-ilg.org/dime □Agency posts the expense reimbursement policy on agency website □Staff and elected officials receive periodic reminders on the provisions of the policy that most likely apply to them □Members make a brief report on meetings and conferences attended at agency expense, underscoring the value received USE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES* | ALLOWANCES *AGENCY FUNDS AND ANYTHING PURCHASED WITH THOSE FUNDS Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Any allowance (for example, a telephone or technology allowance) is backed up by documentation explaining the factual basis for the allowance □Officials decline overly generous or duplicative allowances/benefits that could create public perception issues or present ethical concerns STEWARDSHIP OF PUBLIC RESOURCES 8 USE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES* | AGENCY RESOURCES AND EQUIPMENT *AGENCY FUNDS AND ANYTHING PURCHASED WITH THOSE FUNDS Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency adopts policy which takes into account proscriptions against: •Gifts of public resources •Personal use of public resources •Political use of public resources (see Cam- paign section below) □Agency policy is consistently applied □Staff and elected officials understand and comply with mass mailing prohibitions4 Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/massmailing □Those with special access to agency equipment receive training and periodic reminders on prohibitions of use of agency resources for personal or political purposes □Orientation of newly elected officials, newly appointed officials and newly hired staff address the issue of permissible and impermissible uses of public resources □Agency periodically reminds team members of policies and proscriptions at relevant time points (for example, before election season) □Agency explores opportunities to share limited resources among a network of local agencies (cities, schools, special districts, counties, etc.) to leverage capital and staff resources through joint training programs, sharing services, and joint use of facilities and equipment Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/shared-services- and-joint-use STEWARDSHIP OF PUBLIC RESOURCES 9 PROCUREMENT AND CONTRACTING | RULES AND POLICIES Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency has a transparent and fair process for selecting with whom it will do business □Agency complies with state competitive bidding requirements for public works projects5 □Agency has clear organization-wide standards and guidelines regarding procurement and contracting □Agency has policy for advertising contracts open for bidding □Agency has policies in place for the proper disposal of surplus property – policies are communicated to staff □Local officials involved in contracting decisions receive information and/or training on the laws prohibiting self-dealing in agency contracts6 □Officials involved in contracting and purchasing decisions must be included in an agency’s conflict of interest code and regularly file a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700)7 •Form 700 is available at: www.fppc.ca.gov □Agency completes Agency Report of Consultants (Form 805)8 and ensures that all consultants in designated positions complete and file a Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700) •Form 805 is available at: www.fppc.ca.gov/ forms/805.pdf □Agency complies with both the letter and the spirit of procurement laws and policies, that all interested parties are given the opportunity to do business with the agency on an equal basis □Agency website explains processes for doing business with the agency □Agency website includes information about contract opportunities and Requests for Proposals (RFPs) □Vendors receive information about ethics standards for doing business with the agency □Agency conducts periodic training and outreach to educate prospective and current vendors on the agency contracting process □Agency engages in climate friendly purchasing practices Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/climate-friendly-purchasing □Agency engages in regional or shared bidding processes among local agencies in a geographic area to reduce costs. STEWARDSHIP OF PUBLIC RESOURCES 10 OPEN GOVERNMENT PRACTICES | PROMOTING TRANSPARENCY Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency anticipates information the public needs concerning the agency’s activities and makes the information available through a variety of channels including the agency website □Local officials and designated staff are current in making their Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700) disclosures •Form 700 is available at: www.fppc.ca.gov □Agency institutes a policy for receipt of free tickets/event admissions for officials and ensures reporting compliance on the FPPC Agency Report of Ceremonial Role Events and Ticket/ Admission Distributions (Form 802)9 •Form 802 is available at: www.fppc.ca.gov/ forms/802.pdf □Agency creates a “transparency portal” on its website that provides anticipated information the public needs from all agency departments in one easy to find location □Agency makes Statement of Economic Interests (Form 700) disclosures available on the agency website □Agency makes Ticket/Admission Distribution Report (Form 802) available on the agency website □Agency makes Payment to Agency Report (Form 801) available on the agency website •Form 801 is available at: www.fppc.ca.gov/ forms/801.pdf □Agency uses an electronic filing system to make posting and completion of the required disclosures easier OPEN GOVERNMENT PRACTICES | PUBLIC RECORDS ACT REQUESTS Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency adopts policy for handling Public Records Act requests and makes the policy available on website and through other channels □A designated staff member handles all records requests in order to ensure prompt compliance with records requests □(Alternative for Larger Agencies) Designated staff members within each department receive training on Public Records Act compliance to enable the department to properly respond to such requests. □Agency accepts online records requests □Agency anticipates commonly requested records and posts them on the agency website, including all Fair Political Practices Commission forms □Agencies participating in joint use or shared services provide online access to documents and materials about cross-agency relationships TRANSPARENCY 11 OPEN GOVERNMENT PRACTICES | PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency has an easy to use website that makes public information readily available □Agency website uses plain language and minimizes the use of acronyms to ease understanding □Agency provides information explaining how the decision-making process works and how people can provide input Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/PEOrientations □Agency engages in regular communications through a variety of channels to keep the public up-to-date on agency activities Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/PEstrategiccommunications □Communications are translated as needed and distributed to appropriate community groups Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/EthnicMediaInfographic □Agency officials maintain regular office hours □Department heads maintain an “open door policy” for the public □Residents can subscribe to an e-notification system for meetings, summaries of actions taken at meetings, workshops or other events/information □Agency uses social media and other digital tools to engage and communicate with the public Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/online-engagement-guide □Agency uses mobile app for community members to report issues Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/technology-and-public-input □Agency develops relationships with community based organizations, neighborhood groups, ethnic media and clergy/congregations to distribute information and solicit input on issues of potential interest to those groups Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/partnering-communi- ty-based-organizations □For potentially controversial and/or complex issues, the agency creates additional opportunities for individuals to learn about and have input into decisions on those issues Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/DeeplyHeldConcerns □Agency has or creates youth commissions as an opportunity to connect with younger generations about public services and needs Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/engaging-youth □Agency collaborates and partners with other local agencies to engage shared constituencies, through activities such as joint meetings and newsletters TRANSPARENCY 12 OPEN GOVERNMENT PRACTICES | INFORMATION ABOUT KEY ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS AND STAFF Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Contact information, including telephone numbers, mailing addresses, office locations and email addresses are available on agency website and kept current □Terms of office/appointment and next election date are disclosed □Agency Report of Appointments (Form 806) is posted on agency website10 •Form 806 is available at: www.fppc.ca.gov/ forms/806.pdf □Website and other communications explain terms of office and next election/appointment date for elected and appointed officials □Materials and information on how to seek election and appointment are available on agency website □Agency website contains a dedicated page for links to other local, state and federal agencies, clarifying the functions and services of each agency and makes referrals to other agencies where appropriate OPEN GOVERNMENT PRACTICES | BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency complies with California law relating to creation of a Local Appointments List (Maddy Act), which is a list of all appointed positions that expire within the next calendar year. The list is made available to members of the public by various means and provided to the local library with the largest service population11 □Agency posts unexpected vacancies in the agency’s clerk’s office, the local library with the largest service population and other locations as directed by the legislative body12 □Agency posts the Local Appointments List on the agency website on or before January 2 of each year □Agency supports leadership program(s) to familiarize potential applicants who are thinking of applying to boards and commissions with relevant roles and responsibilities □Agency distributes the Local Appointments List broadly through social and print media, ethnic media, community-based organizations, and clergy and congregations □Agency publicizes unexpected vacancies broadly through press releases, social and print media, ethnic media, community-based organizations, and clergy and congregations □Agency encourages local officials to engage in widespread outreach through their networks to inform all segments of the community about opportunities to serve on boards and commissions TRANSPARENCY 13 MEETINGS | POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □All elected and appointed officials have received information/training related to California’s open meeting laws13 Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/abc □Chairperson receives training/information about the role of the chairperson Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/chairmeeting □All members of the decision-making body receive training/information about roles, responsibilities and purpose □Agency has adopted rules of procedure to govern meetings that meet the needs of the agency and the public Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/parliamentarysimplified □Agency promotes civility in public meetings Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/PromotingCivility □A statement of basic rules and protocol related to public participation is included on meeting agendas and orally stated at the beginning of public comment period □Agency engages in processes to enable the public to understand how to most effectively communicate concerns about issues before the agency Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/publicmeetings MEETINGS | WEBSITE CONTENT Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency posts regular meeting agendas 72 hours in advance and special meeting agendas 24 hours in advance on agency website14 □Current year meeting minutes and agendas are available on agency website □Community members can sign up for email notices/reminders of public meetings □Calendar of date, time, location of meetings is available on the agency website □Agency posts meeting agendas for regular meetings earlier than required to enable the public to understand upcoming issues before the agency □Agency makes archives of meeting minutes and agendas for three years or longer □Agency makes available live audio/video streams and archived recordings of meetings available on the agency website □Agency posts video recordings of meetings with relevant accompanying materials □Agency emails meeting agendas to subscribers with information on how to view related materials on the website TRANSPARENCY 14 DECISION-MAKING | DECISION-MAKERS Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □California Fair Political Practices Commission’s Form 700 (Statement of Economic Interests) is distributed and collected in a timely manner on an annual basis (required by law15) □Decision-makers know where the 500-foot boundaries are with respect to their various property interests16 □Officials are advised of prohibitions against self- dealing in addition to the Political Reform Act17 □Agency staff creates a map of the 500-foot boundaries for each decision-maker to help him or her determine if there is a potential conflict of interest in a decision DECISION-MAKING | PROCESSES Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency has adopted a conflict of interest code as required by the Political Reform Act18 □Decision-makers receive training on due process rules applicable to quasi-adjudicatory (administrative) hearings. Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/bias □Decision-makers know the agency’s policies for disclosure of information they receive outside of adjudicatory hearings □Agency policies are applied consistently to those seeking agency approvals, regardless of personal connections □Decision-makers listen attentively at public hearings, particularly adjudicatory hearings □Decision-makers consider potential impacts to the resources of other local, state, federal or tribal agencies when making decisions □Decision-makers voluntarily abstain when their ability to make decisions in the public interest (as opposed to personal or political interests) might be reasonably questioned Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/abstentions TRANSPARENCY 15 EDUCATION/TRAINING | ONBOARDING Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency provides materials on duties and responsibilities for all newly elected and appointed officials and staff Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/new-local-public-service □Agency provides information on policies, including ethics policy, upon onboarding □Orientation on duties and responsibilities is available to all newly elected and appointed officials and staff Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/OrientationMaterials □When appropriate agency shares training services and costs among neighboring local agencies EDUCATION/TRAINING | ONGOING EDUCATION Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency supports continuing education activities for staff, appointed and elected officials (including those that are required by law for certain professional license-holders) □Agency requires attendance at sexual harassment prevention training for elected officials and those in supervisory positions (two hours every two years required for those in supervisory positions)19 □Agency publicizes and makes available resources to help local officials understand ethics laws □Agency encourages regular attendance at local and/or statewide continuing education activities □Agency plans regular training sessions and budgets for attendance at trainings □Agency provides information and guidance on handling ethical dilemmas in the workplace □Agency conducts joint education and information sessions among city, county, school and special district elected officials about roles, responsibilities and purpose of each local government agency to clarify and raise awareness among decision-makers □When appropriate agency shares training services and costs among neighboring local agencies (e.g. computer classes for fundamental software programs) EDUCATION, TRAINING & PERSONNEL 16 EDUCATION/TRAINING | PROMOTING ORGANIZATIONAL ETHICS Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Ethics values are included in the agency’s mission statement □Agency has adopted a value-based code of ethics Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/ethicscodes □Ethics are part of agency’s hiring practices and interview process □Agency values collaboration and partnerships with other local agencies and community-based organizations □Agency’s leadership leads by example by consistently demonstrating agency’s values through actions □When collaborating with other agencies, staff and leadership show respect and decorum for the formal and informal processes of partners and the community, developing and formalizing agreements when necessary EDUCATION/TRAINING | ETHICS TRAINING (AB 1234)20 Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Elected and appointed officials receive two hours of ethics training every two years (and basic overview training within one year of assuming position)21 •Online training available at: www.fppc.ca.gov □All local officials who must receive AB 1234 training are current on their training □Top level staff voluntarily receives training on ethics laws and principles as relevant to their duties within the agency □Elected and appointed officials receive basic overview training within two months of assuming position □Agency takes steps to make AB 1234 training meaningful, understandable and helpful □AB 1234 training is in-person (as opposed to online) to enable discussion and questions □Certificates of compliance are easily accessible to the public and media (for example posted on the agency website) □Agency requires top level staff to participate in training on ethics laws and principles as relevant to their duties within the agency □Compliance is a condition of continuing appointment (for appointed officials) and reimbursement (elected officials) □Subsequent trainings are more in depth examinations of required topics22 □Agency coordinates with other local agencies to provide AB 1234 training to all local officials and designated staff, including cities, counties, schools and special districts EDUCATION, TRAINING & PERSONNEL In reference to check box 1, column 2. Not past practice, but will direct newly appointed Boards & Commission members to training with appointment letter. CAO conducts training with new Council members. 17 PERSONNEL | PRACTICES AND POLICIES Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency has fair and merit based processes in place for hiring and advancing employees □Agency consistently makes a concerted effort to advertise widely for open positions □Elected officials generally play a role in selection of chief executive, department heads, agency counsel, and non-elected or appointed staff and provide regular guidance and feedback to those employees Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/Board-Chief-Executive- Relations □Officials understand and abide by agency’s adopted policies relating to who makes hiring and other personnel decisions relating to subordinate staff □Agency has a non-discrimination policy and abides by its terms □Agency has adopted and follows an anti- nepotism policy □Agency has adopted a whistleblower protection policy and posted it on the agency website23 (see Speaking Truth to Power section below) □Agency has adopted policies regarding second jobs and other potentially incompatible activities24 □Agency posts compensation and benefits information for all officials and employees on the agency website □Agency completes salary comparison/ benchmarking for staff positions using a reputable salary survey every five years - agency posts summary of results on agency website EDUCATION, TRAINING & PERSONNEL 18 PERSONNEL | INCENTIVES FOR SPEAKING TRUTH TO POWER25 Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency has an adopted policy clearly explaining procedures for reporting and investigating allegations of misconduct and protection of those that report misconduct □Unlawful conduct is dealt with swiftly, firmly and consistently within the agency □Agency supervisors and staff are familiar with legal protections related to whistle-blowing activities and receive ongoing training Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/whistle □Agency supports employees who bring forward truthful, but potentially unwelcome, unsolicited, unpopular or difficult information to the attention of relevant decision- makers □Governing bodies encourage chief executive and financial staff to regularly analyze financial trends for areas of potential concern/risks so the body can discuss and address them □Staff participates in professional associations that provide guidance on ethics as it relates to their role in the organization - for a list of local agency professional associations with ethics codes see www.ca-ilg.org/ associationsethicscodes PERSONNEL | CHIEF EXECUTIVE Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency chief executive has a college degree in relevant field and a minimum of five years of broad-based management experience □Chief executive is or is willing to become a member of the International City/County Management Association (ICMA) in good standing and adheres to ICMA’s declaration of ideals. For more information see www.icma.org □The hiring process includes ethics questions in interviews Resource: •“Promoting Personal and Organizational Ethics” available at www.ca-ilg.org/ppoe PERSONNEL | AGENCY COUNSEL Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency counsel is an active member of the California State Bar in good standing with at least five years’ experience in municipal law. See www.calbar.ca.gov □Agency counsel is familiar with and adheres to the California State Bar’s Rules of Professional Conduct. See www.calbar.ca.gov/ethics □The hiring process includes ethics questions in interviews □Agency counsel acts in accordance with the ethical principles and values set forth by the agency and other relevant organizations. For example, “Ethical Principles for City Attorneys” available at www.cacities.org/attorneys EDUCATION, TRAINING & PERSONNEL 19 PERSONNEL | AGENCY CLERK Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Agency clerk is or is willing to become a member of the International Institute of Municipal Clerks (IIMC) in good standing and adheres to IIMC’s code of ethics. For more information see www.iimc.com □Agency encourages clerks to engage in education, mentorship and professional development activities through the California Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Association and the California City Clerks Association Resources: •www.ccbsa.net •www.californiacityclerks.org EDUCATION, TRAINING & PERSONNEL 20 CANDIDATES Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Candidates for the governing board receive information on how to comply with campaign laws26, including local requirements and restrictions27 □Agency distributes California’s Code of Fair Campaign Practices to all candidates28 □Agency provides candidates with information about ethics laws, including conflicts of interest, incompatible offices and governmental transparency requirements that will be relevant to their service if elected Resource: •www.ca-ilg.org/CandidatePamphlet □A pledge of fair campaign practices is distributed to and signed by all candidates. Available at www.ca-ilg.org/campaigncodes □Agency supports one or more leadership programs to familiarize potential candidates who are thinking of running for office with local issues and decision-making practices OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES Minimum Standards/Good Practices Beyond the Minimum/Better Practices □Officials and employees are advised of prohibitions relating to campaign fundraising directed at agency staff29 □Officials and employees are advised of restrictions relating to political activities of public employees30 □Officials and employees are reminded of the proscriptions against political use of public resources including the use of equipment, photocopying, or mailing of campaign related materials at the public’s expense31 Resources: •www.ca-ilg.org/massmailing •The Fair Political Practices Commission fact sheet on prohibited mass mailings available at www.fppc.ca.gov □Agency provides trainings to officials and employees on prohibitions and restrictions on the political activities of public employees CAMPAIGNS 21 References and Resources Note: Sections in the California Code are accessible at http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/. Fair Political Practices Commission regulations are accessible at www.fppc.ca.gov/index.php?id=52. A source for case law information is www.findlaw.com/cacases/ (requires registration). 1 See Cal. Gov’t. Code § 12410.6 (“a local agency shall not employ a public accounting firm to provide audit services to a local agency if the lead audit partner or coordinating audit partner having primary responsibility for the audit, or the audit partner responsible for reviewing the audit, has performed audit services for that local agency for six consecutive fiscal years.”). 2 Cal. Gov’t Code § 53232.2. 3 Cal. Gov’t Code § 53232.3. 4 Cal. Gov’t Code § 89001; 2 Cal. Code Regs §§ 18901-18901.1. 5 See Cal. Pub. Cont. Code §§ 20121-20123, 20162-20163. 6 See Cal. Gov’t Code § 1090. 7 See 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 18730. 8 Available at www.fppc.ca.gov/forms/805.pdf. 9 See 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 18944.1. 10 See 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 18705.5. 11 Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 54970-54973. 12 Cal Gov’t Code § 54974. 13 Cal. Gov’t Code § 54950 and following. 14 Cal. Gov’t Code § 54954.2. 15 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 18723. 16 See 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 18705.2(a)(11), (A financial effect in which an official has a financial interest, other than a leasehold interest, is material whenever the governmental decision would consider any decision affecting real property value located within 500 feet of the property line of the official’s real property unless the FPPC provides written advice of the determination that there will be no reasonably foreseeable measurable impact on the official’s property). 17 See Cal. Gov’t Code § 1090. 18 See Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 87300-14. 19 Cal. Gov’t Code § 12950.1. 20 Cal. Gov’t Code § 53235 requires ethics training for specified local government officials. For more information see www.ca-ilg.org/ab1234compliance. 21 See Cal. Gov’t Code § 53235(a), (b). 22 See California Attorney General’s Guidelines, available at http://oag.ca.gov/ethics. 23 See Cal. Lab. Code § 1101-06. 24 See Cal. Gov’t Code §1126. 25 Aaron Wildavsky, Speaking Truth to Power: The Art and Craft of Policy Analysis (Boston: Little, Brown, 1979). 26 See generally Cal. Gov ’t Code §§ 84100 – 84511. 27 See Cal. Gov’t Code § 81009.5 (Local government agencies that have adopted campaign finance ordinances must submit a copy to the FPPC). Copies or links to these ordinances are posted on the FPPC website at www.fppc.ca.gov/index.php?id=9. 28 Cal. Elect. Code §§ 20440-20444. 29 See Cal. Gov’t Code § 3205. 30 See Cal. Penal Code § 424; Cal. Gov’t Code § 8314. 31 Cal. Penal Code § 424; Cal. Gov’t Code §§ 8314, 89001; 2 Cal. Code Regs. § 18901.1. Summarized Biographies of Advisor Candidates Gibson Dunn - $750/hour Debra Wong Yang Selected Professional Experience  California State Superior Court Judge  United States Attorney for the Central District of California  Los Angeles Police Commission member  Adjunct professor at USC Gould School of Law  Chair of Gibson, Dunn & Cruther’s Crisis Management Practice Group and White Collar Defense and Investigations Practice Group  Chair, Special Investigative Committee of the Board of Trustees, private school Education  Juris Doctorate, Boston College Law School Doug Fuchs Selected Professional Experience  Assistant United States Attorney, Deputy Chief of the Major Frauds Section  Law clerk, Honorable Cynthia Holcomb Hall, U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit Education  Juris Doctorate, University of Chicago Law School Harris & Associates - $300/hour and $275/hour John W. Harris Selected Professional Experience  Founder of Harris & Associates , specializing in labor and employment, wage and hour defenses, and commercial and product liability litigation  Senior Trial Attorney, Chief Counsel’s Office of the IRS  Member, County of Los Angeles’ Equity Oversight Panel for the Sheriff’s Department Education  Juris Doctorate, University of California, Los Angeles Law School Herbert Hayden Selected Professional Experience  Senior Associate, Harris & Associates Education  Juris Doctorate, Santa Clara University Law School John C. Hueston - $545/hour Selected Professional Experience  Litigation Chair, Hueston Hennigan LLP  Chair of Business Trial & Crisis Management Practice, Irell & Manella  Enron Task Force; Criminal Section Chief and Prosecutor  Assistant United States Attorney  Independent Counsel, County of San Bernardino Education  Juris Doctorate, Yale Law School Jones Day - $585/hour Brian A. Sun Selected Professional Experience  Chief, Financial Investigations Unit, U.S. Department of Justice  Assistant U.S. Attorney  President, National Asian Pacific American Bar Association  President, Los Angeles Regional Foodbank  Deputy General Council, Christopher Commission, Los Angeles Police Department Education  Juris Doctorate, University of Southern California Law School Frederick D. Friedman Selected Professional Experience  Assistant U.S. Attorney  Special Assistant to then Associate Attorney General Rudolph W. Giuliani, U.S. Department of Justice  Trial Attorney, Criminal Section, Tax Division, US. Department of Justice Education  Juris Doctorate, University of California, Berkeley, Bolt Raphael Sonenshein - $225/hour Selected Professional Experience  Political science professor and department chairman at California State University, Fullerton  Executive Director of the Edmund G. “Pat” Brown Institute of Public Affairs and California State University, Los Angeles  Executive Director, Los Angeles Appointed Charter Reform Commission  Principal consultant to charter commissions in Glendale, Burbank, Culver City, Huntington Beach, Anaheim, and Tucson, AZ. Education  Ph.D, Political Science, Yale University Robert M. Stern - $450/hour Selected Professional Experience  President, Center for Government Studies  Elections Counsel, California Secretary of State’s Office  General Counsel, California Fair Political Practices Commission  Co-author of California Proposition 208 (Campaign Finance Reform)  Author of Proposition 9 (Political Reform Act of 1974)  Author of Los Angeles Ethics Act of 1990  Assistant to City of Veron’s Ethics Advisor  Member, City of West Hollywood Ethics Reform Task Force Education  Juris Doctorate, Stanford University Law School First published in Global Investigations Review, Volume 2 Issue 1, April 2015 Women in Investigations E very March, the world observes International Women’s Day to highlight women’s equality and empowerment. Here at Global Investigations Review, we thought it presented the perfect occasion to put the spotlight on women in the field of investigations. When thinking about high-powered women in investigations, several names immediately spring to mind. In the United State, Leslie Caldwell leads the Department of Justice’s criminal division, while Mary Jo White is the chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission. President Obama recently nominated Loretta Lynch to become the next US attorney general. In other countries, too, we find women occupying senior positions in public service. In France, Éliane Houlette was recently appointed the country’s new special financial prosecutor, nicknamed the “super-prosecutor”. In the United Kingdom, the Financial Conduct Authority’s (FCA) former head of enforcement and financial crime, Tracey McDermott, is now the director of supervision and authorisations, and also sits on the organisation’s board. Of course, there are far more examples out there of hard-working wom- en in the field of investigations, which is why GIR is pleased to acknowl- edge them in our first ‘Women in Investigations’ special. Here GIR profiles lawyers, government prosecutors, barristers, forensic accountants and various in-house counsel, all of whom can serve as inspira- tions to current and future generations of investigations professionals. This magazine carries shortened profiles due to space constraints but the full versions can be accessed on the GIR website. We’ve searched near and far, from São Paulo to Shanghai, Oslo to Johannesburg, Washington, DC to Sydney, to find the 100 individuals that have come to be included in this list, drawn up to demonstrate the wide variety of talented women that form part of the worldwide investigations community. GIR GIR Global In vestigations Re view The law and practice of international investigations Global In vestigations Re view The law and practice of international investigationsGIRGlobal In vestigations Review The law and practice of international investigations Global Investigations Review Women in Investigations First published in Global Investigations Review, Volume 2 Issue 1, April 2015 In this special issue, readers can get to know the FCA’s current acting head of enforcement and market oversight, Georgiana Philippou; Marianne Djupesland, head of the anti- corruption team at Økokrim, Norway’s national authority for investigation and prosecution of economic and environmen- tal crime, and Daniëlle Goudriaan, the new national coordi- nating prosecutor for corruption in the Netherlands. We speak to established private practitioners, includ- ing former prosecutor Nancy Kestenbaum at Covington & Burling, and Mini Vandepol, who heads Baker & McKenzie’s global compliance group. Among the emerging women in investigations GIR chose to profile we find Leila Babaeva at Miller & Chevalier, Erica Sellin Sarubbi of Brazil’s Trench Rossi e Watanabe Advogados, and Tiana Zhang of Kirkland & Ellis. We also highlight in-house lawyers from global financial institutions such as Barclays and Nomura, and get the foren- sic accountant perspective from individuals at EY and PwC. GIR set out to discover what it is that makes these indi- viduals tick, what achievements they are most proud of, and what keeps them busy in their respective jurisdictions. They tell us how they got into this area of law: for many, a combina- tion of their curious nature and a particular knack for solving complex puzzles put them on the investigations track. Others told us of how proud they have been to have represented their countries in public service, and of the personal fulfilment it brought to be part of investigations into misconduct that was at the heart of the 2008 financial crisis. But we also discussed what affects individuals’ practices the most: the continuing development of the international investigations landscape. They tell us why evidence gathering by foreign lawyers in Switzerland can be problematic; we find out that practitioners in New York and Australia face similar burdens in dealing with a hotchpotch of domestic regulators all looking into similar conduct; and how Brazilian lawyers, in the midst of a snowballing corruption investigation, face “a bumpy road ahead” in attempting to change locals’ mindsets for the better. Meanwhile, in the United Kingdom, lawyers speak of their concerns regarding future enforcement by the Serious Fraud Office following its tough talk on cooperation in deferred prosecution agreements and legal privilege in investigations. We also looked into the question of gender and what it means to be a woman in the investigations field. Lawyers speak of the importance of getting enough support from part- ners at work and partners at home, to successfully balance the often hectic lifestyle as an investigations professional with a fulfilling family life. We hear encouraging examples of offices where there are many women in leadership positions, and of the many female and male role models that have helped shape these professionals’ careers. Individuals GIR spoke to mentioned that while progress is being made, unconscious bias persists in seemingly innocent decisions: in partnerships dominated by men, who uncon- sciously champion and promote individuals in their image, or when working parents’ professional progress stalls, simply because fewer working hours are spent in the office in full view of senior management. Some mentioned statistics that show women tend to leave Big Law after having their second child, and talked of potential flexible policies that might help prevent the outflow of such talented professionals in the fu- ture. We discuss how the issue should be tackled: for example, among the 100 individuals, we find those people in favour, and others against quotas in the workplace, and we hear about individual experiences with such policies so far. We’re told employers need to be “creative” about gender equality, and that the abolition of double standards – for example allow- ing both male and female parents leave to spend time with their families – will go a long way towards creating a more equal workplace. However, if there’s one common thread, it is that on top of gender equality, overall diversity should be embraced and promoted further. Lastly, we also set out to discover more about the women outside of their profession, and can happily report that among our 100, we have a former prosecutor with a penchant for figure skating, one whose children call her “The Enforcer”, an individual who is fascinated by lighthouses, and a lawyer who can perform the folk dances of over a dozen countries. * Those marked with an asterisk are members of the Global Investigations Review editorial board. GIR GIR Global In vestigations Re view The law and practice of international investigations Global In vestigations Re view The law and practice of international investigat ionsGIRGlobal In vestigations Re view The law and practice of international investigations Global Investigations Review First published in Global Investigations Review, Volume 2 Issue 1, April 2015 Women in Investigations Debra Wong Yang 55 Partner at Gibson Dunn & Crutcher Partner, and co-chair of the crisis management group, the white-collar defence and investigations practice group and the privacy, cybersecurity and consumer protection practice group Los Angeles, California Becoming an investigations lawyer was a natural extension of my years of being a federal prosecutor and judge. Years of cross-examining witnesses and probing for the truth make it much easier to conduct global investigations where one con- stantly assesses credibility and truthfulness. Often you need not only a command of the factual details but also an insight into the contextual issues. Each investigation is different from the next and I thoroughly enjoy the learning that comes with that. In large part this stems from needing to understand the underly- ing business and its complexities. Watching how businesses grow, profit and provide the services of the world has been infinitely fascinating. As one who probably should have gone to business school, I enjoy watching management and boards deal with making critical decisions, exhibit true ingenuity and leadership and drive profit without making the wrong sacrifices. My services for clients have moved past the point of simply conducting investigations. Often I get called in to deal with strategic counselling and long-term business deci- sions. I have had projects where I have been asked to take a business idea and examine it from a legal perspective, and to identify strengths, weaknesses, vulnerabilities and critical concerns for a company. A big talking point here is money laundering and AML issues as they affect businesses beyond financial institu- tions. Also, third-party relationships and examinations of the same in foreign countries. Gibson Dunn partner Ted Olson has been an inspira- tion to me. I have watched him exhibit absolute leadership over and over in his career. I have seen him employ the highest degree of ethics in even the smallest of decisions. His latest work on gay marriage demonstrated bravery but also a way in which legal acumen was used to profoundly make the world better. I believe that a woman who makes the decision to have a successful career, have a meaningful personal relation- ship, have children and be actively engaged in their lives, and maintain close relations with friends and family, does not have an easy path. I continue to think that her career trajectory may not be linearly upward. In order to facilitate their desire to have meaningful careers, greater flexibility needs to be offered to women in the workplace. That means support, such as childcare services, or other types of support services of- fered, or that can mean being able to sideline or B-track your career during challenging personal times, such as when you are parenting young children, without the risk of impairing your career. I don’t think that the legal profession has sufficiently grappled with this issue. I’d tell other women to go big. Don’t limit yourself. And leave your options open, because as life unfolds it will offer you more opportunities if you keep yourself open to them. I strongly believe in the concept of “random acts of kindness”. I have been the recipient of some of the kindest gestures at some of the darkest of times. And I have found those gestures spiritually and emotionally uplifting. I keep this feeling close and try to do the same for others when I can. GIR GIR Global In vestigations Re view The law and practice of international investigations Global In vestigations Re view The law and practice of international investigationsGIRGlobal In vestigations Review The law and practice of international investigations Global Investigations Review Portfolio Media. Inc. | 860 Broadway, 6th Floor | New York, NY 10003 | www.law360.com Phone: +1 646 783 7100 | Fax: +1 646 783 7161 | customerservice@law360.com California Powerhouse: Gibson Dunn By Linda Chiem Law360, New York (May 21, 2015, 6:16 PM ET) -- With its deep California roots and penchant for tackling high-stakes matters, Gibson Dunn has helped shape the Golden State economy and legal landscape by notching landmark trial victories, blazing a trail in appellate work and steering multibillion-dollar transactions. Founded as a small Los Angeles practice 125 years ago, Gibson Dunn has since grown into a more than 1,200-attorney global juggernaut, while still remaining one of the largest and most respected law firms in its home state of California with 456 attorneys in five offices in Los Angeles, Century City, Orange County, Palo Alto and San Francisco whose corporate, regulatory and litigation work has had a far- reaching impact beyond the Golden State’s borders. More recently, Gibson Dunn’s team notched a landmark civil rights victory protecting students’ fundamental right to education, steered a multibillion-dollar merger that created the largest Los Angeles-based publicly traded company, and is advising on the proposed development of an NFL stadium in the Los Angeles area, not to mention numerous other real estate transactions, landing Gibson Dunn a spot among Law360's California Powerhouses. “We are a firm that prides itself on collegiality, collaboration and teamwork, and I think that enables us to better serve our clients across borders. And that’s reinforced structurally where we don’t have any structural impediments to working with one another or finding the best expertise on a matter,” Managing Partner Ken Doran told Law360. Gibson Dunn began taking shape in 1890 when corporate attorney John Bicknell, whose clients included Southern Pacific Railroad, teamed up with litigator Walter Trask to create a law firm providing litigation and transaction-related services. Judge James Gibson joined the firm in 1897, and six years later, the trio merged their practice with that of former Los Angeles City Attorney William Dunn and former Assistant City Attorney Albert Crutcher. Gibson Dunn started out working with railroad, utility and land companies, but has built itself into a full- service global firm that has grown beyond California with outposts in London, Paris, Washington, D.C., and New York City, further expanding throughout Europe, South America, the Middle East and Asia, according to the firm’s website. Gibson Dunn boasts a deep and wide bench of top-tier talent whose expertise has made the firm a dynamo in litigation, antitrust, securities, finance, mergers and acquisitions, real estate, capital markets and white collar, according to Doran. But what also sets the firm apart is the long-standing relationships it has built with notable clients and its bent for tackling high-stakes matters for clients that includeMicrosoft Corp., Time Warner Cable Inc., Nike, Hewlett Packard Co., Dole Food Co., Matson Inc. and others. Over the past year, Gibson Dunn has made a splash on the M&A and capital markets front by steering multibillion-dollar transactions. In a high-profile deal for longtime client Aecom Technology Corp., Gibson Dunn guided the engineering and construction firm in its $6 billion acquisition of larger rival URS Corp. last year, creating an approximately $19 billion engineering and construction giant that is the largest publicly traded company based in Los Angeles. Peter Wardle, a Los Angeles-based corporate partner and co-chair of Gibson Dunn’s capital markets practice, told Law360 that it was a “transformative” transaction for Aecom that was born out of a relationship nearly a decade in the making, dating back to when Gibson Dunn worked on Aecom’s $700 million initial public offering in 2007. “By the time we got to 2014 and it came down to buying a company that’s larger to create a juggernaut, we intimately knew all the people involved on a much deeper level to work out what was the best way to accomplish [the transaction] and avoid some of the pitfalls,” Wardle said. While Aecom had grown over the years through dozens of smaller acquisitions, the company wasn’t necessarily looking for a big buy at the time, Wardle said. But activist hedge fund Jana Partners LLC had been putting the pressure on URS to boost shareholder value and that ultimately put the San Francisco- based URS in play, prompting Aecom to more seriously consider a combination with a much larger company. The end result: Aecom became the largest Los Angeles-based publicly traded company, with 95,000 employees in 150 countries, and combined revenue of $19 billion for 2013. “We have this holistic approach where we get to know a client really well, and when it comes time to do a big M&A transaction, we’ve already got that backdrop,” Wardle said. “Our attorneys have been on with the client over a number of years and have a deep understanding that gives us the advantage of propelling any transaction that comes along.” In another transformative transaction for another longtime California client, Gibson Dunn represented Conversant Inc. in the digital marketing company’s $2.3 billion sale to Alliance Data Systems Corp. last year, creating a marketing services powerhouse with greater reach and a broader platform in the growing e-commerce and online advertising spaces. “We do have deep roots in California [and] that’s been one of our enduring strengths that clients, year after year, with big deals or little deals, have turned to us for all of them,” Stewart McDowell, a San Francisco-based corporate partner and co-chair of the firm’s capital markets practice, said. Gibson Dunn’s corporate transactional prowess has also resulted in a robust real estate practice — handling real estate finance and development, acquisitions and land use matters — that has been picking up plenty of steam this past year. The firm is lead counsel to Hollywood Park Land Co., a joint venture between Stockbridge Capital Group LLC and St. Louis Rams owner Stan Kroenke’s real estate firm, the Kroenke Group, in its plan to develop 298 acres in Inglewood, California, which could potentially include a $1.8 billion NFL stadium and 6,000 seat performance venue. The high-profile proposal was announced in January 2015 and it was approved by the Inglewood City Council in February through a voter-sponsored initiative. Gibson Dunn has also carved a name for itself handling headline-grabbing civil rights matters in California. In a landmark education case called Vergara v. California, a Gibson Dunn team represented nine California public school students in bringing a successful constitutional challenge against five California Education Code statutes regulating public school teacher tenure, dismissal and layoffs. Gibson Dunn helped prove that the statutes created a system that saddled students, especially low- income and minority students, with grossly ineffective teachers and created vast and unjustified inequalities in the educational opportunities that were being afforded to students across California. In June 2014, a state judge in Los Angeles sided with the nine public school students, ruling that the state's teacher tenure system was unconstitutional and struck down the five state laws governing teacher hiring, firing and tenure. Before that, the firm helped lead the charge against Proposition 8, persuading a trial court and then the Ninth Circuit to recognize same-sex couples' right to marry in the state. The U.S. Supreme Court in June 2013 left the injunction against the enforcement of Proposition 8 intact, ruling that the proponents of the initiative lacked standing to defend it. “Our clients’ litigation wins have had a major impact in California and nationwide — from overturning Prop. 8 and securing the right for same-sex marriage in California, to fighting on behalf of underprivileged students in California, along with our precedent-setting wins at the U.S. Supreme Court that have reshaped the landscape for business defendants nationwide,” Christopher Chorba, a litigation partner and co-partner in charge of the Los Angeles office, said. California-based litigators also played a central role in exposing systemic fraud underlying foreign judgments against Dole Food Co. and Chevron Corp., and then setting aside those tainted judgments and pursuing the wrongdoers throughout the country, Chorba added. Specifically, a Gibson Dunn team succeeded in getting a California appeals court to toss a $2.3 million jury award against Dole in March 2014, putting an end to a decadelong dispute between Dole and a group of Nicaraguans who claimed they were affected by pesticides that Dole used in the 1970s. The appeals court affirmed a lower court decision vacating the award and axing the suit because the purported Nicaraguan banana farm workers who sued the company may have built their case on false testimony at the behest of their attorneys. Gibson Dunn described it as a “fraud on the court” perpetrated by U.S. and Nicaraguan plaintiffs’ lawyers who had “coached their clients to lie about working on banana farms, forged work certificates to create the appearance that their clients had worked on Dole-contracted farms, and faked lab results” as part of a scheme to obtain the judgment against Dole. It's an impressive run made possible by a collaborative corporate culture that the firm expects to continue tapping into to build on its strengths and to rack up cases and deals for clients. “There are no structural impediments for partners to want to work together and provide the best team for a matter," Doran said. "That’s the hallmark of our culture and it’s been a pretty consistent piece of our culture. As a growing firm, it's even more important to have a culture that is understood and binding across the firm.” --Additional reporting by Daniel Siegal and Jeff Sistrunk. Editing by Mark Lebetkin. All Content © 2003-2015, Portfolio Media, Inc. JOHN C. HUESTON DIRECT 949 226 6740 OFFICE 949 229 8640 EMAIL JHUESTON@HUESTON.COM FAX 888 775 0898 620 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE SUITE 1300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 November 2, 2015 5029636 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL Mayor Kevin McKeown Santa Monica City Council Members City of Santa Monica 1685 Main Street Santa Monica, CA 90401 Dear Mayor McKeown and Members of the City Council: I am pleased to submit this letter of interest to serve as independent counsel in order to assist the City of Santa Monica in establishing best practices for cities with a council-manager form of government. Mr. Cole has requested that I provide answers to the following three questions: 1) What is your interest and availability for promptly undertaking this review, with an initial scoping phase; fact finding and research; and delivering a report in the next three-four months? As a former public servant, I am keenly aware of the importance of expeditiously addressing cases and issues that directly and broadly affect the public. Since concluding my work on the Enron Task Force, I have sought public interest/public impact work at discounted rates as part of my effort to continue to serve my community. Because almost all such work is extremely time- sensitive, I seek to focus effort and resources to meet project goals within an expedited time frame. In this instance, I believe all work can and should be concluded within a three-month period. 2) What would be the financial terms? For representations of public entities, our firm charges steeply discounted rates. Employing a blended, discounted rate approach that we have used for the County of San Bernardino, the Navajo Nation, the University of California and other government entities, we are prepared to offer a blended discounted rate of $545 per hour for all attorneys working on the matter. This rate is less than half of my standard, undiscounted rate. 3) What is the most relevant experience or expertise you bring to this work that would best qualify you to be chosen? I bring over 20 years of experience in investigating and remediating municipal and local government issues as well as broad experience in diagnosing and remedying governance problems for a range of public entities and Fortune 500 companies. I believe that my background and experience provide the independence and balanced judgment necessary for the investigation of issues arising from the Riel termination and the recommendation of governance improvements and best practices. As a Division Chief and Assistant U.S. Attorney in Los Angeles and Orange counties, I led a series of successful investigations of municipal corruption in Santa Ana, Anaheim, Carson, Long Beach, MAYOR MCKEOWN NOVEMBER 2, 2015 PAGE 2 PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL 5029636 Gardena and several other cities. In each instance, my investigation uncovered breakdowns in good governance practices. In several cases, I provided analysis and recommendations for new guidelines and the adoption of best practices. In 2003, the Enron Task Force conducted a national search for lawyers to help lead the investigation into potential criminal conduct by former Enron CEOs Jeff Skilling and Kenneth Lay. The Los Angeles U.S. Attorney’s office nominated me to serve as a lead trial lawyer. For the next three years, I investigated one of the most complex financial frauds ever attempted. My service culminated with a lead role in the successful, four-month trial of Skilling and Lay. After the trial, I spoke at national conferences and in boardrooms about corporate “best practices” and how to conduct an effective internal investigation. Since 2006, I have devoted a substantial part of my private practice to internal investigations and counseling for best governance practices. For example, in 2009 I served as Independent Counsel for the County of San Bernardino in order to investigate whether the County Assessor should be removed from office. I conducted a thorough investigation of county employees and third-party witnesses. I was quickly able to establish that the Assessor should be removed from office. The Board of Supervisors then authorized an expansion of my investigation. At the conclusion of my work, I presented a 27–page, published report, which detailed broad misconduct by several elected officials and municipal contractors. My findings served as the basis for criminal prosecutions subsequently pursued by the District Attorney. I also have been asked to conduct investigations for county and local governments, law enforcement agencies, state universities (including UCLA and UC-Irvine), and a broad array of private and publicly traded companies. In each instance, I was asked to evaluate allegations of impropriety and assess existing controls and practices, Each investigation concluded with written recommendations for improving compliance protocols and instituting a variety of applicable best practices. The City of Santa Monica has been questioned on multiple levels regarding the circumstances of a recent termination decision. Although the related civil lawsuit is settled, the City Council has resolved to assess whether and to what degree to improve its governance practices. This is precisely the type of problem that I have repeatedly and successfully addressed in both my public and private sector careers. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you desire any additional information. Regards, John C. Hueston JH:lh cc: Rick Cole, City Manager, City of Santa Monica M ATERIALS P REPARED F OR O CTOBER 30, 2015 Materials Prepared For: The City of Santa Monica October 30, 2015 Tab 1 Cover Letter Tab 2 Why Jones Day Tab 3 Selected Public Sector Representations Tab 4 Selected Lawyer Profiles Presented by: Brian A. Sun Partner Tel: +1.213.243.2858 basun@jonesday.com Frederick (Fred) D. Friedman Of Counsel Tel: +1.213.243.2922 ffriedman@jonesday.com 2. Why Jones Day Managing Resources for Client Benefit Jones Day’s One Firm Worldwide approach allows us to create multi-office and multidisciplinary teams specifically designed to address the demands of any client matter. Lessons learned and experience gained are quickly communicated across the Firm. At Jones Day we are relentlessly focused on client service. Our partners are committed to ensuring that all matters are staffed with the most appropriate lawyer for the job, regardless of geographic location or practice. Award-Winning Client Service Our commitment to client service has repeatedly earned the Firm first-place ratings from The BTI Consulting Group, an organization that monitors client satisfaction with legal services. The annual ranking is based on independent, individual interviews with more than 300 Fortune 1000 general counsel. Jones Day is the only firm to earn top ratings year after year—no other firm has matched our first-place record. Since the inception of the BTI Client Service ranking 14 years ago, Jones Day has ranked number one eight times. Our consistent high performance has earned the Firm a place among the elite firms elected to the BTI Client Service Hall of Fame. One Firm Worldwide Benefit All clients are Firm clients. Cross-practice teams aligned with client needs. Singular commitment to client objectives. Consistent delivery of the best resources, everywhere. Efficient, effective delivery of legal services. Innovative, cost-effective business solutions. Top Rankings for Client Service The annual ranking by The BTI Consulting Group is based on independent, individual interviews with more than 300 general counsel. Jones Day was named the “best of the best” in the following categories:  Breadth of Services  Brings Together National Resources  Client Focus  Deals with Unexpected Changes  Handles Problems  Helps Advise on Business Issues  Innovative Approach  Legal Skills  Meets Core Scope  Regional Reputation  Understands the Client’s Business Jones Day Ranked First More Than Any Other Law Firm The Only Firm to Earn Top Ratings Year After Year “Jones Day has the honored distinction of being the only firm to earn a spot in the top 5 every year since the first-released BTI Client Service A-Team – further proof of this firm’s skill and commitment to leading the client service charge.” 3. Selected Public Sector Representations Jones Day has represented public sector clients in a wide array of matters, including appellate issues, investigations, employment and wage issues, general litigation, financial transactions, governance infrastructure transactions, intellectual property, labor, tax, and workers' compensation matters. The following is a listing of certain U.S. public sector representations in which Jones Day's participation has been a matter of public record. City of Alpharetta, Georgia City of Alpharetta, Georgia v. R. J. Kurey, No. 2005-CV-99205, Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia Represented client as special prosecutors to bring impeachment proceedings against City Council Member R.J. Kurey for misconduct in office. City of Atlanta Arrival Star v. SITA Information Technology Computing USA, Inc., et al., No. 1:02-cv-2543-MHS (N.D. Ga.) Defended patent infringement action involving six patents covering flight notification systems to passengers. City of Chicago Portis v. City of Chicago, No. 02 C 3139 (N.D. Ill. October 18, 2013) Obtained unanimous verdict from federal jury on behalf of client in §1983 case alleging that Chicago Police Department violated Fourth Amendment rights. Chicago Parking Meters, LLC v. The City of Chicago, No. 51 181 Y 01253 (AAA) Represented client in dispute over its agreement in 2009 to monetize over 35,000 metered parking spaces by leasing those spaces to Chicago Parking Meters, LLC in exchange for $1.14 billion. James Kluppelberg v. City of Chicago, et. al., No. 13-cv-03963 (N.D. Ill.) Represented client in civil rights case where plaintiff alleged he was wrongly convicted of a crime due to police misconduct. Hobley v. Burge, 433 F.3d 946 (7th Cir. 2006) In a case of first impression, obtained reversal of district court ruling compelling non-party law firm, which was never served with a discovery request, to produce documents from a prior client engagement. City of Costa Mesa Costa Mesa Employees Association v. City of Costa Mesa, Case No. 30-2012-0055390 (Orange County Superior Court) Appealed the entry of a preliminary injunction granted against client in suit brought by The Costa Mesa Employees Association after client privatized various aspects of its labor and laid off half of its workforce. City of Detroit Jones Day served as lead restructuring counsel to the City of Detroit in connection with its chapter 9 bankruptcy case filed in July 2013 and its ongoing restructuring efforts. In connection with this representation, Jones Day (a) assisted in the development and implementation of restructuring proposals, including the chapter 9 plan of adjustment; (b) participated in negotiations with the City's key stakeholder constituencies (including approximately 150 mediations) with the goal of reaching a consensual restructuring; and (c) handled all aspects of the chapter 9 case. The wide- ranging nature of the City's restructuring required Jones Day to perform an equally wide array of legal service. City of East Point, Georgia City of East Point, Georgia v. Fulton County, Georgia; Arthur Ferdinand, Fulton County Tax Commissioner; and Fulton County Board of Tax Assessors, No. 2004-CV-93632 (Super. Ct., Fulton Cty., Ga.); Arthur Ferdinand and Fulton County, Georgia v. City of East Point, Georgia, 301 Ga. App. 333 (2010) Obtained judgment on behalf of client in the first known case of a city seeking an accounting and damages from a county arising out of the county's diversion of property taxes collected pursuant to a Billing and Collection Agreement. Judgment affirmed on appeal. City of Jackson, Mississippi Smith v. City of Jackson, 544 U.S. 228 (2005) Representation of client before the U.S. Supreme Court involving briefing and oral argument on behalf of employer in age discrimination case. City of Los Angeles Tennie Pierce v. City of Los Angeles, et al., Case No. BC 342 845 (Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Cal.) Successfully resolved high-profile lawsuit brought against client involving alleged racial harassment in the Los Angeles Fire Department. City of Oxnard, California Molina v. City of Oxnard, Case No. CV 00-02291 CAS (SHx)(C.D. Cal.); Case Nos. 01-57096, 04-55173 (9th Cir.) We secured two jury verdicts in favor the City of Oxnard, California after its former Financial Officer claimed that he was illegally terminated due to his public statements concerning alleged fiscal mismanagement by elected officials. County department Advised client in connection with a review of its policies and procedures for debarment of contractors. County of Los Angeles Duplesse v. County of Los Angeles, 714 F. Supp. 2d 1045 (2010) Obtained summary judgment in FLSA collective action involving the calculation of bonuses. One Unnamed Deputy District Attorney, et al. v. County of Los Angeles, et al., Case No. CV 09-7931 JCG (C.D. Cal.) Prevailed on behalf of client and former District Attorney Steve Cooley in jury trial of action brought by current and former Deputy District Attorneys alleging civil rights violations. Patrick Owens and Patricia Munoz, as individuals, and on behalf of a class of similarly situated residents of Los Angeles County, both business and individual, Case No. BC419572 (Super. Ct. Ca., Cty. of L.A.) Successfully represented client in challenge to the validity of the County's November 2008 election regarding Measure U which authorized the collection of the Utility User Tax. County of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles County Employee Relations Commission et al. Filed petition for writ of administrative mandamus challenging agency's decision to disclose private employee information to union. Ricketts v. McCormack, Case No. BC318044 (Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Cal.); 177 Cal. App. 4th 1324, 99 Cal. Rptr. 3d 817, 2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 1581 (Cal. App. 2d Dist. 2009) Lead trial counsel for the County of Los Angeles in dispute concerning proper recording of reconveyances; judgment awarded for the County of Los Angeles on all causes of action. County of Los Angeles v. SCRRA d/b/a Metrolink, Case No. BC 393817 (Super. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Cal.) Obtained partial summary judgment on behalf of client and Los Angeles Sheriff's Department in declaratory relief action relating to Glendale Metrolink derailment. County of Los Angeles v. Raymond J. McKenzie and Rock the Vote Education Fund, et al., Action No. BA 29 253 Represented client in California state trademark infringement and breach of contract action against domain registrar and former contractor, respectively, regarding unlawful termination and use of client's domain name. American Federal of State, et al. v. Board of Retirement, et al. Negotiated resolution in action challenging the validity of agreement entered into by the County of Los Angeles and the Board of Retirement administering the County's pension plan (LACERA). Sturgeon v. County of Los Angeles, 167 Cal. App. 4th 630 (2008) Obtained and defended on appeal judgment in favor of client rejecting plaintiffs' contention that the payment of local judicial benefits to Superior Court judges violates the state's constitution. Douglas Turner v. The County of Los Angeles, California, Case No. CV-04-08244 R (Ex) (C.D. Cal., Western Div.) Obtained a dismissal with prejudice at the pleadings stage in federal equal protection action brought by former independent contractor of client on theory of "de facto" or common law employment. State of Cal. v. Lauher, 30 Cal. 4th 1281 (2003) Successfully argued amicus curiae brief in support of the client involving Labor Code, Section 132a, that public employees are required to establish an entitlement to the benefit they claim to have been denied as part of prima facie case. Cecil Bugh v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. A106303 (Cal. Ct. App.) Defense of employer in slander claim arising from employer investigations of employee misconduct. Hall v. County of Los Angeles, 148 Cal. App. 4th 318 (2007) Defense of employment class action brought under the California and federal Equal Pay Acts. Holmgren v. County of Los Angeles, 159 Cal. App. 4th 593, 71 Cal. Rptr. 3d 611 (Jan. 30, 2008); Shiell v. County of Los Angeles, Appeal No. B194042 (unpublished) Obtained affirmation of trial court decisions rejecting two class actions brought against the client by contract workers. Frank et al. v. County of Los Angeles et al., 149 Cal. App. 4th 805 (2007) petition for review denied (Aug. 8, 2007) Successfully represented client in post-trial motions and appeal from an adverse jury verdict involving race discrimination claims brought by a class of more than 600 employees seeking more than $150 million in relief. United States ex rel. Englund v. Los Angeles County (E.D. Cal. Oct. 31, 2006) Obtained a major victory for Los Angeles County when the district court granted summary judgment in a multi-billion dollar False Claims Act case. Oronoz v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC334027; Owens v. County of Los Angeles, Case No. BC419572 (Cal. App.) Successfully defended client by obtaining favorable trial court judgment against a potential $200 million loss in two related taxpayer actions. One Unnamed Deputy District Attorney, et al. v. County of Los Angeles, et al., Case No. CV 09-7931 JCG (C.D. Cal.) Prevailed on behalf of client and former District Attorney Steve Cooley in jury trial of action brought by current and former Deputy District Attorneys alleging civil rights violations. Stuart J. Coker et al. v. County of Los Angeles, BC462419 (Super. Ct. Los Angeles Cty., Cal.) Successfully obtained demurrer without leave to amend in class action suit brought by former officers of the now- defunct Los Angeles County Office of Public Safety alleging client engaged in age and disability discrimination in violation of California's Fair Employment and Housing Act. Gamst, et al. v. County of Los Angeles, et. al., No. BC462420 (Cal. Super), No. 11-cv-00707 (C.D. Cal.) Obtained dismissal in suit alleging client engaged in age and disability discrimination in violation of California Peace Officers Bill of Rights. Esparza, et al. v. County of Los Angeles et al., No. 11-56523 (9th Cir.), No. 11-CV-02589 (C.D. Cal.) Secured Ninth Circuit affirmation of dismissal law suit brought by former officers claiming age and disability discrimination and retaliation. County of San Bernardino The Colonies Partners, L.P. v. San Bernardino County Flood Control District, Case No. RCV 061971 (San Bernardino Cty. Super. Ct.) Representation in a six-week jury trial regarding an inverse condemnation case bought by a real estate developer on a flood plain in San Bernardino. Fulton County, Georgia District Attorney's Office Retained by client to conduct an investigation into allegations of theft and misuse of county funds. Hempstead, New York, Town of Hardial v. Town Council of the Town of Hempstead, N.Y., No. 2:13-cv-02452 (E.D.N.Y.) Successfully defended Hempstead's Town Council redistricting plan against voters' preliminary injunction action seeking a court-imposed redistricting plan. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Bus Riders Union v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, 179 Cal. App. 4th 101 (2009). Achieved significant victory for client when the California Court of Appeal issued a published unanimous opinion affirming trial court judgment finding that Metro's bus fare increase fell within statutory rate-setting exemption under the CEQA. Tutor-Saliba-Perini, J.V., et al. v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, CV-13-6795-GHK (C.D. Cal.) Obtained dismissal with prejudice of federal civil rights action filed by Tutor-Saliba-Perini, J.V. asserting client had improperly denied certain entities prequalification, had been engaged in baseless litigation against Tutor entities for twenty years, and had effectuated improper de facto debarment. Tutor Saliba Perini, J.V. v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Case Nos. BC123559 and BC132928 (Super. Ct. Los Angeles Cty.), Case Nos. B232372 and B237037 (Cal. App.) Obtained affirmation of jury verdict that contractor for portions of Metro Rail subway system violated California False Claim Act in connection with change order on construction project. Boggs, et al. v. Los Angeles County MTA, Case No. BC 336334 (Cal. Super. Ct., Los Angeles County 2005) Defended client in class action alleging failure to accommodate visually impaired bus passengers under California's Unruh Act and Disabled Persons Act. Gaddy, et al. v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, (C.D. Ca.) Representation of client in connection with several related cases pursuant to the Rehabilitation Act and Title II of the ADA. Flowers v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transp. Auth., BC515136 (Super. Ct. Los Angeles Cty., Cal.); Flowers v. Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transp. Auth. B256744 (Cal. App., 2d. Dist.) Successfully defended against class and collective action wage and hour lawsuit brought on behalf of 7,000 current and former bus and train operators alleging violations of Fair Labor Standards Act, IWC Order No. 9, and California Labor Code Section 1194. MTA v. Allianz Global Risks Recovered $2.54 million after a successful arbitration ruling in connection with a builder's risk insurance claim involving damage during the construction of MTA subway stations caused by El Niño storms. Natural Resources Defense Council v. Los Angeles County MTA (California Superior Court) Representing the MTA in a lawsuit challenging fare increases under the California Environmental Quality Act; judgment was entered on MTA's behalf. Haywood v. Los Angeles County MTA, Case No. BC390056 (Los Angeles Superior Court) Representing the Metropolitan Transportation Authority in a meal and rest period class action. Los Angeles County MTA v. VCC Alameda (California Superior Court) Obtained reversal of trial court judgment against client in eminent domain action. Brodie v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board; Welcher v. Workers' Compensation Appeals Board, Case Nos. S146979, S147030, 40 Cal. 4th 1313 (2007) (Cal. Supr. Ct.) Argued as amicus curiae on behalf of the client in support of employer parties before the Supreme Court which resulted in a determination that worker's compensation benefits had not been changed by legislative actions and the Court's 1976 decision in Fuentes controlled the determination as to how benefits were to be calculated. Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department Representing Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department in federal grand jury investigation targeting alleged misconduct in its jails. Coordinating discovery, arranging compliance measures, communicating with government prosecutors, and monitoring developments in indicted cases. Los Angeles Unified School District In re School District Construction Cases, Coordination Proceeding 4517/ BC 359758 (Orange County Superior Court, Civil Complex Center) Won five week trial over allegations by terminated contractor that client failed to provide adequate notice and opportunity to cure problems surrounding construction of two new schools resulting in finding that termination notice was proper under contract and law. Represented client in connection with pre-litigation disputes with general contractor responsible for the construction of a new high school. Adams v. Los Angeles Unified School District, Case No. B159310 (Cal. Ct. App., Unpub.); 2007 WL68104 (January 11, 2007) Defense of employer in claim under state harassment law for failure to stop sexual harassment. Richard Selby v. LAUSD, et al., Case No. 02-8601 PAJTLx, (C.D. Cal.) Defense of claims by school psychologist under collective bargaining agreement, as well as overlapping civil action arising from the same series of events. United Teachers of Los Angeles v. Los Angeles Unified School District, Case No. LA-CE-4378-E (PERB) Represented client in unfair practice administrative law litigation before the California Public Employment Relations Board. Mary E. Pitchford v. Los Angeles Unified School District, Case No. BC 236761 (Sup. Ct., Los Angeles Cty., Cal.); Civil No. B155698 (Cal. Ct. Appl., 2d Appl. Dist.) Obtained summary judgment in all claims on employment termination and harassment case under FEHA and Title VII. Los Angeles Unified School District v. Great American Insurance Company, et al., No. S165113 (Cal. Supr. Ct.); (201) 112 Cal. Rptr. 3d 697 Represented client in connection with matter argued to the California Supreme Court concerning a dispute with the surety and a completion contractor. Sandels v. Los Angeles Unified School Dist., No. LC073656 (California Superior Court) Assisted with litigation of post-trial matters and mediation of dispute arising out of personal injury action against the District. Maricopa County Elections Department Thomas v. Mundell, No. 2:06-CV-00598-PHX-EHC (D. AZ) Representation in civil rights action challenging the establishment of separate DUI courts for Native American and Spanish speakers. Monitor for the Department of Justice Represented client in matter involving FCPA compliance by a company pursuant to the terms of a deferred prosecution agreement. Office of the County Attorney (Fulton) Retained by client to conduct an investigation of allegations of theft and misuse of county funds. Orange County, California Jones Day lawyers were lead counsel to Orange County, California in connection with its chapter 9 debt adjustment case – the largest chapter 9 case ever at that time. The County's plan of adjustment resulted in the payment or restructuring of approximately $10 billion in indebtedness. In addition, the County's debt rating returned to investment grade within 18 months after completing the chapter 9 case – ascending from a rating of D ("default") to AA. The Orange County case provides a model for a successful chapter 9 process. Orange County Transportation Authority Granite-Myers-Rados, a Joint Venture v. Orange County Transportation Authority Defense of construction litigation brought by a design-build contractor of the high occupancy vehicle lanes and other improvements on California State Route 22, involving claims in excess of $120 million. Port Authority of New York and New Jersey The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey v. Federal Aviation Administration, No. 08-1329 (D.C. Cir. 2008) Representation in a series of legal proceedings arising out of the planned auction by the U.S. Department of Transportation, including the Federal Aviation Administration and the Office of the Secretary, of landing and take-off operating authorizations at JFK, La Guardia, and Newark airports. Port of Oakland Fuller-Tompkins v. Port of Oakland, Case No. RG-08419264 (Alameda Superior Ct.) Obtained full defense verdict for employer in discrimination and wrongful termination case. Various (Western Council of Engineers, SEIU 1021) Defending employer in numerous arbitrations and unfair labor practice charges stemming from a reduction in force. Portage County Board of Commissioners, Cities of Kent, Cuyahoga Falls, Munroe Falls and Village of Silver Lake Portage County Board of Commissioners, et al., Plaintiffs, v. City of Akron, et al., Defendants, Case No. 98-CV- 000325 (Court of Common Pleas, Portage County, Ohio), Case No. 2004-0783, 11th District Court of Appeals (Portage County) Representation in lawsuit to enforce our clients' right to use the rivers and aquifers in three counties. South Orange County Community College School District Westphal v. Wagner, No. 10-55781 (9th Cir.) Obtained favorable resolution on behalf of client in action involving claims that invocations offered at graduation and other college ceremonies violate the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment. State of Georgia Goodman v. Georgia and United States v. Georgia, 126 S. Ct. 877 (2006) Successful representation of the State of Georgia in a prisoner's challenge to prison conditions under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Obtained dismissal of case involving constitutionality of the right to a speedy trial. State of North Carolina North Carolina v. Holder, No. 1:11-cv-01592 (D.D.C.) Successfully represented the State of North Carolina in Voting Rights Act preclearance proceedings before the U.S. Department of Justice and U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. 4. Selected Lawyer Profiles  Brian A. Sun, Partner (Los Angeles)  Frederick (Fred) D. Friedman, Of Counsel (Los Angeles) BRIAN A. SUN PARTNER basun@jonesday.com Corporate Criminal Investigations Business & Tort Litigation Antitrust Criminal Investigations Foreign Corrupt Practices Act Counseling & Defense Life Sciences False Claims Act & Qui Tam Defense Los Angeles (T) 1.213.243.2858 Brian Sun has earned a national reputation as a distinguished trial lawyer in complex business litigation and white-collar criminal defense. He has also handled a wide range of internal investigations for significant organizations. Brian is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers and was named in 2005 by Lawdragon Magazine as one of America's 500 leading lawyers. He is recognized as a Tier One lawyer by Chambers and listed among the most highly regarded lawyers in the U.S. by Who's Who Legal in the area of business crime defense. Brian's litigation practice covers a wide range of areas, including matters involving unfair competition, intellectual property disputes, entertainment, shareholder rights, contractual disputes, and fraud. His clients include Global Fortune 300 institutions and individuals embroiled in high-stakes litigation. Over the years, he has represented such companies as Hon Hai Precision Co. (Foxconn), Mattel, Emerson Electric Co., the City of Los Angeles, and a number of individuals, including former Orange County Sheriff Michael Carona, and Dr. Wen Ho Lee in his successful civil suit against the U.S. government. Brian is a former president of the National Asian Pacific American Bar Association (NAPABA) and the Los Angeles Regional Foodbank. In 2013, he was honored by NAPABA with its Trailblazer Award and by the Southern California Chinese Lawyers Association with its Lifetime Achievement Award. He also served as a Deputy General Counsel to the Christopher Commission which recommended sweeping reforms of the Los Angeles Police Department in the wake of the Rodney King incident. Brian is Partner-in-Charge of the Los Angeles Office. EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS Chinese state-owned enterprise reaches settlement in federal prosecution for alleged conspiracy, money laundering, smuggling and distribution of human growth hormone Michael Carona acquitted on five of six counts of indictment charging him with corruption and witness tampering Large offshore multinational corporation responds successfully to U.S. federal criminal tax investigation EDUCATION University of Southern California (J.D. 1979; B.A. magna cum laude 1976; Phi Beta Kappa) BAR ADMISSIONS California CLERKSHIPS Law Clerk to the Honorable A. Andrew Hauk, U.S. District Court, Central District of California (1979- 1980) GOVERNMENT SERVICE Chief, Financial Investigations Unit, U.S. Department of Justice (1984-1986) and Assistant U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney's Office, Los Angeles (1982-1986) FREDERICK D. FRIEDMAN OF COUNSEL ffriedman@jonesday.com Business & Tort Litigation Investigations & White Collar Defense Corporate Compliance Programs Class Action & Multidistrict Litigation Los Angeles (T) 1.213.243.2922 Fred Friedman's practice focuses on complex civil litigation and criminal and regulatory investigations. He has prosecuted and defended civil claims involving intellectual property, copyright and trademark, securities fraud, unfair business practices, and other business torts. In the criminal and regulatory field, Fred has undertaken the defense of a wide range of cases, including alleged trade secret theft, environmental violations, campaign finance violations, illegal arms exports, customs violations, political corruption, money laundering, and the full spectrum of fraud cases. Fred has participated in numerous internal corporate investigations and reviews. He has defended numerous criminal tax cases and has consulted on internet gambling issues. Fred has given compliance advice to businesses on cyber security and data collection issues. Fred also has represented Chinese businesses that are alleged to have obtained trade secrets or other confidential information in violation of United States laws. Fred's civil representations include his representation of a distributor of dietary supplements sued by customers in a putative class action. The trial court's order in that case, denying plaintiffs' motion to certify a class of all purchasers of the product, was upheld on appeal. He also was part of a team that represented a large foreign corporation accused of violating United States tax laws by not paying payroll taxes on millions of dollars of employee compensation. That case ended successfully when a small subsidiary of the client pled guilty to a single count not involving fraud, with a promise by the prosecutor not to charge any of the company's executives or employees. EXPERIENCE HIGHLIGHTS Orange County businessman obtains dismissal with prejudice in criminal case alleging illegal wholesale distribution of prescription medications Insurance company wins summary judgment in breach of contract and fraud action County of Los Angeles and former District Attorney prevail at trial defeating claims brought by current and former District Attorneys alleging adverse employment action for their union participation HONORS & DISTINCTIONS Listed in Southern California Super Lawyers since 2007 and The Best Lawyers in America for 2009 and 2010 EDUCATION University of California, Berkeley, Boalt Hall School of Law (J.D. 1976; Board of Editors, Law Review); Yale University (B.A. magna cum laude 1973) BAR ADMISSIONS California and New York GOVERNMENT SERVICE Served as Assistant U.S. Attorney, Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney's Office, Los Angeles (1982-1985); also served with the U.S. Department of Justice in the following positions: Special Assistant to then Associate Attorney General Rudolph W. Giuliani (1981-1982) and Trial Attorney, Criminal Section, Tax Division (1980-1981) November 1, 2015 To the Honorable Mayor and Council, City of Santa Monica From: Raphael J. Sonenshein, Ph.D. Subject: Review and Recommendations Report on Council Manager System of Government What is your interest and availability for promptly undertaking this review, with an initial scoping phase; fact finding and research; and delivering a report with recommendations over the next three-four months? I am very interested in assisting the Mayor and Council in this study of the dynamics of the council manager system of government. The respective duties of mayor, council, and manager are at the core of the council manager system, and there is great value in clarifying these roles. Such a study requires familiarity with the field of public administration and the numerous studies that have been made on the topic. However, there is also great benefit to applying experience with the practical realities of the council-manager system as it has evolved over its century of use in this country. Finally, the charter itself is the guiding document for the definition of roles; the origin and application of charter provisions should be explored to illuminate the best way to achieve good government in a transparent environment. I would be available to undertake this review and report over the next three to four months on a consulting basis. Specifically, the noninterference clause that frequently appears in city charters has been a topic of discussion in Santa Monica, as in other cities. It is a metaphor for the council-manager system, and understanding its history and its implications is valuable for any council-manager city. What would be the financial terms, recognizing that the amount of work would be determined in the scoping phase and at this stage we are only seeking individual and/or blended hourly rates for you and any staff who would work with you? I would undertake this project as an independent consultant. My hourly rate is $225. In the scoping phase, I would assess the level of effort and specific tasks required to conduct the review and produce the report; develop a practical time line with milestones toward completion; and estimate the full cost of the project. What is the most relevant experience or expertise you bring to this work that would best qualify you to be chosen? I have been a student of local government since my days as a graduate student. I received my BA in public policy from the Woodrow Wilson School at Princeton, and my MA and Ph.D. in political science from Yale University. Through my academic work, I developed expertise in local government as well in racial and ethnic relations. The question of how the council manager system works, and how it can work best in any particular community, is a major subject in public administration and one with which I am very familiar. I taught political science and public administration with an emphasis on local government and politics for nearly 30 years at Cal State Fullerton before taking my current position as Executive Director of the Pat Brown Institute for Public Affairs at Cal State LA in 2012. Outside academia, I have 18 years experience working with local governments and their city charters. Between 1997 and 1999, I served full time as executive director of the Los Angeles Appointed City Charter Commission that helped craft the first comprehensive revision of the charter in over 70 years. My book on the city’s charter reform, The City at Stake: Secession, Reform, and the Battle for Los Angeles, was published by Princeton University Press in 2004. Since then, I have served as principal consultant to charter commissions in Glendale, Burbank, Culver City, Huntington Beach, Anaheim, and most recently Tucson, Arizona. In that capacity, I worked with citizen commissioners, city staff (particularly city managers, attorneys, and clerks.) I would be happy to provide references from these cities, each of which utilizes the council manager system of government. Each charter revision addressed the roles of elected and appointed officials in the council manager system. With specific reference to the noninterference clause, my most recent charter reform effort, in Tucson in 2014, included an exploration of that charter question. In Tucson, unlike most other cities, it appeared only in ordinance. I did considerable research on the provision as it appears in other city charters, and ultimately the commission decided to recommend moving the heart of the section into the charter. In my charter work, I have prepared and presented numerous reports, both to commissions and to mayors and councils. I also have considerable experience in writing and presenting major reports including my analysis of the California Citizens Redistricting Commission process published by the League of Women Voters of California in 2012 (When the People Draw the Lines). Please let me know if I can answer any questions you might have. As a final note, I am a 35 year resident of Santa Monica, and would be gratified to be able to be of assistance to my community. 1038 Pine Street, Santa Monica, CA 90405 Raphesonenshein@gmail.com 310 433 9665 Robert M. Stern Attorney at Law 18057 Coastline Dr., No. 6 Malibu, CA 90265 Phone: (310) 573-1889 Fax: (310) 573-1889 Cell: (310) 382-0904 rstern2009@gmail.com November 1, 2015 Santa Monica City Councilmembers Santa Monica City Hall 1685 Main Street Santa Monica, CA 90401 Dear Councilmembers: It is with great pleasure that I submit my application to serve as an outside advisor to the City of Santa Monica in order to write a public report that recommends best practices in the areas of ethics, employee-city council relations, and the Oaks Initiative. From 1983 to 2011, I was the president of the Center for Governmental Studies, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit research organization that studied campaign financing, ethics, the initiative process, redistricting and other government reform issues. We issued a number of reports and advised states, cities and counties on their reform laws. For example, I was a principal co-author of the City of Los Angeles’ Campaign Finance and Ethics law passed by the voters in 1990. The Center was hired to assist the City of Pasadena as it developed amendments and improvements to its Oaks Initiative, and we worked closely with its Task Force, public interest groups and city council members on successfully amending it. Before coming to Santa Monica in 1983, I was in Sacramento for 13 years, first working for Assemblymember Henry Waxman as his counsel for the Assembly Elections Committee. Secretary of State Jerry Brown asked me to become his office’s Elections Counsel in 1972. While there, I was the principal co-author of the Political Reform Act of 1974, passed by 70% of the state’s voters in June, 1974 (Proposition 9). I then became the general counsel for the California Fair Political Practices Commission for nine years. After the Center for Governmental Studies closed in 2011, I retired, taking four classes a semester at Santa Monica Emeritus College. In addition, I have assisted former Attorney General John Van de Kamp, the City of Vernon’s Ethics Advisor, for the last 5 years. This year I have served on the City of West Hollywood’s Ethics Reform Task Force, and we have just issued our final report to the city council. Finally, for the past six months, I have been involved in drafting the Voters’ Right to Know Act, a statewide initiative that has been submitted to the Attorney General’s office. I was a resident of Santa Monica from 1983 to 1998, when my son attended its public schools: Franklin Elementary, Lincoln Middle School and Santa Monica High. I now live in Malibu. For the City of Vernon, I charge $450 an hour for my time and that would be my rate for the City of Santa Monica if I am selected. I look forward to assisting the City as it works on possibly changing its charter, ordinances and policies in a number of reform areas. Best wishes, Robert M. Stern John C. Hueston LOS ANGELES | 213.788.4340 | 523 WEST 6TH STREET SUITE 400 LOS ANGELES, CA 90014 NEWPORT | 949.229.8640 | 620 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE SUITE 1300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 EMAIL INFO@HUESTON.COM WEB WWW.HUESTON.COM About John C. Hueston John Hueston, a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, has been described by Chambers and Partners as “hard driving, insightful and aggressive.” Twice recognized as a "California Lawyer of the Year," Mr. Hueston is the former chair of Irell & Manella’s Business Trial and Crisis Management practice. He has been selected to serve as lead trial counsel by Fortune 500 companies and by governments in a variety of cases, including business torts cases, securities and shareholder class action cases, patent litigation cases, trademark infringement cases, and environmental cases. “hard-driving, insightful and aggresive” who has “an energy that is tremendous” Chambers USA, 2014 Mr. Hueston and his team recently secured a $5.15 billion settlement after trial, which represented the largest environmental recovery in U.S. history. A former lead prosecutor for the Enron trial of Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling, Mr. Hueston also devotes a substantial part of his practice to internal investigations, corporate crisis management and white collar criminal defense. “He doesn’t just win. He destroys.” Los Angeles Times, 2006 CONTACT jhueston@hueston.com 949.226.6740 EDUCATION Yale Law School (J.D., 1991) Notes Editor of The Yale Law Journal Dartmouth College (B.A., 1986) Magna cum laude with Honors John C. Hueston Cont. LOS ANGELES | 213.788.4340 | 523 WEST 6TH STREET SUITE 400 LOS ANGELES, CA 90014 NEWPORT | 949.229.8640 | 620 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE SUITE 1300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 EMAIL INFO@HUESTON.COM WEB WWW.HUESTON.COM The American Lawyer magazine has recognized Mr. Hueston as one of the nation's Top 50 Young Litigators and California Lawyer magazine twice has named him a "California Lawyer of the Year." Mr. Hueston is a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, an honor reserved for less than 1% of active lawyers who have "mastered the art of advocacy and whose professional careers have been marked with the highest standards of ethical conduct, professionalism, civility and collegiality." Chambers & Partners recognizes Mr. Hueston as a leading lawyer in commercial litigation and white- collar crime and government investigations. Benchmark Litigation has repeatedly recognized Mr. Hueston as a National Litigation Star. The Los Angeles/San Francisco Daily Journal has repeatedly named him as one of California’s 100 most influential lawyers. Best Lawyers in America named Mr. Hueston a “Lawyer of the Year” in 2015 and has recognized him annually since 2009. Mr. Hueston is a recipient of the Anti-Defamation League's Marcus Kaufman Jurisprudence Award. A “high -profile, tough-as-nails lawyer with a reputation for rooting out corruption at the highest levels.” Daily Journal, May 26, 2009 As a prosecutor, Mr. Hueston was presented with four awards by three U.S. Attorneys General for his trial work, including the highest award bestowed by the U.S. Department of Justice. As Forbes magazine noted of his work in the trial of Kenneth Lay and Jeffrey Skilling, where he served as a lead prosecutor, “John Hueston was quickly able to establish a clear, uninterrupted connection between fraudulent activities at Enron and the two defendants ... a methodically researched presentation of evidence proving the defendants’ guilt.” The Los Angeles Times described Mr. Hueston’s cross- examination of Lay as “devastating” and The Associated Press called him “the perfect David to Lay’s Goliath.” “Hueston has a knack for taking complicated information and presenting it to jurors so they’ll understand it in a personal way.” Houston Chronicle, January 28, 2006 Mr. Hueston has been retained as lead counsel to represent clients in their most significant and high- profile matters, including: Business Trials and Litigation John C. Hueston Cont. LOS ANGELES | 213.788.4340 | 523 WEST 6TH STREET SUITE 400 LOS ANGELES, CA 90014 NEWPORT | 949.229.8640 | 620 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE SUITE 1300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 EMAIL INFO@HUESTON.COM WEB WWW.HUESTON.COM • Secured a $5.15 billion settlement after trial for the Tronox Trust as the Litigation Trustee responsible for prosecution of consolidated national litigation against Anadarko Petroleum Company and Kerr McGee Corporation for fraudulent transfer of massive environmental, tort, retiree and other liabilities see: “Tronox Trust Wins Up To $14B In Kerr-McGee Spinoff Row" in Law360, “Anadarko, Kerr-McGee liable for Tronox cleanup costs -U.S. judge" in Reuters, and “Judge Approves Anadarko's $5.15 Billion Settlement” in WSJ; • Obtained summary judgment for Sempra Energy, a Fortune 500 energy services company, in a cross-border dispute relating to a billion dollar liquefied natural gas terminal, see “Sempra Energy defeats lawsuit alleging malicious prosecution: in the Los Angeles Daily Journal, and “Sempra wins one showdown with Mexican rancher” in the San Diego Tribune; • After a 3-week jury trial in New York federal court in April 2013, won a $12 million punitive damages verdict and liability findings on all claims of fraud, deceptive business practices and false advertising (see “Collecting: Thieves And Forgers Rush In Where Big Spenders Dare To Tread” in Forbes and “How They Won It” in Law360); • Represents Navajo Nation for matters rising from Gold King Mine waste water disaster, see “Navajo Nation preps lawsuit against EPA over mine spill” inThe Hill. “‘Mr. Lay, I’m an assistant United States attorney,’ Hueston responded. ‘This is my job. You may call me anything you want.’ At that point the unthinkable happened: The crisp, meticulous government prosecutor had claimed the moral high ground from the family man who is calling two Baptist ministers to testify on his behalf.” CNN • Obtained $50 million for Pacific Life against Bank of New York Mellon at conclusion of motions for summary judgment in breach of contract and breach of fiduciary duty matter in an investment mismanagement case; • Dismissal with prejudice of consolidated federal shareholder litigation arising from a $600 million settlement with the USDOJ for alleged off-label promotional activities related to Botox; John C. Hueston Cont. LOS ANGELES | 213.788.4340 | 523 WEST 6TH STREET SUITE 400 LOS ANGELES, CA 90014 NEWPORT | 949.229.8640 | 620 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE SUITE 1300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 EMAIL INFO@HUESTON.COM WEB WWW.HUESTON.COM • Obtained over $50 million and award of IP rights for major telecommunications company at the conclusion of an 8-month action; • Dismissal of trade secrets case (see “Teva Loses Amgen Spying Suit Over Blood Drug Secrets” in Law360); • Obtained broad injunctions against theft of trade secrets and confidential information, admissions of misappropriation of confidential information and published apologies from 5 former employees of CoreLogic Solutions, LLC, one of the country’s leading property information, analytics and services providers. “The government lawyers took a very complicated case, one that easily could have gotten bogged down in stultifying accounting minutia, and created a compelling theme of ‘lies and choices,’ just as prosecutor John Hueston promised in his opening statement.” Fortune Magazine • Secured decertification of a consumer class action alleging violations of California’s false advertising and consumer protection laws, on behalf of a publicly traded manufacturer of natural health products and nutritional supplements; • Obtained dismissal with prejudice of False Claims Act claims alleged to be worth tens of millions of dollars in action brought against public entity; • Defense of Amgen in national class action after remand by U.S. Supreme Court (Amgen v. Connecticut Retirement Plan and Trust Funds); • Recovery of $20 million “earn out” payments for former executives of Automotive.com; • Termination of one of a Fortune 500 company’s most significant patent litigation matters through an early and targeted motion for summary judgment for noninfringement; “With no key evidence, skill was at a premium.... Hueston’s chilly persistence left the once-genial corporate chieftain, who had been expected to flash his charm like a get-out-of- John C. Hueston Cont. LOS ANGELES | 213.788.4340 | 523 WEST 6TH STREET SUITE 400 LOS ANGELES, CA 90014 NEWPORT | 949.229.8640 | 620 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE SUITE 1300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 EMAIL INFO@HUESTON.COM WEB WWW.HUESTON.COM jail card, stammering and angry, drawn for the jury in a few quick strokes as a micromanager who thought he could talk his way out of trouble...” The Washington Post • Obtained multimillion dollar settlement for former CEO deprived of change in control benefits in case initially deemed “meritless” in company public filings; • Secured permanent injunction and won trial for UCLA in civil actions against organizations and individuals threatening violence against faculty members and administrators; • Defeated CEQA challenges to proposed residential development by Las Vegas developer Marnell Corrao Associates and recovered 100% of attorney’s fees; Corporate Crisis and White Collar Criminal Defense • On the eve of trial in July 2015 and after four years of investigation and litigation, obtained dismissal of all felony federal charges against a subsidiary of Waste Management Inc., America's largest environmental services provider, and two of its managers; • Secured the termination without action of a long-running insider-trading investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission into former Goldman Sachs banker Matthew Korenberg; • Dismissal of criminal mortgage fraud indictment after evidentiary hearings for prosecutorial misconduct; Dallas County District Attorney held in contempt (see "Hill Wins, Watkins Loses" in the Dallas Morning News); • Dismissal of all 306 counts of an indictment brought by the Nevada Attorney General’s “Mortgage Fraud Task Force” in first “robo-signing” prosecution (see “Massive ‘robo-signing’ prosecution dismissed for misconduct” in the National Law Journal); John C. Hueston Cont. LOS ANGELES | 213.788.4340 | 523 WEST 6TH STREET SUITE 400 LOS ANGELES, CA 90014 NEWPORT | 949.229.8640 | 620 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE SUITE 1300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 EMAIL INFO@HUESTON.COM WEB WWW.HUESTON.COM “Hueston...was the perfect David to Lay’s Goliath – boyish, buttoned-down, soft-spoken, utterly composed. It was Mr. Hueston versus Mr. Houston. And it wasn’t pretty.” The Associated Press • Secured declination of federal criminal investigation against former Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo; • Termination of criminal investigation of Edwards Lifesciences without payment of fine or civil settlement; • FCPA investigation on behalf of a Fortune 100 company completed within 60 days and without assessment of sanctions or fines; • Resolved SEC and FDIC investigations against former Chief Lending Officer of Downey Financial without charges or personal contribution to global settlement; “Even before the trial began, Lay had publicly maintained that he had sold his Enron stock only because he had no choice... On cross-examination, prosecutor John Hueston methodically eviscerated this claim.” CNNMoney.com • Resolved tri-state Attorneys General investigation into alleged false advertising by Fortune 500 health care company without fines or penalties; • Obtained prosecution declinations for UCI and former individual “targets” in highly publicized health care fraud investigation of the UCI Liver Transplant Program; • Obtained prosecution declination for Kaiser Permanente in Nadia Suleyman “Octomom” investigations of alleged HIPAA violations; • Secured written declinations for two former Chief Executive Officers in two separate criminal and S.E.C. stock option backdating investigations; John C. Hueston Cont. LOS ANGELES | 213.788.4340 | 523 WEST 6TH STREET SUITE 400 LOS ANGELES, CA 90014 NEWPORT | 949.229.8640 | 620 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE SUITE 1300 NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660 EMAIL INFO@HUESTON.COM WEB WWW.HUESTON.COM • Resolved federal investigation of alleged celebrity privacy breaches at UCLA without charges or fines; • Independent Counsel for County of San Bernardino in corruption investigation. “If two ways to alienate yourself from a jury are a) by putting them to sleep and b) by coming across as unlikeable, Lay hit the Lotto yesterday. His transformation at the hands of Hueston was something to see.” The Washington Post Mr. Hueston also served as a lead trial attorney in one of the first criminal trademark infringement cases brought to trial in Southern California. Mr. Hueston has been specially commended by the National Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, the F.B.I., the I.R.S. and U.S. Customs for his performance as the lead trial attorney in fraud, tax and public corruption trials. Mr. Hueston has lectured nationally at law and business schools on topics of trial advocacy and corporate governance, including Cornell, Loyola, Stanford, UCLA, U.C. Hastings, UCI, USC and Yale. Mr. Hueston served as a law clerk for the Honorable Frank M. Johnson, Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Mr. Hueston is currently National Co-Chair of the ABA White Collar Crime Committee. Mr. Hueston is a member of the American College of Trial Lawyers’ National Trial Competition Committee, the Federal Rules of Evidence Committee. Additionally, Mr. Hueston serves as a Central District of California Merit Selection Panel member to assist the U.S. District Court with the appointment and reappointment of magistrate judges. Mr. Hueston is a past President of the Orange County Bar Association, the second largest bar association in the State of California, and a former President of the Federal Bar Association of Orange County. Mr. Hueston also served as a Central District of California Judicial Conference Lawyer Representative. Mr. Hueston served as a Transition Team Member for California Attorney General Kamala Harris and as a member of her Mortgage Fraud Task Force. He is also a member of the Executive Committee of the Yale Law School Association and serves on the Board of Visitors for UCI Law School. Environment Hueston led the national team of lawyers at Irell and at Kirkland Ellis that reached a $5.15 billion settlement for environmental cleanups, the largest ever to be included in a bankruptcy case. Across the country, wood-processing, uranium-mining, and rocket-fuel production companies owned by energy giant Kerr-McGee Corp. left behind devastating environmental damage. Ahead of the company’s acquisition by Anadarko Petro- leum Corp., executives with both companies tried to evade responsibility for the harm by transferring liabilities to an insolvent shell company. Hueston was appointed by the DOJ as trustee of the Anadarko Litigation Trust. The parties settled after a 34-day trial in the Southern District of New York; Anadarko will fund cleanups in 47 states and provide $1 billion for the Navajo Nation to contain radioactive contamination from uranium mining. STATUS: The settlement was approved in November. 2015 The 2015 CLAY Awards originally published in the March 2015 issue of California Lawyer. Reprinted with permission. ©2015 Daily Journal Corporation, San Francisco, California ATTORNEYS of the YEAR JOHN C. HUESTON Hueston HenniganLos Angeles CLAY     Reference:    Agreement No. 10217   (CCS)