Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
CC SR 20180206 05 - Brown Act PRA Report
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 02/06/2018 AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business AGENDA DESCRIPTION: Consideration and possible action to address Brown Act and Public Records Act request issues RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION: (1) Reauthorize in open session a letter being sent to Michael Huang stating that former Mayor Brian Campbell's October 5, 2017 email regarding Mr. Huang, violated a Council Protocol (#14) and was his own personal view and not authorized by the City Council. (2) Authorize a letter to Attorney Jeffrey Lewis which makes an unconditional commitment as to when threats of litigation are added to the closed session agenda, facts and circumstances of the threat will be orally disclosed. (3) Determining that the City has been unable to obtain from former Mayor Brian Campbell City -related emails on his personal email servers to comply with Public Records Requests from Mr. Huang, requested on November 10, 2017 (and clarified on November 14, 2017) and from Attorney Ellen Berkowitz requested on December 4, 2017 (a renewal of a May 20, 2016 request to which Mr. Campbell did not respond); that such failure will subject the City to litigation; and that under Sections 12.3, 12.4 of the Council Procedures Manual, Mr. Campbell's failure to cooperate with the City Attorney in providing the public records waives his right to defense and indemnification by the City. FISCAL IMPACT: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A Additional Appropriation: N/A Account Number(s): N/A ORIGINATED BY: David J. Aleshire, City Attorney REVIEWED BY: Gabriella Yap, Deputy City Manager --->p; APPROVED BY: Doug Willmore, City Manager ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS: A. October 4, 2017, Email from Michael Huang (page A-1) B. October 5, 2017, Brian Campbell Email regarding Michael Huang (page B- 1) C. Late Correspondence regarding Brian Campbell's emails (page C-1) D. October 23, 2017 Letter sent to Michael Huang (page D-1) 01203.0030/444060.2 1 E. Attorney Jeff Lewis' letter dated October 24, 2017 (page E-1) F. City Attorney David Aleshire's response dated November 21, 2017 (page F-1) G. May 20, 2016 PRA Request by Ellen Berkowitz (page G-1) H. Records provided by City Clerk (page H-1) I. December 4, 2017 PRA Request by Ellen Berkowitz (page 1-1) J. Letter to Jeff Lewis (page J-1) I. BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION: A. Claims Concerning October 5 Brian Campbell Election Email On October 4, 2017, Michael Huang, a resident of Rancho Palos Verdes (RPV), exercised his First Amendment right and represented his views of the City Council candidates to his private email list comprised of other residents (Attachment A). Mr. Huang does not hold any office or position with the City of RPV, and has primarily been involved as a citizen who opposes short-term rentals. Mr. Huang's emails presented an unfavorable opinion of Dave Emenhiser and Krista Johnson, both candidates supported Brian Campbell, because of their history of supporting short-term rentals, or their association with Brian Campbell, who has also supported short-term rentals. October 5, 2017, then -Mayor Brian Campbell sent an email to his own distribution list of residents (Attachment B), in which he called out Mr. Huang by name, accused him of making a number of false and misleading claims, and stated that Mr. Huang was a "campaign operative" who was "smearing" people. In this email, Brian Campbell referred to himself "As the current mayor of RPV, ...", signed off as the Mayor, and made other inferences to the City Council, making it appear as if it were an official City communication. On Sunday, October 8, 2017, Mr. Huang alerted the City Council, City Attorney, and City Manager of then -Mayor Brian Campbell's email, and that he believed it was intimidating, defaming, an abuse of power, and a suppression of his free speech rights. Mr. Huang asked for a response by the City by Monday, October 16, 2017, in order to clear his name of Mr. Campbell's accusations. While the email sent by Mr. Campbell was absolutely not the position of the City nor was Mr. Campbell acting in his official capacity as Mayor, the City Council could not as a body clarify their position since the next meeting was scheduled for Tuesday, October 17, 2017, and to do so beforehand would have been a Brown Act violation. In the meantime, the City Attorney attempted to address Mr. Huang's concerns by email on Monday, October 9, stating that these were Brian Campbell's personal opinions. This did not alleviate Mr. Huang's concerns and he remained distressed because of the damage to his personal and professional reputation in being called a "campaign operative" and accused of smearing candidates. Mr. Huang therefor sent a second email on October 13, to the City Councilmembers and City Attorney restating the damage to his reputation and asking for an official response from the Council as to 01203.0030/444060.2 2 whether Mayor Campbell represented the City, and stating that if he received no further response by Monday, October 16, he would have to pursue his legal options. Unfortunately, Mr. Campbell's email continued to be spread by many residents who were proponents of short-term rentals, causing further distress to Mr. Huang. Even the day of the meeting, late correspondence continued to come in from residents reacting to then -Mayor Campbell's email stating that his actions were inappropriate, abusive of his position, and threatened residents' right to free speech (Attachment C). B. Council Meeting of October 17, 2017 The Council agenda for the regular meeting of October 17 went out on Tuesday, October 10, before Mr. Huang's second email was received and it was known that he sought a more authoritative response than he had received from the City Attorney. At the October 17, 2017, City Council meeting, in the absence of an apology or clarification by then -Mayor Campbell that could have resolved the situation with Mr. Huang, the City Council (absent then -Mayor Campbell who did join the closed session) voted to add an urgent potential litigation item to the closed session agenda for discussion related to then -Mayor Campbell's email defaming Mr. Huang. In adding the item to the agenda, the Council unanimously found there was a need to take action on a matter arising subsequent to posting of the agenda, but the City Attorney did not publicly explain the email exchanges and dispute between Mr. Huang and Mr. Campbell. The Council discussed the item in closed session and, in open session, reported out the action, which was to direct the City Attorney to draft a letter to Mr. Huang stating that Mayor Campbell's actions were unauthorized by the Council. There was consensus in closed session to send the clarifying letter to Mr. Huang. However, when it came time to draft the letter, then -Mayor Campbell while agreeing that the Council had not authorized his email, wanted to sign the letter only if it included language to say he was acting in the scope of his duties as Mayor. The City Attorney did not believe this reflected the consensus of the Council, and would not add the language and so the letter went out without the Mayor's signature. The October 23, 2017, letter to Mr. Huang (Attachment D), made it clear that Mr. Campbell's email was his personal opinion, did not reflect the views and/or opinions of the City Council or the City, and was "not directed, sanctioned, or authorized in any way by the City." The letter was only signed by the other four members of the City Council. C. October 24 Letter from Attorney Jeff Lewis On October 24, 2017, Attorney Jeff Lewis wrote a letter to the City (Attachment E) with his opinion that the City violated the Brown Act for a variety of reasons including (i) there was not an emergency justifying adding the matter to the agenda, (ii) the matter did not arise subsequent to the posting of the agenda, and (iii) there was an inadequate disclosure of the facts and circumstances justifying the addition of the matter. 01203.0030/444060.2 3 On November 21, 2017, the City Attorney responded with his opinion that the City did not violate the Brown Act (Attachment F). In an effort to dissuade Mr. Lewis from needlessly spending taxpayer money on a lawsuit, the City Attorney laid out the basis for his position, as well as the options for curing the perceived violation. Mr. Lewis rejected this response, saying he was not requesting a redo of the action, but reiterated that the City should pass in open session a resolution per Section 54960.2 subdivision (c) indicating that — without any admission of fault or wrongdoing — when the City receives a written threat of litigation from a person and the matter is to be added to the agenda, and the circumstances are known to the person, the facts and circumstances should be fully disclosed orally. In dialogue between the City Attorney and Mr. Lewis, the parties, through a Tolling Agreement, deferred the issue until tonight's public meeting. D. Public Records Issues As a by-product of Mr. Campbell's election email dispute, Mr. Huang made a request on November 10, 2017, pursuant to the California Public Records Act ("CPRA"; Section 6250 et seq), for Mr. Campbell's emails. Evidently the purpose was to determine who Mayor Campbell had been communicating with, since Mr. Campbell's email had indicated there was a distribution list he sent the October 5 email to, along with emails between him and a number of residents who were supporting short-term rentals. The City Attorney repeatedly attempted to gain compliance with the CPRA request from Mr. Campbell, but Mr. Campbell refused to cooperate and did not provide responsive documents or even indicate if he had any responsive documents. In fact, Mr. Campbell has a number of personal email addresses which he has used from time to time with staff and various persons. From the City's server alone, not including Mr. Campbell's private email servers, the City identified approximately 19,000 potential emails to review. The City Attorney review of responses to PRA requests resulted in significant costs to the City. In this case the City Attorney reviewed and released the emails by most recent year, except for emails on Mr. Campbell's personal server. In addition to the failure to cooperate in answering Mr. Huang's request of November 10, Ellen Berkowitz, on behalf of Green Hills, made a request for public records dated May 20, 2016, which included records from Councilmember Campbell (Attachment G). The City Clerk provided the records she could (Attachment H), which totaled approximately 1,800 pages. As with the Huang request, the City Attorney made numerous attempts to obtain records from Mr. Campbell and offered to review all records for privilege. Mr. Campbell has failed to provide such records or even to meet with the City Attorney to review the records. On December 4, 2017 (Attachment 1), Ms. Berkowitz renewed her request. Evidently, litigation has now been commenced. 01203.0030/444060.2 4 II. DISCUSSION OF LEGAL ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS A. Reauthorize in open session a letter being sent to Michael Huang stating that former Mayor Brian Campbell's October 5, 2017, email regarding Mr. Huang violated a Council Protocol (#14) was his own personal view and was not the City's view. Council Protocol #14 states as follows: "Unless authorized to do so by the City Council, refrain from making statements, either orally or in writing, that assert or would cause a reasonable person to believe that you are acting on behalf of the City." On January 16, as the culmination of the work of a Council Subcommittee to update the City's parliamentary procedures, Brown Act compliance, and incorporation of a Code of Ethics, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2018-04 adopting a Council Procedures Manual. The new Manual included Section 16.5, which reads as follows: "Improper Representation Unless authorized to do so by the Council, Officials shall refrain from making statements, either orally or in writing that assert or would cause a reasonable person to believe that they are acting on behalf of the City. Accordingly, if an Official testifies, either orally or in writing, before an administrative body of a governmental agency outside of the City, and identifies himself or herself as an Official, that Official also must state that he or she is not appearing or testifying in any official capacity and is not representing the views or opinions of the City; rather, he or she is representing his or her own views as a private citizen. Additionally, other than personal thank you notes, City letterhead or the City's official logo shall not be used for any purpose without prior Council approval. Unless the written communication is appropriately authorized on behalf of City, the Official shall not use their official title in the communication unless there is a written disclaimer to the effect that "This communication is the personal opinion of official and does not represent the views of the city of Rancho Palos Verdes or its Officials." As violations of the foregoing would be contrary to the City's transparency policies, likewise, Officials should not communicate regarding City business either anonymously or through pseudonyms. This limitation includes, but is not limited to, posts and comments made on social media. Attorney Lewis claimed that the City Council's actions violated the Brown Act. Although the City rejects those claims, as specified below, still the letter to Mr. Huang did not express all of the City's sentiments on the matter as it was consensual. Given the legal questions raised, it is recommended that a revised letter be sent to Mr. Huang. A sample is being provided and the text can be refined by the Council at the meeting. 01203.0030/444060.2 5 B. Authorize a letter to Attorney Jeffrey Lewis which makes an unconditional commitment as to when threats of litigation are added to the closed session agenda, facts and circumstances of the threat will be orally disclosed. Mr. Lewis gave various reasons for his claim that a violation of the Brown Act had occurred. The detailed chronology above will show errors in these allegations. He claimed that there was not an emergency requiring the action in that there was not crippling disaster, work stoppage, act of terrorism or similar cause. However, while these causes are considered "dire" emergencies under Section 54956.5, they are not the sole source for adding emergency items. Section 54954.2(b) is the more general section for adding matters and reads as follows: "54954.2(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the legislative body may take action on items of business not appearing on the posted agenda under any of the conditions stated below. Prior to discussing any item pursuant to this subdivision, the legislative body shall publicly identify the item.... (2) Upon a determination by a two-thirds vote of the members of the legislative body present at the meeting, or, if less than two-thirds of the members are present, a unanimous vote of those members present, that there is a need to take immediate action and that the need for action came to the attention of the local agency subsequent to the agenda being posted as specified in subdivision (a). (Emphasis added)." As quoted above, the operative language is that "there is a need to take immediate action, " and the need arose "subsequent to the posting of the agenda." This finding requires a different vote than for the Section 54956.5 emergency, which in this case we obtained as it was unanimous of the 4 councilmembers present. The findings the section requires are that (i) there was a need to take action, and (ii) the need arose subsequent to the posting of the agenda. In terms of the need, we had a written threat by Mr. Huang that he would sue the City for the damage to his reputation if he didn't get a response by October 16. The threat of litigation before a future meeting is a legitimate justification, especially where it could be readily shown that Mayor's actions were unauthorized and the rest of the Council could easily correct the matter. Additionally, although Mr. Huang's initial email was before the posting of the agenda on October 10, it was only after the City Attorney had attempted to address the matter and Mr. Huang responded that he wanted official action, that the need to add it became clear. So it is clear that the matter was proper to be added to the agenda. However Mr. Lewis makes a further claim that in publicly announcing the purpose of the closed session, the City Attorney did not adequately disclose the facts and circumstances justifying the closed session. The City Attorney during the day had engaged in an effort with the Mayor to obtain a statement to resolve Mr. Huang's concerns and some drafts had been prepared. The City Attorney was further concerned that Mr. Huang was objecting to the publication of the emails damaging his reputation and further public broadcast could cause further damage. The City Attorney expected going into the 01203.0030/444060.2 6 closed session that the City would emerge with an appropriate statement and the matter could be easily resolved. As events unfolded, this was not to be—and moreover, it appeared that the controversy over the emails had become widely known as a number of speakers got up to speak on the matter when the meeting convened. As it turned out, a more complete disclosure of the facts and circumstances of the email exchanges, as is being done now would have not produced more damage. The explanation of this to Mr. Lewis has not dissuaded him from threatening the City with legal action. While Section 54960 allows agencies to avoid Brown Act litigation by redoing their actions, and in Section IIA above we are proposing to reissue the letter to Mr. Huang stating that Mayor Campbell's actions were unauthorized, Section 54960.2 is a second mechanism to avoid litigation. The City has the right without admitting to a Brown Act violation to issue a letter which makes an unconditional commitment, in this case dealing only with the issue of the oral announcement of the facts and circumstances justifying the addition of a closed session to discuss a litigation threat. To avoid such costly litigation, a draft letter is provided as Attachment J which the Council can consider issuing concerning Mr. Lewis' threat of litigation. C. Determining that the City has been unable to obtain from former Mayor Brian Campbell City -related emails on his personal email servers to comply with Public Records Requests from Mr. Huang, requested on November 10, 2017, and from Attorney Ellen Berkowitz requested on May 20, 2016, that such failure will subject the City to litigation, and that under Sections 12.3, 12.4 of the Council Procedures Manual, the City will not defend Mr. Campbell if he is not cooperative with the City Attorney in providing the public records. As the Background discussion reveals, for 8 months, Councilmember Campbell has failed to produce records requested by Green Hills through their legal counsel Ellen Berkowitz, and this request has been renewed as Mr. Campbell was exiting the Council. Moreover, Mr. Huang also requested records including records of Mr. Campbell on November 10. With respect to both requests, the City Attorney's office has on many occasions requested that Mr. Campbell comply and offered to provide legal assistance in evaluating if privilege exists as to any of the emails. Mr. Campbell has never agreed to a meeting or to provide any records. The issue of whether work-related emails on personal servers are disclosable under the CPRA has been a matter of concern for some time. The City several years ago in their Procedures adopted rules saying that any work related emails on a personal server which had a connection to the City's official sources, was considered disclosable. However, this policy turned out to be too conservative. In a case last year by the California Supreme Court, San Jose vs Superior Court ruled against the City of San Jose and determine that if it was a work-related email, it was disclosable no matter where it was stored. As a result of this clarification of the law, one of the changes in the City's new Council Procedures Manual was to clarify the obligation of Councilmembers to 01203.0030/444060.2 7 cooperate with these requests. In fact, the policy makes it a violation to use personal email servers for City business. Of course, in adopting this policy we were aware of Mr. Campbell's long standing resistance to complying with the Green Hills request and it was clear we'd need a mechanism to assure compliance from employees who might resist in the future. So the new Procedures Manual also provides that an employee who would normally be entitled to a defense by the City if acting in the course and scope of their employment is not entitled to such defense if they do not cooperate with the City Attorney in providing such defense—in effect they waive their privileges under state law. The relevant provisions of the new Procedures Manual are quoted below: 12.3 Cooperation in Councilmembers' Defense Section 825 of the Act requires that in order to receive defense by the City, an employee or former employee must reasonably cooperate in their defense by the City. This includes, but is not limited to, prompt and complete responses to inquiries/requests for information and documents by the City Attorney's Office, including discovery requests. This cooperation would also include pre -litigation acts such as complying with public records requests. 12.4 City's Duty to Defend – Limitations Any Councilmember or former Councilmember who is acting outside the scope of his or her duties, or who does not cooperate with his or her defense or the defense of City, may, at the Council's sole discretion, be provided with written notice and an opportunity to cure. The Council shall retain absolute discretion to refuse to defend and/or indemnify any Councilmember acting outside the scope of his or her duties, or a Councilmember who does not cooperate in his or her defense or the defense of City. Lastly, the Public Records Act makes it clear that a party requesting public records can go to court against a recalcitrant public agency. Section 6258 allows a party to go to court and seek injunctive or declaratory relief. Section 6259 gives the court broad powers to accomplish the purposes of the CPRA, including the awarding of attorneys' fees. Generally the award would be against the public agency. We looked to find a case where the public employee was refusing to cooperate with the public agency and whether in that case the award could be made against the employee rather that the agency but could find no similar case. We think, however, that the adoption of the new Procedural Manual and strong actions to warn Mr. Campbell of the negative legal situation is probably the best we can do to protect the City from liability in these circumstances. 01203.0030/444060.2 8 III. ALTERNATIVES: In addition to the Staff recommendation, the following alternative actions are available for the recommended actions for the City Council's consideration: A. Recommendation (1): 1. Do not redo letter to Mr. Huang 2. Revise the letter as appropriate B. Recommendation (2) 1. Do not send letter to Mr. Lewis of unconditional commitment. 2. Revise the letter as appropriate. C. Recommendation (3) 1. Do not take action under Policy determining Mr. Campbell is waiving his right to indemnification by not cooperating in producing public records. 2. Wait for formal indemnification request from Mr. Campbell. 01203.0030/444060.2 9 From: Michael Huang <mikeh ag laxykgmail.com> Date: Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:43 PM Subject: Update on Status of Short -Term Rentals in RPV /Upcoming City Council Election To: Hi Everybody, I just wanted to provide an update on the effectiveness of the ban on the advertising and operation of short-term rentals in our City. The ban on the advertising and operation of short-term rentals has been very successful. The increased fines have also helped enforcement significantly. After the passing of the ban and the increased fines, many of the illegal short-term rental operators removed their listings and stopped renting. Of course, as with any law, there will be those who will choose not to follow it. As far as I know, there is one illegal short-term rental operator who is openly violating the law and a few operators who are trying to skirt the law. The City is dealing with these violators. From my contacts with the residents who suffered from the effects of short-term rentals, the problems associated with these illegal short-term rentals have decreased many folds since the actions taken by the City. You may also know that we have a municipal election coming up on November 7, 2017, in which there are six candidates running for two City Council seats. Councilman Anthony Misetich and Brian Campbell are both termed out. Anthony Misetich is a staunch supporter of the ban on short-term rentals, and Brian Campbell is a foe of the ban on short-term rentals. Here are some information I have gathered on each of the candidates based on what I know of their previous voting records on short-term rentals and information we collected when Chris and I attended the Candidates' Forum at Hesse Park on 9/22/17: Eric Alegria - Small business owner, RPV Finance Committee Board member, Taxpayer Advocate, and State Commissioner. Eric is a current member of RPV Finance Committee. He is a PhD candidate in Public Policy at Clarement Graduate University and has a Masters in Public Administration from USC. I have reached out to Eric, and he fully supports the current ban on short-term rentals operations and advertising. Eric is endorsed by Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetich as well as former Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich and State Treasurer John Chiang. Both Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetichare strong supports of the ban on short-term rentals. We support Eric Ale,gria for City Council. John Cruikshank - Local small business owner, RPV Planning Commissioner, Civil Engineer with bachelors and masters degrees from USC. John is the current chairman of the Planning Commission. John was on the planning commission on August 22, 2016, when he voted to allow owners to rent out one room if the owners live at the property. Then at the 11/29/16 Planning Commission, John voted in favor of the ban on the advertising of short-term rentals. I was disappointed that John Cruikshank voted to allow the one -room short-term rental option, but I do credit John for subsequently voting for the banning of the advertising of short-term rentals. We had a meeting with John about a month ago, and he stated that he "supports the current short-term ban as passed by the City council and has no plans to reverse that decision". John is also endorsed by Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetich as well as by David Hadley and Don Knabe. We also support John Cruikshank for City Council. In our opinion, he will vote for an issue if it is the will of the majority despite his own personal opinions. Dave Emenhiser - RPV Planning Commissioner, former member of RPV Finance Committee, Doctorate, and 2 masters degrees. As a member of the Planning Commission, on August 22, 2017, Dave Emenhiser voted for allowing the one -room short-term rental option if the owner is present. Then on November 29, 2016, he was in favor of allowing the advertising of illegal short-term rentals by voting against the ban on advertising. At that hearing, he told the City Attorney he was concerned that banning advertising may impede freedom of speech. The City Attorney responded that since short-term rental is an illegal activity, the advertising of an illegal activity is not protected. Despite that clarification, Dave still voted against the advertising ban. Dave also said he was against the advertising ban because he was concerned about legal fees and attorney bills for the City and also about lawsuits from Google. I find it alarming that Dave was not willing to have the City spend money to prevent an activity that was declared illegal by the City Council and that was adversely affecting many of the neighbors. It was made clear that the advertising ban was only against the owners of the property and not against the short-term rental websites. Furthermore, Google is a search engine; it has nothing to do with the short- term rental websites. In my personal opinion, the reasons Dave gave for his nay vote on the advertising ban was disingenuous. At that hearing, only two Planning Commissioners voted against the advertising ban - Dave Emenhiser and Robert Nelson. Robert Nelson is also the planning commissioner who favors short-term rentals and was against any type of restrictions against it. In fact, he has said that he is happy that a doctor was making $100,000 a year running short-term rentals four house from his home and that neighbors should just sue each other in small -claims court to stop the nuisance from short-term rentals. City records show that Robert Nelson donated $5,000 to Dave Emenhiser'scampaign. Lastly, Dave is supported by Brian Campbell. Brian Campbell is the Councilman who has consistently favored allowing short-term rentals in our City. We strongly oppose voting for Dave Emehniser for City Council. Krista Johnson - Member of RPV Finance Committee. I do not know much about Krista Johnson other than the fact that she got involved with the City after her house burned down. She was asking the City Council to make some type of exception for her in the permitting or rebuilding of her house. The whole of the City Council was opposed with the exception of Brian Campbell. She is heavily endorsed by Councilman Brian Campbell. On his Facebook page, Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA - he has multiple posts endorsing Krista Johnson. We strongly ppose voting for Krista Johnson because she is so heavily endorsed by Brian Campbell. A-1 Matthew Vitalich - Bachelor's degree in English and Creative Writing from Cal State Long Beach in 2014. Matthew supports the current ban on the operation and advertising of short-term rentals in our City. Ben Kellv - 18 years old - Ben just graduated from high school this past June. At the Candidates' Forum at Hesse Park, I felt that he was not as well- informed on the issues as the other candidates. In summary, we support Eric Alegria (#2 on ballot) and John Cruikshank (#3 on ballot) for City Council because they are both endorsed and supported by Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetich. Both of these council members are strong supporters of the short- term rental ban. We oppose Dave Emenhiser and Krista Johnson because they are supported by Brian Campbell, who is a foe of the ban on short- term rentals in our City. Please feel free to forward this email to your friends and relatives who are registered to vote in the upcoming RPV election. Please also let me know if you support Eric Alegria and John Cruikshank and are interested in hosting their signs on your yard. I would be happy to get the signs from them and delivery them to your house. Thank you for all of your efforts in bringing about the short-term rental ban in our City, but we need to be vigilant to ensure that we keep short-term rentals away from our City. Thanks again. Sincerely, Chris and Mike Huang ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michael Huang <mikeh ae lax kgmail.com> Date: Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:27 PM Subject: Fwd: Update on Status of Short -Term Rentals in RPV / Upcoming City Council Election To: Sorry for this follow up, but there is a clarification about how the candidates are listed on the ballot: Eric Alegria is listed second from the top, but he is Candidates #3 on the ballot, and John Cruikshank is listed third from the top, but he is Candidates #4 on the ballot. There is no candidate #1. The numbering starts at #2. Here's a picture of the ballot below: A-2 J CITY RANCHO PALOS VERDES CIN GENERAL MUNICIPAL ELECTION Member of the DAVE EMENHISER City Council 8uspnessrnaNCity Cvnmis� 2w6O Vote for no more ERIC ALEGRIA than Two Finance BoarVemberffiusineN�;nan JOHN CRIJIKSHANK Fiar,r,;rj Cornr1r.ssi 0fJn9irW KRISTA JOHNSON ExecufiveJFnaneW Boardmernber BEN KELLY 4 l* 0 5 6~O 4 MATTHEW VITAUCH �..,e, PLEASE NOTE: The order in which carddates' names appear on the ballot is detemmuned by a randdorn drawn of 26 letters of the alphabet. I don't know why they don't start numbering with #1. Sincerely, Mike Huang ENS? OF BALLOT 3 A-3 From: RPV Mayor Brian Campbell <campbell.rpv@gmail.com> Date: October 5, 2017 at 4:10:37 PM PDT To: radlsmith@cox.net Subject: RPV Council Race - Keep it accurate please! Reply -To: campbell.rpv@gmail.com Hi, just a reminder that you're receiving this email because you have expressed an interest in the RPV City Council. You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails. ® Like Accuracy in Campaign Messages I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list. In it he made a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. I'm disappointed in this approach. Its patently unfair to all of the candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing any of these six individuals who have the courage to run for local office. While they should all be vigorously vetted on the issues during the campaign, they all deserve our respect and honest dialog. There are plenty of worthy topics and positions to openly debate and discuss in this council race. I think the community prefers that we focus on those. As the current mayor of RPV, I think its important that we all do our part to set an example to help ensure a campaign season that at the end of the day we are proud of. As City Councilman, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 SafeUnsubscribeTm radlsmith@cox.net Forward this email I Update Profile I About our service provider Sent by campbel1.rpv@amail.com in collaboration with Constant Contact', 0-0-` Try it free today From: RPV Mayor Brian Campbell <cam by ell.rpy(cDgmail.com> Date: October 5, 2017 at 4:10:37 PM PDT To: Subject: RPV Council Race - Keep it accurate please! Reply -To: campbell.rpyCa)amail.com AGENDA ITEM: V WD6L,,C-1���� R NED FROM: t��/�L(�� AND MADE PART OF THE REGOJRD TTHE COUNCIL MEETING OF: `1 C OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK Hi, just a reminder that you're receiving this email because you have expressed an interest in the RPV City Council. You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails. ©©ff o 1 © Like i Accuracy in Campaign Messages I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list. In it he made a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. I'm disappointed in this approach. Its patently unfair to all of the candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing SSC of these six individuals who have the courage to run for local office. While they should all be vigorously vetted on the issues during the campaign, they all deserve our respect and honest dialog. There are plenty of worthy topics and positions to openly debate and discuss in this council race. I think the community prefers that we focus on those. As the current mayor of RPV, I think its important that we all do our part to set an example to help ensure a campaign season that at the end of the day we are proud of. Thanks for reading, C-1 City Councilman, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 SafeUnsubscribeTM Forward this email I Update Profile I About our service provider Sent by cambn ell.rpvCaymaiLcom in collaboration with Constant Contact",-,�' Try it free today C-2 .w, c4L"ry C<' Map t A t vF P,,tibr'- ;: woups pem Estate Lost JIM Gerwad a F� to Lov TaN-,-towa Bad• f 'MY T* City cmxo do s • cut ournc—o v aAC franV OIW MNVAevet exwRl)cec tzar e., .. „� Wsr�A.. x�wrcew +wxaea " a>a:�sws.-ane r.«cxwan-a»�a+vaFm ' xs+w.sa^+w�ex�t ex+ee+ea w C-3 A t vF P,,tibr'- ;: woups F� to Lov TaN-,-towa Bad• f 'MY T* City cmxo do s • cut ournc—o v aAC franV OIW MNVAevet exwRl)cec tzar e., .. „� Wsr�A.. x�wrcew +wxaea " a>a:�sws.-ane r.«cxwan-a»�a+vaFm ' xs+w.sa^+w�ex�t ex+ee+ea w C-3 C-4 The Pales Verde Peninsula News Morn rs Events VRIe0s RKAOS Yu Ming Last S err. l attend me RPv nr•e urtctl meeting regaMing the +:4 ort tear rental, From the ove". t have two strong _- t. "Miers is a masterbenM this in regarding the MouscaiWs of letters Sew! to ttW.,CIW iii a Very Short, penoO 4f t€tY , aril W total 4 t it s i 80% of lerim were complained 2 Mij:} Who is the master? hN the city cCtunal do sortie clue Iil ric 7 tie mayor and the councs v vote Yes tit NO the short teat) recital, fteM not know ariythrritt aboto. the Airboo and mwy attars management ptatfomnever expetwerKeC any of this new way of houseAlinesnare How theyvote so tnt the d{4 nit know? The a lactied copy of t current may=ors, letter K rn*d my doubts, gip: tt, private house awners tin RPV lost their rignt- Sa . , Whams t is W ofwe wowV 1*4 PAVtOxhood to (heel tho%* 0% -,xvwq shwl tetm tyre is wt's . saw Oa cy it> C 's i ve wonvd a 06W 0# WW, ~ today I""—* W, MCN �+4" r„t Ott V"Wdoy t 3i.. ki # 4 tA~ 4A folse agA Mmwadlfv s` of try C3r4kut" Nf ow €2'MoC+ Rs WN" +" C tear to "Agon t#tis Of t -y Theww ey of CormwAy in RV t ..arno'Ur eraumm tetra'+ 111� Orly Of thew " 'r9 t rL" ks imal sof+* wh#0 M aft he W"t*d casttw ' t it Owe m#tAomy tai wwlft topycs and ` . to e d4wots s ttw e t; tw if t foci on t AS it-* Pffrord Memo of IW*0_ t tt t 49 ! !f`W CIS, Ow pan to Uq an0xa tot" A^ at 0V Oft" day w, ie r ew*s frit sv"tl" 'I -*-, The tiscw of tree Delos Verdes r o-oittsuia t5rst . Groups make t easier than ever to sitars w0h hiends, family and to s lir' CFVTGWINM r4*01TA See, AA Soot,ftsted t".40rs See AM ♦ 7 N t fart -c- D" post + ;nits CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: OCTOBER 17, 2017 SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material presented for tonight's meeting. Item No. Description of Material Public Comments Email exchange between City Attorney Aleshire and Michael Huang; Emails from: Michael Huang; Nelly and Jim Bertolina; Margaret Shih; Faith Stapleton; Karen Chuang; Mr. & Mrs. Glenn Spargo; Maureen Spargo; Diane Smith; Amar and Narinder Kapoor; Tracy Burns; Thomas W. Frew 2 Email from Jennifer Taggart ** PLEASE NOTE: Materials attached after the color page(s) were submitted through Monday, October 16, 2017**. Respectfully submitted, A�, Emily Co orn WA01 City Clerk\LATE CORRESPONDENCE\2017 Cover Sheets\20171017 additions revisions to agenda.doc C-6 From: Dave Aleshire[mailto:daleshire@awattorneys.com] Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 1:02 PM To:'Michael Huang' <mikehgalaxy@gmail.com> Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Brian Campbell <BrianC@rpvca.gov>; Jerry Duhovic <Jerry.Duhovic@rpvca.gov>; Susan Brooks <SusanB@rpvca.gov>; Ken Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Anthony Misetich <AnthonvM@rpvca.gov>; Doug Willmore <DWillmore @rpvca.gov>; Rebecca S. Burleson <rburleson@awattorneys.com>; CityClerk <CityClerk@rpvca.gov> Subject: RE: Demand Notice to City of Rancho Palos Verdes Concerning Defamation by Brian Campbell, in capacity as Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, Against Me - Please Respond by Monday, October 16, 2017 Mr Huang— Your latest email is addressed to and responding to my email, yet in the actual email you include as addressees Mr Willmore and the members of the Council. For the reasons stated in my prior email, I will respond although there has still been no direction from the City Council, and their next meeting is not until October 17. You evidently do accept my representation that Mr Campbell's email was not directed by the Council. I do understand the points you make about the format of the email and the possible confusion, and the lack of a disclaimer to clarify that Mr Campbell was speaking for himself --and as I said I am working with a subcommittee of the Council on revisions to the Council Procedures Manual which could address the issues you raise. That being said, you have asked for a further clarifying letter from the City Manager. The intent as I perceive it is that there be a more or less public disavowal of the Mayor's actions. In that regard, as the City Manager reports to the City Council, it would seem that he should not send such a letter unless authorized by the Council itself. I've discussed this with the City Manager, so at this point we will not act further to comply with your request without specific Council direction. You do have my email—and we have a process ongoing in terms of council procedures review which should conclude within a few months. Thanks, Dave Dave From: Michael Huang[mailto:mikehgalaxyCabgmail.com] Sent: Friday, October 13, 2017 9:28 AM To: Dave Aleshire Cc: CC; brian.campbell@rpvca.gov; ierry.duhovic@rpvca.gov; susan.brooks@rpvca.gov; ken.dyda@rpvca.gov; anthony.misetich@rpvca.gov; Doug Wilmore; Rebecca S. Burleson; CityClerk Subject: Re: Demand Notice to City of Rancho Palos Verdes Concerning Defamation by Brian Campbell, in capacity as Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, Against Me - Please Respond by Monday, October 16, 2017 Dear Mr. Aleshire, Mr Wilmore, and Members of the City Council, Thank you for your response. I appreciate your quick confirmation that Mr. Brian Campbell's comments about me from his email of October 5, 2017, is not the opinion of the City nor of the City Council. I also understand that neither the City nor the City Council directed Mr. Campbell P�.L I1 G to write the email; he did it on his own initiative. Mr. Campbell did more than just sign the letter C-7 C0 W contained in the email as "Mayor - Rancho Palos Verdes". He took great pains to make the email look like a public announcement message from the City in the following ways: 1. The email sender is identified as "RPV Mayor Brian Campbell". 2. Under the address header, there is a message stating that the recipient is receiving this message because "you have expressed an interest in the RPV City Council." This message is very similar to Listserv, the official notification from the City. 3. There is another message stating "You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails". From this context, Mr. Campbell is implying that this email is coming from the City, not from him as an individual. 4. In the fourth paragraph of the embedded letter, he states that "As the current mayor of RPV..." It is obvious he is making his accusations against me as the Mayor of our City. 5. Lastly, he signs the letter as "Mayor - Rancho Palos Verdes." I take your word at face value that Mr. Campbell has not violated any current City policy. But his email is malicious, deceptive, and wrong on many levels. There is no doubt to the reader that this letter is an official notification from a sitting mayor calling a private resident a "campaign operative" who has "smeared some of the candidates" by making "a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates. Mr. Campbell's claims are facetious and without merit. I wrote an email to a group of friends and neighbors stating my opinion as to why I did not support two City Council candidates whom he supports. I included the candidates' voting record on short-term rentals and my knowledge of the candidates based on my research to arrive at my opinions. This speech falls under protected speech. In summary, he made vague and unsubstantiated accusations against me. He is the one who actually "smeared" me by making "a number of false and misleading claims" about me. Most importantly, he abused his power and inappropriately used his title of Mayor to lend credence to his ridiculous claims. I appreciate the fact that neither the City nor the City Council authorized or directed Mr. Campbell to write the email about me. But please appreciate my distress at having a letter out in the public domain that is disguised as public announcement from the City in which the Mayor is baselessly accusing me of unethical behavior and reprimanding me to refrain from these activities. I understand that Mr. Campbell also did something similar to Mr. Edmundo Hummel by filing a false claim about Mr. Hummel to his employer, the Sheriff s Department last year when Mr. Hummel opposed Mr. Campbell on the Ladera Linda issue. There appears to be a pattern of unethical retaliation by Mr. Campbell against his critics. An argument can be made that the City has been negligent in not having taken immediate action against Mr. Campbell at that time. As I indicated in my previous email, I love this City, and I am not looking to cause the City any problems. But I will take all actions necessary to protect my reputation and restore the harm that Mr. Campbell has done to my name. I would like to request that the City and the City Council take the following actions to mitigate the harm Mr. Campbell has done to me: 1. Have the City Manager provide an official letter on City letterhead signed by the City Manager stating the following: "The opinions stated by Mayor Brian Campbell in his October 5, 2017, letter distributed by email about Mr. Michael Huang are not the opinions of The City of Rancho Palos Verdes. The City did not authorize nor direct Mayor Brian Campbell to write and distribute this letter. The City regrets any harm this letter may have done." I would request that an original version of this letter be provided to me by Monday, October 16, 2017. 2. The City will make its best effort to distribute the letter from the City Manager by email to the same distribution list Mr. Campbell used. The City will prove to my satisfaction that this C-8 letter was distributed in this way successfully. If the City is not able to obtain the email list Mr. Brian Campbell used, we can work together to find the best alternative. 3. Have the City Council provide an official letter on City letterhead signed by the City Council stating the following: "The opinions stated by Mayor Brian Campbell in his October 5, 2017, letter distributed by email about Mr. Michael Huang are not the opinions of The City Council of Rancho Palos Verdes. The City Council did not authorize nor direct Mayor Brian Campbell to write this letter. The City Council regrets any harm this letter may have done." I understand that it may take some time for the City Council to meet and authorize this letter. Please let me know approximately time when this letter can be provided. I would also ask this letter to be distributed the same way as the letter by the City Manager. On a separate but related issue, I urge the City Council to enact policies and procedures as soon as possible to prevent Mr. Brian Campbell or any other council member from using their position of authority to bully and intimidate residents in this way. I look froward to your reply and thank you for your time and attention to this matter. Sincerely, Michael Huang On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 1:51 PM, Dave Aleshire <daleshiregawattorne, s�> wrote: Dear Mr Huang— I was out of the country last week which is why I missed the last council meeting and have had a number of matters to review this morning—and am just getting to your email. I have spoken with Doug Willmore on this matter and am responding for us on behalf of the City. I have not spoken with any councilmember and as under the Brown Act we can only consult with the Council in establishing official policy through a Council meeting—this email will have to constitute official response until the Council as a body might otherwise direct. We are aware of no action on behalf of the Council directing the Mayor to review or distribute any comment on your email below—accordingly any opinion expressed at this point is his own opinion and not the position of the City Council. The law is clear that no public resources can be used for political campaign purposes. Beyond this you start to run into first amendment issues which allows wide latitude in terms of the expression of opinion concerning election matters—councilmembers thus have the same right as you do to express opinions on the qualifications of candidates for office, and to respond to communications which they think mischaracterize their positions. The issue which can arise is the potential for confusion where a councilmember uses their official title in the expression of a private opinion—which is the reason for your email. Some cities have specific rules that either a title not be used, or if a title is used, there be a disclaimer that the opinion is a personal opinion and not the official position of the city. We are currently in the process of reviewing RPV council policies with a council subcommitttee. Although there is a policy (#39) dealing with communications between councilmembers, commissioners and staff on agenda items, there is nothing dealing with use of the title in public communications. This is one of the policies that is under review and might be addressed in the future. The Mayor's use of his title in this communication does not seem to violate any current City policy that I have found. C-9 That being said, I reiterate that his communication at this point is a personal one solely, and has not been authorized by the Council as being an official position of the City. I assume this addresses your question, but if it does not, please feel free to inquire further. Dave From: Michael Huang [mailto:mikehgalaxy@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 09, 2017 8:45 AM To: CC; brian.campbellOrpvca.gov; jerry.duhovic@rpvca.gov; susan.brooks@rpvca.gov; ken.dydaCa)rpvca.gov; anthony.miseticKi)rpvca.gov; Doug Wilmore; Dave Aleshire Subject: Demand Notice to City of Rancho Palos Verdes Concerning Defamation by Brian Campbell, in capacity as Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, Against Me - Please Respond by Monday, October 16, 2017 Dear Members of the City Council Members; Mr. Doug Wilmore, City Manager; and Mr. Dave Aleshire, City Attorney: On Wednesday, October 4, 2017, I wrote an email to my friends and neighbors expressing my personal opinion of City Council candidates. In this email, I expressed my opinion that I oppose Krista Johnson and Dave Emenhiser, candidates Brian Campbell supports and endorses. The next day, I was informed that Brian Campbell, in his capacity of the Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, wrote an email in which he defamed me by calling me a "campaign operative" and baselessly accused me of "smearing" some candidates. I am a private individual and do not hold any office in this City. His email is a blatant abuse of power in his attempt to suppress my freedom of speech. He is trying to intimidate me and has already defamed me. It is unheard of to have a Mayor single out a private resident for attack in this way. I have attached the following below: my original emails, Brian Campbell's email, and my followup email I have been a resident of this City for a long time, and I dearly love this City. I do not wish to cause this City problems, but I cannot tolerate this vicious attack to my reputation and attempt to intimidate me from exercising my freedom of speech. I am demanding to hear from the City about its position on this matter. Please clarify if the derogatory and defamatory comments Brian Campbell made about me in the email in his capacity as the Mayor are also being made by the City. If not, I would demand that the City issue a clarification and retraction with the content and form of distribution subject to my approval. If I do not receive a response from the City by Monday, October 16, 2017, I will assume that Brian Campbell's email is the official position of the City, and I will seek all legal redress available to me. Thank you. Sincerely, Michael Huang ** Start of my original emails below: ** ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michael Huang <mikeh ag laxyAgmail.com> Date: Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:43 PM Subject: Update on Status of Short -Term Rentals in RPV / Upcoming City Council Election To: C-10 Hi Everybody, I just wanted to provide an update on the effectiveness of the ban on the advertising and operation of short-term rentals in our City. The ban on the advertising and operation of short-term rentals has been very successful. The increased fines have also helped enforcement significantly. After the passing of the ban and the increased fines, many of the illegal short- term rental operators removed their listings and stopped renting. Of course, as with any law, there will be those who will choose not to follow it. As far as I know, there is one illegal short-term rental operator who is openly violating the law and a few operators who are trying to skirt the law. The City is dealing with these violators. From my contacts with the residents who suffered from the effects of short-term rentals, the problems associated with these illegal short-term rentals have decreased many folds since the actions taken by the City. You may also know that we have a municipal election coming up on November 7, 2017, in which there are six candidates running for two City Council seats. Councilman Anthony Misetich and Brian Campbell are both termed out. Anthony Misetich is a staunch supporter of the ban on short-term rentals, and Brian Campbell is a foe of the ban on short-term rentals. Here are some information I have gathered on each of the candidates based on what I know of their previous voting records on short-term rentals and information we collected when Chris and I attended the Candidates' Forum at Hesse Park on 9/22/17: Eric Alegria - Small business owner, RPV Finance Committee Board member, Taxpayer Advocate, and State Commissioner. Eric is a current member of RPV Finance Committee. He is a PhD candidate in Public Policy at Clarement Graduate University and has a Masters in Public Administration from USC. I have reached out to Eric, and he fully supports the current ban on short-term rentals operations and advertising. Eric is endorsed by Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetich as well as former Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich and State Treasurer John Chiang. Both Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetichare strong supports of the ban on short-term rentals. We support Eric Alegria for City Council. John Cruikshank - Local small business owner, RPV Planning Commissioner, Civil Engineer with bachelors and masters degrees from USC. John is the current chairman of the Planning Commission. John was on the planning commission on August 22, 2016, when he voted to allow owners to rent out one room if the owners live at the property. Then at the 11/29/16 Planning Commission, John voted in favor of the ban on the advertising of short-term rentals. I was disappointed that John Cruikshank voted to allow the one -room short-term rental option, but I do credit John for subsequently voting for the banning of the advertising of short-term rentals. We had a meeting with John about a month ago, and he stated that he "supports the current short-term ban as passed by the City council and has no plans to reverse that decision". John is also endorsed by Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetich as well as by David Hadley and Don Knabe. We also support John Cruikshank for City Council. In our opinion, he will vote for an issue if it is the will of the majority despite his own personal opinions. Dave Emenhiser - RPV Planning Commissioner, former member of RPV Finance Committee, Doctorate, and 2 masters degrees. As a member of the Planning Commission, on August 22, 2017, Dave Emenhiser voted for allowing the one - room short-term rental option if the owner is present. Then on November 29, 2016, he was in favor of allowing the advertising of illegal short-term rentals by voting against the ban on advertising. At that hearing, he told the City Attorney he was concerned that banning advertising may impede freedom of speech. The City Attorney responded that since short- term rental is an illegal activity, the advertising of an illegal activity is not protected. Despite that clarification, Dave still voted against the advertising ban. Dave also said he was against the advertising ban because he was concerned about legal fees and attorney bills for the City and also about lawsuits from Google. I find it alarming that Dave was not willing to have the City spend money to prevent an activity that was declared illegal by the City Council and that was adversely affecting many of the neighbors. It was made clear that the advertising ban was only against the owners of the property and not against the short-term rental websites. Furthermore, Google is a search engine; it has nothing to do with the short- term rental websites. In my personal opinion, the reasons Dave gave for his nay vote on the advertising ban was disingenuous. At that hearing, only two Planning Commissioners voted against the advertising ban - Dave Emenhiser and Robert Nelson. Robert Nelson is also the planning commissioner who favors short-term rentals and was against any type of restrictions against it. In fact, he has said that he is happy that a doctor was making $100,000 a year running short-term rentals four house from his home and that neighbors should just sue each other in small -claims court to stop the nuisance from short-term rentals. City records show that Robert Nelson donated $5,000 to Dave Emenhiser'scampaign. Lastly, Dave is supported by Brian Campbell. Brian Campbell is the Councilman who has consistently favored allowing short- term rentals in our City. We strongly oppose votingfor or Dave Emehniser for City Council. Krista Johnson - Member of RPV Finance Committee. I do not know much about Krista Johnson other than the fact that she got involved with the City after her house burned down. She was asking the City Council to make some type of exception for her in the permitting or rebuilding of her house. The whole of the City Council was opposed with the exception of Brian Campbell. She is heavily endorsed by Councilman Brian Campbell. On his Facebook page, Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA - he has multiple posts endorsing Krista Johnson. We strongly oppose voting for Krista Johnson because she is so heavily endorsed by Brian Campbell. C-11 Matthew Vitalich - Bachelor's degree in English and Creative Writing from Cal State Long Beach in 2014. Matthew supports the current ban on the operation and advertising of short-term rentals in our City. Ben Kelly - 18 years old - Ben just graduated from high school this past June. At the Candidates' Forum at Hesse Park, I felt that he was not as well-informed on the issues as the other candidates. In summary, we support Eric Alegria (#2 on ballot) and John Cruikshank (#3 on ballot) for City Council because they are both endorsed and supported by Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetich. Both of these council members are strong supporters of the short-term rental ban. We oppose Dave Emenhiser and Krista Johnson because they are supported by Brian Campbell, who is a foe of the ban on short-term rentals in our City. Please feel free to forward this email to your friends and relatives who are registered to vote in the upcoming RPV election. Please also let me know if you support Eric Alegria and John Cruikshank and are interested in hosting their signs on your yard. I would be happy to get the signs from them and delivery them to your house. Thank you for all of your efforts in bringing about the short-term rental ban in our City, but we need to be vigilant to ensure that we keep short-term rentals away from our City. Thanks again. Sincerely, Chris and Mike Huang ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michael Huang <mikehgalaxyagmail.com> Date: Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:27 PM Subject: Fwd: Update on Status of Short -Term Rentals in RPV / Upcoming City Council Election To: Sorry for this follow up, but there is a clarification about how the candidates are listed on the ballot: Eric Alegria is listed second from the top, but he is Candidates #3 on the ballot, and John Cruikshank is listed third from the top, but he is Candidates #4 on the ballot. There is no candidate #1. The numbering starts at #2. Here's a picture of the ballot below: I don't know why they don't start numbering with #1. Sincerely, Mike Huang ** End of my original emails ** C-12 * * Start of Brian Campbell's email below accusing me of being a campaign operative and of smearing some candidates: (recipient removed to protect privacy * * From: RPV Mayor Brian Campbell <campbell.rpv@gmail.com> Date: October 5, 2017 at 4:10:37 PM PDT To: ------------------------ Subject: RPV Council Race - Keep it accurate please! Reply -To: campbell.rpv@gmail.com Hi, just a reminder that you're receiving this email because you have expressed an interest in the RPV City Council. You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails. 1013 in a In Like C-13 Accuracy in Campaign Messages I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list. In it he made a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. I'm disappointed in this approach. Its patently unfair to all of the candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing any of these six individuals who have the courage to run for local office. While they should all be vigorously vetted on the issues during the campaign, they all deserve our respect and honest dialog. There are plenty of worthy topics and positions to openly debate and discuss in this council race. I think the community prefers that we focus on those. As the current mayor of RPV, I think its important that we all do our part to set an example to help ensure a campaign season that at the end of the day we are proud of. Thanks for reading, C-14 C-15 City Councilman, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 SafeUnsubscribeTM------------------------- Forward this email I Update Profile J About our service provider Sent by campbgll.rpv@gmaii.com in collaboration with * * End of Brian Campbell's email * * * * Start of My followup email below: * * Hi Everyone, I was informed that Brian Campbell, the Councilman who is also the Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, issued the following communication by email in his official role as the Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes. As you can see, in his official capacity of Mayor, he called me a "campaign operative" and is accusing me of "smearing" some candidates by making a "number of false and misleading claims". He has openly endorsed and supported Krista Johnson and Dave Emenhiser, the same two candidates I do not support as stated in my original email. C-16 Accuracy in Campaign Messages I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list. In it lie made a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. I'm disappointed in this approach. Its patently unfair to all of the candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing �!ny of these six individuals who have the courage to run for local office. While they should all be vigorously vetted on the Issues during the campaign, they all deserve our respect and honest dialog. There are plenty of worthy topics and positions to openly debate and discuss In this council race. I think the community prefers that we focus on those. As the current mayor of RPV; I think its important that we all do our part to set an example to help ensure a campaign season that at the end of the day we are proud of. Thanks for reading Brian Campbell Mayor - Rancho Palos Verdes Campbell rpva gmail com Below are screenshots of Brian Campbell's Facebook page showing his support and endorsement of Dave Emenheiser and Krista Johnson: C-17 Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA Home About Endorsements Photos Videos Join My List Posts Community III; Like 1 Follow + Share ••• Posts Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA l9 he a5 Like Q Comment Cj Share Top Comments Write a comment Preis E—". pas, View 1 comment Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes. CA © Government Official People Also Like ®Long Beach Area Rep... Ilk Like Political Organization • Peninsula Athletics Ilk Like School Sports Team _+ j� Sustainable Palos Ver... t1l Like School Pages liked by this Page ceder Easy Reader News lb Like Wounded Warrior Am... ljr Like USMC Wounded Warr!... r` Like English (US) Espahol PotlugWs (Brasil) + Frangais (France) Deutsch Privacy Terms Advertising Ad Choices Cookies More Facebook * 2017 C-18 Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA Home About Endorsements Photos Videos Join My List Posts Community ri Like 1 Follow A Share ••• Brian Campbell • Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA is Susie Lee Campbell I am very pleased to report that Krista Johnson has announced that she is running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council this November. Krista is a natural business and community leader. She is a respected and veteran RPV City Committee appointee, member of multiple boards, successful businesswoman and terrific mom to her two sons and husband Jeff. I will be 100% behind her campaign. a5 Like Q Comment �> Share 0069 Top Comments' 2 Shares Write a comment_ Q cis _ ro r^" Tracy A. Hunt Krista, you are awesomel Like Reply © 1 June 27 at 6 53pm Y View 1 more reply Government Official In Rolling Hills Estates, California Community See All Lt Invite your friends to like this Page r` 692 people like this �'\ 662 people follow this About See All p Send Message <' vnmr.campbellforrpv.com p Government Oficial People Also Like ®Long Beach Area Rep... Political Orgamzal:on riir Like Peninsula Athletics rlr Like School Sports Team _ _n Sustainable Palos Ver... School r` Like Pages liked by this Page asyEy f Easy Reader News I& Like Rea In the two posts above, he is clearly supporting Dave Emenhiser and affirming his endorsement of Krista Johnson by stating that he is "100% behind her campaign". Here's what I wrote in my original email about Dave Emenhiser: "Dave Emenhiser - RPV Planning Commissioner, former member of RPV Finance Committee, Doctorate, and 2 masters degrees. As a member of the Planning Commission, on August 22, 2017, Dave Emenhiser voted for allowing the one - room short-term rental option if the owner is present. Then on November 29, 2016, he was in favor of allowing the advertising of illegal short-term rentals by voting against the ban on advertising. At that hearing, he told the City Attorney he was concerned that banning advertising may impede freedom of speech. The City Attorney responded that since short- term rental is an illegal activity, the advertising of an illegal activity is not protected. Despite that clarification, Dave still voted against the advertising ban. Dave also said he was against the advertising ban because he was concerned about legal fees and attorney bills for the City and also about lawsuits from Google. I find it alarming that Dave was not willing to have the City spend money to prevent an activity that was declared illegal by the City Council and that was adversely affecting many of the neighbors. It was made clear that the advertising ban was only against the owners of the property and not against the short-term rental websites. Furthermore, Google is a search engine; it has nothing to do with the short- term rental websites. In my personal opinion, the reasons Dave gave for his nay vote on the advertising ban was disingenuous. At that hearing, only two Planning Commissioners voted against the advertising ban - Dave Emenhiser and Robert Nelson. Robert Nelson is also the planning commissioner who favors short-term rentals and was against any type of restrictions against it. In fact, he has said that he is happy that a doctor was making $100,000 a year running short-term rentals four house from his home and that neighbors should just sue each other in small -claims court to stop the nuisance from short -tern rentals. City records show that Robert Nelson donated $5,000 to Dave Emenhiser'scampaign. Lastly, Dave is supported by Brian Campbell. Brian Campbell is the Councilman who has consistently favored allowing short- term rentals in our City. We strongly oppose voting for Dave Emehniser for City Council." C-19 I stand behind every statement I made above. I, along with many of you, was present at the Planning Commission meetings when Dave Emehniser voted against banning the advertising of short-term rentals along with Robert Nelson, who I just discovered is his campaign treasurer. I even went back and viewed the videos and read the Planning Commission meeting minutes to make sure I remember Dave Emenhiser stated reasons for voting against the advertising ban. I was merely stating my opinion as to why I strongly oppose voting for Dave Emehniser for City Council based upon my observation of his voting record on short-term rentals and also because he is supported by Brian Campbell. Here's what I wrote in my original email about Krista Johnson: "Krista Johnson - Member of RPV Finance Committee. I do not know much about Krista Johnson other than the fact that she got involved with the City after her house burned down. She was asking the City Council to make some type of exception for her in the permitting or rebuilding of her house. The whole of the City Council was opposed with the exception of Brian Campbell. She is heavily endorsed by Councilman Brian Campbell. On his Facebook page, Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA - he has multiple posts endorsing Krista Johnson. We strongly oppose voting for Krista Johnson because she is so heavily endorsed by Brian Campbell." I stated that I did not know much about Krista Johnson and that my main reason for opposing her for City Council was because of Brian Campbell's heavy endorsement. Since my original email, I have done research from public records. Here's what I found out: Her house suffered extensive fire damage in September 2005, and she had to rebuild the whole house. There was a permit to build a "new 4,280 square foot, single -story residence in replacement of the existing fire -damaged 3,946 square foot residence. Understandably, she was under time pressure to complete the construction of her new house because the insurance company will only for rental housing for a fixed period of time. So she was requesting that the City "fast-track" the approval of her plans. She also sought the assistance of then Councilman Peter Gardiner. According to one of her letters to the City at that time, Councilman Gardiner interceded on her behalf and had the City Manger move up the date of a Planning Commission meeting. Understandably, the whole process can take time, but I understand her desire to speed up the process because of her circumstance. I could not find any information on how the other City Council members responded to her request, and I was able to confirm that Brian Campbell was not on the City Council at that time. So I had incorrect knowledge that the City Council was opposed to her request and that Brian Campbell was the exception. But I still stand behind my main point that I strongly oppose voting for Krista Johnson because she is so heavily endorsed by Brian Campbell. Her relationship with the City Council about the rebuilding of her home was not a factor in my conclusion. In summary, I sent out the email to you expressing my support or lack thereof of the candidates based upon my observations and knowledge. The email was sent from me as a resident to you as a resident. I do not work for any of the candidates' campaigns. It is true that I support Eric Alegria and John Crukishank, and that I oppose Dave Emehniser and Krista Johnson. Speaking on behalf of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes as the Mayor, Brian Campbell sent out his email in his official City capacity accusing me of being a "campaign operative" who has "smeared" some of the candidates. He is using his role as a public official to attack me as a private citizen who was expressing my opinions as to why I was not supporting his candidates. Brian Campbell sent out this malicious personal attack upon my reputation in response to the email I sent privately to you. This improper abuse of power that Brian Campbell has committed in the name of Rancho Palos Verdes as Mayor is further proof of my concern about any City Council candidates endorsed by him. It is my believe that City Council candidates seek out the endorsement of other public figure and officials who have similar values. Brian Campbell's personal attacks in the attempt to intimidate me further bolsters my conviction about not supporting any candidates he endorses. He is trying to bully me and suppress my first amendment rights to freedom of speech as a private citizen. Sincerely, Mike Huang ** End of my followup email ** C-20 From: Michael Huang <mikehgalaxy@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 8:36 PM To: CC; Ken Dyda; Jerry Duhovic; Anthony Misetich; Susan Brooks Cc: Doug Willmore; Dave Aleshire; CityClerk Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting on October 17, 2017 - Mr. Campbell's Violation of Section III - 14 of Protocol for Elected Officials Attachments: Protocol for Elected Officials and Appointed Board Commission and Committee Members (PDF)_201501061401363526.pdf Dear Members of the City Council, It is my contention that Mr. Brian Campbell has violated Section III - 14 of our City's Protocol for Elected Officials when he wrote his malicious email about me using his authority as the Mayor. Specifically, the section states: "Unless authorized to do so by the City Council, refrain from making statements, either orally or in writing, that assert or would cause a reasonable person to believe that you are acting on behalf of the City." It is my assertion that Mr. Campbell has violated City policies. I urge the other members of the City Council to take appropriate action. For your reference, I have attached the Protocol for Elected Officials and Appointed Boards, Commission and Committee Members. Thank you. Sincerely, Michael Huang poo I I c com ymeklf s C-21 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PROTOCOL FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND APPOINTED BOARDS, COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS ADOPTED: May 29, 2012 C-22 CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES PROTOCOL FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS AND APPOINTED BOARDS, COMMISSION AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS Adopted May 29, 2012 I. STATEMENT OF PURPOSE The purpose of this document is to create a single comprehensive protocol for the City Council and Members of City Boards, Commissions and Committees (hereinafter referred to collectively as "Officials") to ensure the efficient, effective and ethical operation of this municipal government. As a statement of purpose, this policy also recognizes that the proper operation of this municipality requires that all of its Officials be independent and impartial in their judgment and actions; that public office not be used for personal gain; that the public have confidence in the integrity of its Officials; and that public deliberations and actions be conducted in an atmosphere free from personal animosity and hostility. II. INTRODUCTION A. Existing State statutes already address many areas of appropriate conduct. This policy statement is not intended to supersede the State laws with which City officials must comply, including the Political Reform Act of 1974, Government Code Section 1090 and the Ralph M. Brown Act. B. As a matter of practice, this policy should be read and reviewed periodically by all members of the City Council and by the Members of City Commissions and Committees. C. Not all conduct and behavior fit neatly within this Protocol. The rules and procedures listed herein are designed to clearly define conduct in common situations. Special circumstances may not be easily resolved by simply referring to this Protocol. The City Council can provide specific interpretation through review with the City Attorney, as necessary. D. In this City's Council/Manager form of government, the City Manager is the "administrative head" (Municipal Code Section 2.08.070) of the City government under the direction and control of the City Council. The City Council is the chief policy- making body of the City. Direction to the City Manager on policy matters and issues shall occur at regular and/or special sessions by a majority of the City Council. E. The City historically has recognized the value of municipal organizations and associations including the League of California Cities, California Contract Cities Association, South Bay Cities Association, etc., and that Officials should participate in their meetings and seminars when appropriate. -1- C-23 III. PROTOCOL FOR OFFICIALS The proper operation of this local government requires that its public Officials be independent, impartial and responsible to its residents; that its public Officials strive to cooperate and work together for the common good of the City; that decisions and policy be made in the proper channels of the government structure; that public office not be used for personal gain; and that the public have confidence in the integrity of its public Officials. In recognition of these goals, the following protocol is hereby prescribed for the Officials, who shall: 1. At all times during the performance of their City duties, adhere to their oath of office (Cal. Const. Art. XX Section 3) and comply with all State ethics laws for public officials. 2. Provide fair and equal treatment for all persons and matters coming before the City Council, Commissions or Committees. No Official shall grant any special consideration or advantage to any citizen beyond that which is available to every other citizen. 3. Be prepared, learn and study the background and purposes of items that are on the agenda before voting. To the extent possible, raise any questions pertaining to agenda items with appropriate City Staff and the City Manager prior to the meeting where the item will be discussed. 4. Represent and work to protect the rights of all residents of the City, without favoritism, conflict of interest or for any personal gain. 5. Faithfully perform all duties of office. 6. Refrain from disclosing confidential information that is learned during a closed session held in accordance with the Ralph M. Brown Act (Cal. Govt. Code Section 54950, et seq.) of the City Council or any of the City's Commission's or Committees and refrain from disclosing information that is subject to the City's attorney client privilege, unless disclosure is specifically authorized by a majority vote of the City Council. 7. Refrain from abusive conduct, personal charges or verbal attacks upon the character, motives, ethics or morals of other members of the Council, Commissions, Committee Members, City Staff or the public, or from making other personal comments that are not germane to the issues before the City Council, Commission or Committee. 8. Listen carefully, courteously and attentively to all public discussions at City Council, Commission or Committee meetings and avoid -2- C-24 interrupting other speakers, including other City Officials, City Staff, or the public. 9. Foster a positive attitude and constructively foster open communication in dealing with the public, City staff and all City Officials. City Officials should keep an open mind in dealing with issues and attempt to work out solutions and/or compromises that meet the needs and interests of all parties. 10. Faithfully attend all sessions of the City Council, Commission or Committee of which the person is a member unless unable to do so for some compelling reason or disability. 11. Accept as a personal duty the responsibility to conduct this City's business with professional competence, fairness, impartiality, efficiency and effectiveness. 12. Advise appropriate City staff when a quorum of the City Council or a Council standing sub -committee or a quorum of a City Commission or Committee meets with another governmental agency's officials, citizen groups, homeowners' associations, county or contract officials, development applicants, etc., to insure proper notice of such meetings is given in accordance with the provisions of the Ralph M. Brown Act. Members of the public may attend any such meetings. 13. Respect intergovernmental relationships between this City and other neighboring cities, the County of Los Angeles, the State of California, and the federal government. 14. Unless authorized to do so by the City Council, refrain from making statements, either orally or in writing, that assert or would cause a reasonable person to believe that you are acting on behalf of the City. Accordingly, if a Official testifies, either orally or in writing, before an administrative body of a governmental agency outside of the City, and identifies himself or herself as a Official, that Official also must state that he or she is not appearing or testifying in any official capacity and is not representing the views or opinions of the City; rather, he or she is representing his or her own views as a private citizen. Other than personal thank you notes, City letterhead shall not be used without prior City Council approval. 15. Refrain from using of City -owned equipment, materials or property for personal purposes is prohibited, except when such equipment or property is available to the public generally or is provided to City Officials, pursuant to City policy, in the conduct of City business. -3- C-25 16. Disclose any corruption, fraud, and bribery to appropriate authorities. 17. Refrain from making, participating in making, or using his or her official position with the City to influence any governmental decision directly relating to any person or entity with whom he or she is negotiating concerning prospective employment or any other prospective business relationship that will be a source of financial gain to the Official . -4- C-26 From: Michael Huang [mailto:mikehgalaxy@gmaii.com] Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2017 12:18 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Jerry Duhovic <Jerry. Duhovic@ rpvca.gov>; Ken Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Susan Brooks <SusanB@rpvca.gov>; Anthony Misetich <AnthonyM@rpvca.gov>; Brian Campbell <BrianC@rpvca.gov> Cc: Doug Willmore <DWillmore@rpvca.gov>; Dave Aleshire <daleshire@awattorneys.com>; Rebecca S. Burleson <rburleson@awattorneys.com>; CityClerk <CityClerk@rpvca.gov> Subject: Public Comment for City Council Meeting on October 17, 2017 - Defamatory Email by Mayor Brian Campbell Using Authority of His Title Against Me for Expressing My Personal Opinion Opposing Candidates He Endorses and Supports for City Council Member Dear Members of the City Council, On Wednesday, October 4, 2017, 1 wrote an email to my friends and neighbors expressing my personal opinion of City Council candidates. In this email, based on my knowledge and observations, I expressed my opinion that I opposed two candidates because: 1) Brian Campbell supports and endorses these two candidates, and 2) One of the candidates voted against the City's ban on short-term rental operation and advertising as a planning commissioner. I have expressed to my friends many times that I also oppose Brian Campbell because he is a foe of the City's ban on short- term rentals. The next day, I was informed that Brian Campbell, in his capacity of the Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, wrote an email in which he defamed me by calling me a "campaign operative" and baselessly accused me of "smearing" some candidates without providing any context or details. I am a private individual and do not hold any office in this City. His email is a blatant abuse of power in his attempt to suppress my freedom of speech. He is trying to intimidate me and has already defamed me. It is unheard of to have a Mayor single out a private resident for attack in this way, especially given that my email was sent privately to a group of my friends and neighbors. I have already received confirmation from the City Attorney that the opinion expressed by Mr. Brian Campbell is his personal opinion and not the position of the City Council. The City Council did not authorize or direct Mr. Campbell to write this email about me. But Mr. Campbell did more just sign the letter as the Mayor of our City. He took great pains to make the email look like a public announcement message from the City in the following ways: 1. The email sender is identified as "RPV Mayor Brian Campbell". 2. Under the address header, there is a message stating that the recipient is receiving this message because "you have expressed an interest in the RPV City Council." This message is very similar to Listserv, the official notification from the City. 3. There is another message stating "You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails". From this context, Mr. Campbell is implying that this email is coming from the City, not from him as an individual. owi 4. In the fourth paragraph of the embedded letter, he states that "As the current mayor of RPV..." It is obvious he is making his accusations against me as the Mayor of our City. 5. Lastly, he signs the letter as "Mayor - Rancho Palos Verdes." Virtually all readers of this email will infer that this email is an official notification from the City signed by the Mayor. This Friday, I discovered that this defamatory email has been posted on the Facebook page of The Palos Verdes Peninsula New and also on NextDoor across 14 neighborhoods. There would be more postings of which I am unaware. Please understand my distress and concern in finding out that as a private citizen, this malicious attack on my reputation and character by a sitting Mayor is now out there in the public domain and spreading. In fact, the poster on NextDoor is Ling Tang, a short- term rental operator who is obviously upset at my involvement in supporting the short- term rental ban. I urgently ask the City Council to help me clear my name as soon as possible by doing the following to prevent this malicious email from spreading farther and doing more damage: 1. Provide me a signed letter on City letterhead head stating the following.. "The opinions Mayor Brian Campbell expressed about Mr. Michael Huang in his email of October 5, 2017, is not the opinion of the City or of the City Council. Mr. Campbell was not directed or authorized by the City or the City Council to make these statements." 2. If the City Council has concerns about the above wording, please allows the City Attorney or the City Manager to work with me to draft language that is acceptable to the City and myself. 3. This revised language can then be approved by the subcommittee that is studying this issue of City Council Members expressing their personal opinions using their titles. 4. Please allow the City Manger to work with me to find the best way to distribute this letter to repair the damage to my reputation. 5. The City Council should implement policies and procedures to prevent this type of abuse and misuse of power in the future. I have been a resident of this City for a long time, and I dearly love this City. I do not wish to cause this City problems, but I cannot tolerate this vicious attack to my reputation and attempt to intimidate me from exercising my freedom of speech. Having this letter and finding the best way to distribute this letter is the only way for me to try and repair the damage that has already been done to my reputation. I have attached the following documents below: 1. Post of Mr. Campbell's email on NextDoor by Ling Tang. 2. Post of Mr. Campbell's email on Facebook Page of The Palos Verdes Peninsula News by Yu Tang 3. My original emails to friends and neighbors. 4. Mr. Campbell's email of October 4, 2017, about me. C-28 5. My followup email to friends and neighbors. Sincerely, Michael Huang ** Start of post of Mr. Campbell's Email by Ling Tang on NextDoor ** Search Nextdoor Home Post in General Country Club 49 "7 Tana ! unada Bay Map RPV city council Categories Last year. I attend the RPV council meeting in regarding the short term rental From the meeting. 1 have tv.o strong feelings Recommendations 1 There Is a master behind this in regarding the thousands of letters send to the city in a very short penod of time and for total .1 houses ?' 8000 of those letters were For Sale & Free complained 2 houses) `1 Events Nho Is the master? Real Estate ® Why the city council do some due diligence? Crime & Safety 2 The mayor and the councils who vote Yes to Dan the short term rental event not know anything about the Airbnb and many other management platforms never Lost & Found experienced any of tnis new way of nouse.time share -; Documents +-tout do they vote something they do not know General r confirmed my doubts so pity the The attached copy of the cu�Ce,, Oqghts private house ohners in R Pet Directory People _..... s ..._.�- --••-.- Neighbors ....-►». ��..�..__.. Public Agencies N � Groups Lg Browse all groups - -r- Help Guideknes Privacy • _... About .lobs Press Slog C 2017 NeAdoor �• • r •- 1 h aqo 14 neighborhoods in General Thank I Reply - wes '.Vang. Silver Spur that right is a big one. * Zoomed in version of screen above * 1 Ti iriY ? R-C-fles C-29 at I hope everyone got the email from Mayor Brian Campbell calling out "chael Huang, the man who is known to drive around the neighborhood to find those of us running short term rentals. Here is Brian's message: Accuracy in Campaign Messages I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list in it he made a number of false and mdsleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. I'm disappointed in this approach Its patently unfair to atl of the candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing any of these six individuals who have the courage to run for local office. While they should all be vigorously vetted on the issues during the campaign, they all deserve our respect and honest dialog. There are plenty of worthy topics and positions to openly debate and discuss in this council race. I think the community prefers that we focus on those. As the current mayor of RPV, I think its important that we all do our part to set an example to help ensure a campaign season that at the end of the day we are proud of. Thanks for reading, signature Brian Campbell Mayor - Rancho Palos Verdes Campbell.rpvagmail.com d W Suggested Groups ** End of post of Mr. Campbell's email by Ling Tang on NextDoor ** ** Start of post of Mr. Campbell's email on Facebook Page of The Palos Verdes Peninsula News by Yu Tang ** C-30 The Palos Verdes Yu Tang ... nesc RiPTION The local newspaper of the Palos Verdes Peninsula dews Peninsula community %i i Lastyear, I attend the RPV council meeting In regarding the short term rental from the meeting i have two strong feelings: Discussion t There Is a master behind this in regarding the thousands of letters send to t ReArr raEw ca �uPs Members the city In a very short period of time, and for total 4 houses ( 80% of those Groups make it easier than letters were complained 2 houses) ever to share with friends, Events who is the master? family and teammates Videos why the city council do Some due diligence? 2 The mayor and the councils who vote Yes to ban the short term rental. III Cf NT cR€HIP PHOTO!, See All Photos event not know anything about the Alrbnb and many others management ptafform . never experienced any of this new way of houseltime share. f -'e! , , It ',tip How do they vote something they do not know? The attached copy of the current mayor's letter confirmed my doubts. so pity the private house owners in RPV lost their right See All I hope everyone W the ar4v1 from Maya Brian Campbell calls V out Mk:hael f4 lig, the man who is known to drove wo wid the neighborhood - to find those of us mating short tam rentals. Here is Brian's message. Accuracy in campaign Messages c rve nxoived a copy of an 0"1 today from a Mr µave( Huang that he �■ c� ■ sant yesterday to he unosciosed list in d he made a number of false and misleading clams abort some of the candidates running fa the Rancho Paios VopJ#t try Couna: San Pedro both and raised and I'm do appotmed n ttes approach. Its patently unfmr to alt of the very proud + Join candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my operon prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing any of these six rid+ duals who have the courage to rim for local office. while they should 0 be vgrrousty, votled on the issues duvxj if* campaign, they all deserve oil respect and hottest dialog TWO are plenty of —thy torics And positions to Openly debate and discuss in this council race, i think the comnwrity prefers that we focus _ on those ` As the current mayor of RPV, I think its important than vat: as do our part to -- - t set an example to help ensue a campaign season ai that at the d of the • Torrance Daly Post• day "are proud of + Join thanks for readmg. signature urian - Ranmpbell c a ALL- 1041M Mayo • Pats Verdes campttparpvognsans co © Hollywouii Rrr.eta i:airioanna Ire ! ** End of post of Mr. Campbell's email on Facebook Page of The Palos Verdes Peninsula News ** ** Start of my original emails below: ** ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michael Huang <mikeh ag laxy gmail.com> Date: Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:43 PM Subject: Update on Status of Short -Term Rentals in RPV / Upcoming City Council Election To: Hi Everybody, I just wanted to provide an update on the effectiveness of the ban on the advertising and operation of short-term rentals in our City. The ban on the advertising and operation of short-term rentals has been very successful. The increased fines have also helped enforcement significantly. After the passing of the ban and the increased fines, many of the illegal short- term rental operators removed their listings and stopped renting. Of course, as with any law, there will be those who will choose not to follow it. As far as I know, there is one illegal short-term rental operator who is openly violating the law and a few operators who are trying to skirt the law. The City is dealing with these violators. From my contacts with the residents who suffered from the effects of short-term rentals, the problems associated with these illegal short-term rentals have decreased many folds since the actions taken by the City. C-31 You may also know that we have a municipal election coming up on November 7, 2017, in which there are six candidates running for two City Council seats. Councilman Anthony Misetich and Brian Campbell are both termed out. Anthony Misetich is a staunch supporter of the ban on short-term rentals, and Brian Campbell is a foe of the ban on short-term rentals. Here are some information I have gathered on each of the candidates based on what I know of their previous voting records on short-term rentals and information we collected when Chris and I attended the Candidates' Forum at Hesse Park on 9/22/17: Eric Alegria - Small business owner, RPV Finance Committee Board member, Taxpayer Advocate, and State Commissioner. Eric is a current member of RPV Finance Committee. He is a PhD candidate in Public Policy at Clarement Graduate University and has a Masters in Public Administration from USC. I have reached out to Eric, and he fully supports the current ban on short-term rentals operations and advertising. Eric is endorsed by Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetich as well as former Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich and State Treasurer John Chiang. Both Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetichare strong supports of the ban on short-term rentals. We support Eric Alegria for City Council. John Cruikshank - Local small business owner, RPV Planning Commissioner, Civil Engineer with bachelors and masters degrees from USC. John is the current chairman of the Planning Commission. John was on the planning commission on August 22, 2016, when he voted to allow owners to rent out one room if the owners live at the property. Then at the 11/29/16 Planning Commission, John voted in favor of the ban on the advertising of short-term rentals. I was disappointed that John Cruikshank voted to allow the one -room short-term rental option, but I do credit John for subsequently voting for the banning of the advertising of short-term rentals. We had a meeting with John about a month ago, and he stated that he "supports the current short-term ban as passed by the City council and has no plans to reverse that decision". John is also endorsed by Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetich as well as by David Hadley and Don Knabe. We also support John Cruikshank for City Council. 1n our opinion, he will vote for an issue if it is the will of the majority despite his own personal opinions. Dave Emenhiser - RPV Planning Commissioner, former member of RPV Finance Committee, Doctorate, and 2 masters degrees. As a member of the Planning Commission, on August 22, 2017, Dave Emenhiser voted for allowing the one - room short-term rental option if the owner is present. Then on November 29, 2016, he was in favor of allowing the advertising of illegal short-term rentals by voting against the ban on advertising. At that hearing, he told the City Attorney he was concerned that banning advertising may impede freedom of speech. The City Attorney responded that since short- term rental is an illegal activity, the advertising of an illegal activity is not protected. Despite that clarification, Dave still voted against the advertising ban. Dave also said he was against the advertising ban because he was concerned about legal fees and attorney bills for the City and also about lawsuits from Google. I find it alarming that Dave was not willing to have the City spend money to prevent an activity that was declared illegal by the City Council and that was adversely affecting many of the neighbors. It was made clear that the advertising ban was only against the owners of the property and not against the short-term rental websites. Furthermore, Google is a search engine; it has nothing to do with the short- term rental websites. In my personal opinion, the reasons Dave gave for his nay vote on the advertising ban was disingenuous. At that hearing, only two Planning Commissioners voted against the advertising ban - Dave Emenhiser and Robert Nelson. Robert Nelson is also the planning commissioner who favors short-term rentals and was against any type of restrictions against it. In fact, he has said that he is happy that a doctor was making $100,000 a year running short-term rentals four house from his home and that neighbors should just sue each other in small -claims court to stop the nuisance from short-term rentals. City records show that Robert Nelson donated $5,000 to Dave Emenhiser'scampaign. Lastly, Dave is supported by Brian Campbell. Brian Campbell is the Councilman who has consistently favored allowing short- term rentals in our City. We strongly oppose voting for Dave Emehniser for City Council. Krista Johnson - Member of RPV Finance Committee. I do not know much about Krista Johnson other than the fact that she got involved with the City after her house burned down. She was asking the City Council to make some type of exception for her in the permitting or rebuilding of her house. The whole of the City Council was opposed with the exception of Brian Campbell. She is heavily endorsed by Councilman Brian Campbell. On his Facebook page, Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA - he has multiple posts endorsing Krista Johnson. We strongly ppose voting for Krista Johnson because she is so heavily endorsed by Brian Campbell. Matthew Vitalich - Bachelor's degree in English and Creative Writing from Cal State Long Beach in 2014. Matthew supports the current ban on the operation and advertising of short-term rentals in our City. Ben Kelly - 18 years old - Ben just graduated from high school this past June. At the Candidates' Forum at Hesse Park, I felt that he was not as well-informed on the issues as the other candidates. In summary, we support Eric Alegria (#2 on ballot) and John Cruikshank (#3 on ballot) for City Council because they are both endorsed and supported by Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetich. Both of these council members are strong supporters of the short-term rental ban. We oppose Dave Emenhiser and Krista Johnson because they are supported by Brian Campbell, who is a foe of the ban on short-term rentals in our City. C-32 Please feel free to forward this email to your friends and relatives who are registered to vote in the upcoming RPV election. Please also let me know if you support Eric Alegria and John Cruikshank and are interested in hosting their signs on your yard. I would be happy to get the signs from them and delivery them to your house. Thank you for all of your efforts in bringing about the short-term rental ban in our City, but we need to be vigilant to ensure that we keep short-term rentals away from our City. Thanks again. Sincerely, Chris and Mike Huang ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Michael Huang <mikehgalax mail.com> Date: Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:27 PM Subject: Fwd: Update on Status of Short -Term Rentals in RPV / Upcoming City Council Election To: Sorry for this follow up, but there is a clarification about how the candidates are listed on the ballot: Eric Alegria is listed second from the top, but he is Candidates #3 on the ballot, and John Cruikshank is listed third from the top, but he is Candidates 44 on the ballot. There is no candidate #1 . The numbering starts at #2. Here's a picture of the ballot below: I don't know why they don't start numbering with #1. Sincerely, Mike Huang ** End of my original emails ** C-33 ** Start of Brian Campbell's email below accusing me of being a campaign operative and of smearing some candidates: (recipient removed to protect privacy * * From: RPV Mayor Brian Campbell <campbell.rpv@gmail.com> Date: October 5, 2017 at 4:10:37 PM PDT To: ------------------------ Subject: RPV Council Race - Keep it accurate please! Reply -To: campbell.rpvP_gmail.com Hi, just a reminder that you're receiving this email because you have expressed an interest in the RPV City Council. You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails. ® © 0 a i© Like Accuracy in Campaign Messages I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list. In it he made a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. I'm disappointed in this approach. Its patently unfair to all of the candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing any of these six individuals who have the courage to run for local office. While they should all be vigorously vetted on the issues during the campaign, they all deserve our respect and honest dialog. There are plenty of worthy topics and positions to openly debate and discuss in this council race. I think the community prefers that we focus on those. C-34 City Councilman, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 SafeUnsubscribeTM------------------------- Forward this email I Update Profile I About our service provider Sent by campbell.rpv@gmail.com in collaboration with * * End of Brian Campbell's email * * ** Start of My followup email below: ** Hi Everyone, I was informed that Brian Campbell, the Councilman who is also the Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, issued the following communication by email in his official role as the Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes. As you can see, in his official capacity of Mayor, he called me a "campaign operative" and is accusing me of "smearing" some candidates by making a "number of false and misleading claims". He has openly endorsed and supported Krista Johnson and Dave Emenhiser, the same two candidates I do not support as stated in my original email. C-35 t Accuracy in Campaign Messages I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list. In it lie made a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council I'm disappointed in this approach. Its patently unfair to all of the candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing gny of these six individuals who have the courage to run for local office. While they should all be vigorously vetted on the issues during the campaign. they all deserve our respect and honest dialog. There are plenty of worthy topics and positions to openly debate and discuss in this council race I think the community prefers that we focus on those. As the current mayor of RPV. I think its important that we all do our part to set an example to help ensure a campaign season that at the end of the day we are proud of. Thanks for reading. W -1 �� i Brian Campbell Mayor - Rancho Palos Verdes Campbell rpva email corn Below are screenshots of Brian Campbell's Facebook page showing his support and endorsement of Dave Emenheiser and Krista Johnson: C-36 Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA Home About Endorsements Photos Videos Join My List Posts Community 16 Like 1 Follow A share ••• Posts Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 6 Like Q Comment �:> Share Top Comments Write a comment.. 0— ar Preis Enro' 1. M, View 1 comment Brian Campbell • Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA C2 Government Official People Also Like Long Beach Area Rep... r1r Like Political Organization • Peninsula Athletics r1r Like School Sports Team Sustainable Palos Ver... rib Like School Pages liked by this Page ender Easy Reader News ilk Like Wounded Warrior Am... lido Like USMC Wounded Ward... ri Like English (US) Espahol Porlugu&s (Brasil) + Frangais (France) Deutsch Privacy Terms Advertising Ad ChoicesN Cookies More - Facebook ® 2017 C-37 Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA Home About Endorsements Photos Videos Join My List Posts Community ik Like 1 Follow A Share •.• Brian Campbell • Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA is ••• Io, Susie Lee Campbell I am very pleased to report that Krista Johnson has announced that she is running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council this November Krista is a natural business and community leader. She is a respected and veteran RPV City Committee appointee, member of multiple boards, successful businesswoman and terrific mom to her two sons and husband Jeff. I will be 100% behind her campaign. 05 Like Q Comment �> Share 00 69 Top Comments 2 Shares write a comment.. Q 12 cm 9) Press En!at to post ®Tracy A. Hunt Krista, you are awesornel Like Reply Q 1 June 27 at 6 53m; M View 1 more reply Government Oficial in Rolling Hills Estates, California Community See All ),L Invite your friends to like this Page ,dr 692 people like this 1 662 people follow this About See Ail Q Send Message (D envw.campbeliforrpv.com p Government Official People Also Like ®Long Beach Area Rep... l+ Like Po4hcal Organrzabo^ • Peninsula Athletics ,fir Like School Sports Team Sustainable Palos Ver... 12&,ib Like School Pages liked by this Page 3SYEasy Reader News ,k Like Header In the two posts above, he is clearly supporting Dave Emenhiser and affirming his endorsement of Krista Johnson by stating that he is "100% behind her campaign". Here's what I wrote in my original email about Dave Emenhiser: "Dave Emenhiser - RPV Planning Commissioner, former member of RPV Finance Committee, Doctorate, and 2 masters degrees. As a member of the Planning Commission, on August 22, 2017, Dave Emenhiser voted for allowing the one - room short-term rental option if the owner is present. Then on November 29, 2016, he was in favor of allowing the advertising of illegal short-term rentals by voting against the ban on advertising. At that hearing, he told the City Attorney he was concerned that banning advertising may impede freedom of speech. The City Attorney responded that since short- term rental is an illegal activity, the advertising of an illegal activity is not protected. Despite that clarification, Dave still voted against the advertising ban. Dave also said he was against the advertising ban because he was concerned about legal fees and attorney bills for the City and also about lawsuits from Google. I find it alarming that Dave was not willing to have the City spend money to prevent an activity that was declared illegal by the City Council and that was adversely affecting many of the neighbors. It was made clear that the advertising ban was only against the owners of the property and not against the short-term rental websites. Furthermore, Google is a search engine; it has nothing to do with the short- term rental websites. In my personal opinion, the reasons Dave gave for his nay vote on the advertising ban was disingenuous. At that hearing, only two Planning Commissioners voted against the advertising ban - Dave Emenhiser and Robert Nelson. Robert Nelson is also the planning commissioner who favors short-term rentals and was against any type of restrictions against it. In fact, he has said that he is happy that a doctor was making $100,000 a year running short-term rentals four house from his home and that neighbors should just sue each other in small -claims court to stop the nuisance from short-term rentals. City records show that Robert Nelson donated $5,000 to Dave Emenhiser'scampaign. Lastly, Dave is supported by Brian Campbell. Brian Campbell is the Councilman who has consistently favored allowing short- term rentals in our City. We strongly oppose voting for Dave Emehniser for City Council." C-38 I stand behind every statement I made above. I, along with many of you, was present at the Planning Commission meetings when Dave Emehniser voted against banning the advertising of short-term rentals along with Robert Nelson, who I just discovered is his campaign treasurer. I even went back and viewed the videos and read the Planning Commission meeting minutes to make sure I remember Dave Emenhiser stated reasons for voting against the advertising ban. I was merely stating my opinion as to why I strongly oppose voting for Dave Emehniser for City Council based upon my observation of his voting record on short-term rentals and also because he is supported by Brian Campbell. Here's what I wrote in my original email about Krista Johnson: "Krista Johnson - Member of RPV Finance Committee. I do not know much about Krista Johnson other than the fact that she got involved with the City after her house burned down. She was asking the City Council to make some type of exception for her in the permitting or rebuilding of her house. The whole of the City Council was opposed with the exception of Brian Campbell. She is heavily endorsed by Councilman Brian Campbell. On his Facebook page, Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA - he has multiple posts endorsing Krista Johnson. We strongly ppose voting for Krista Johnson because she is so heavily endorsed by Brian Campbell." I stated that I did not know much about Krista Johnson and that my main reason for opposing her for City Council was because of Brian Campbell's heavy endorsement. Since my original email, I have done research from public records. Here's what I found out: Her house suffered extensive fire damage in September 2005, and she had to rebuild the whole house. There was a permit to build a "new 4,280 square foot, single -story residence in replacement of the existing fire -damaged 3,946 square foot residence. Understandably, she was under time pressure to complete the construction of her new house because the insurance company will only for rental housing for a fixed period of time. So she was requesting that the City "fast-track" the approval of her plans. She also sought the assistance of then Councilman Peter Gardiner. According to one of her letters to the City at that time, Councilman Gardiner interceded on her behalf and had the City Manger move up the date of a Planning Commission meeting. Understandably, the whole process can take time, but I understand her desire to speed up the process because of her circumstance. I could not find any information on how the other City Council members responded to her request, and I was able to confirm that Brian Campbell was not on the City Council at that time. So I had incorrect knowledge that the City Council was opposed to her request and that Brian Campbell was the exception. But I still stand behind my main point that I strongly oppose voting for Krista Johnson because she is so heavily endorsed by Brian Campbell. Her relationship with the City Council about the rebuilding of her home was not a factor in my conclusion. In summary, I sent out the email to you expressing my support or lack thereof of the candidates based upon my observations and knowledge. The email was sent from me as a resident to you as a resident. I do not work for any of the candidates' campaigns. It is true that I support Eric Alegria and John Crukishank, and that I oppose Dave Emehniser and Krista Johnson. Speaking on behalf of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes as the Mayor, Brian Campbell sent out his email in his official City capacity accusing me of being a "campaign operative" who has "smeared" some of the candidates. He is using his role as a public official to attack me as a private citizen who was expressing my opinions as to why I was not supporting his candidates. Brian Campbell sent out this malicious personal attack upon my reputation in response to the email I sent privately to you. This improper abuse of power that Brian Campbell has committed in the name of Rancho Palos Verdes as Mayor is further proof of my concern about any City Council candidates endorsed by him. It is my believe that City Council candidates seek out the endorsement of other public figure and officials who have similar values. Brian Campbell's personal attacks in the attempt to intimidate me further bolsters my conviction about not supporting any candidates he endorses. He is trying to bully me and suppress my first amendment rights to freedom of speech as a private citizen. Sincerely, Mike Huang ** End of my followup email ** C-39 From: Sent: To: Subject: Dear Council Members, James Bertolina <jnbertolina@icloud.com> Sunday, October 15, 2017 9:42 PM CC Mayor Brian Campbell's inappropriate behavior We are writing to let you know that we do not approve of Brian Campbell's behavior i.e. using his official position as the mayor to attack Michael Huang, a private citizen, who is expressing his personal opinion on the City Council candidates for this November election. The City Council should condemn Brian Campbell's behavior as soon as possible. Thank you for your attention. Sincerely, Nelly and Jim Bertolina 3713 Hightide Drive RPV, Ca 90275 From: Margaret Shih <marg.shih@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 7:25 AM To: CC; Jerry Duhovic; Susan Brooks; Ken Dyda; Anthony Misetich; Brian Campbell Subject: Concern about Mayor's Email Dear RPV City Council and City Personnel, I'm writing to express concern about Mayor Brian Campbell's inappropriate email using his position as RPV Mayor to criticize and mischaracterize Michael Huang's email. Michael Huang's email simply reported factual information, and was also clear to point which sentences were his own private opinion (eg "I was disappointed..."). There nothing "misleading", as the mayor mischaracterizes in Michael Huang's email. The larger issue is that Mayor Campbell should not be using his office to attack private citizens who are civically engaged. It harms and corrupts the process. Thank you. I look forward to your correcting this and avoiding a repeat. Sincerely, Margaret Shih Resident of Rancho Palos Verdes From: Emily Colborn Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 12:28 PM To: Nathan Zweizig Subject: FW: Sharing an Opinion From: Faith B.Stapleton [mailto:fbstapleton@cox.net] Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 10:13 AM To: Jerry Duhovic <Jerry.Duhovic@rpvca.gov>; Susan Brooks <SusanB@rpvca.gov>; Ken Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Anthony Misetich <AnthonyM@rpvca.gov>; Brian Campbell <BrianC@rpvca.gov> Cc: Doug Willmore <DWillmore@rpvca.gov>; Dave Aleshire <daleshire@awattorneys.com>; Rebecca S. Burleson <rburleson@awattorneys.com>; CityClerk <CityClerk@rpvca.gov> Subject: Sharing an Opinion Greetings, RPV is a treasure which I desire to preserve as a community of persons dedicated to intrinsic good neighbor living, something which cannot be achieved if a cottage industry of short term rentals were allowed to flourish. I applaud Michael Huang in his tireless and selfless effort to bring forth facts and only facts regarding the ban of short term rentals about which I am passionate. Never a reference which could be interpreted as "smearing" was ever disseminated, how insulting to Mr. Huang to even harbor such a thought. Faith Stapleton From: Keyshiao <keyshiao@cox.net> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 1:21 AM To: CC Subject: Public Comment re Brian Campbell's unethical conduct Dear Members of RPV City Council, Please let the record reflect that i find Mayor Brian Campbell's recent email purporting to be an official communication from the City Council labeling Mr Michael Huang a "political operative" disturbing and unethical. It is slanderous for Mr Campbell to smear Mr Huang as a "political operative" since there is absolutely no evidence that Mr Huang is working for any of the candidates. Moreover, Mr Campbell attempts to legitimize his allegation by sending the email in an official looking letter head and in his capacity as the mayor of RPV. Any quarrel Mr Campbell has with Mr Huang's email is merely that, a personal disagreement, and has NOTHING to do with his official position. For Mr Campbell to use his official title in order to suppress a dissenting opinion is troubling and in contradiction of the First Amendment. Mr Huang certainly has the right to express his opinion on the City Council candidates in his capacity as a private citizen, and any attempt to smother that right, especially by a City official in the guise of his official capacity, is an abuse of power. Mr Campbell has crossed the line. Sincerely, Karen Chuang COQ[ C Cc��,vyte�9"r� C-43 From: glenn spargo <spargo@cox.net> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 1:46 PM To: CC Cc: Michael Huang Subject: MICHAEL HUANG V.S. MAYOR CAMPBELL MANY OF US HERE IN THE RPV COMMUNITY HAVE BECOME AWARE OF A RECENT LETTER ( EMAIL) THAT MAYOR (MR. CAMPBELL) SENT OUT PERSONALLY ATTACKING MR. HUANG FOR HIS COMMUNICATING TO HIS NEIGHBORS ON SPECIFIC CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR THE UPCOMING CITY COUNCIL SEATS. IN HIS OPINION MR. HUANG WAS UPDATING US ON WHICH OF THE CANDIDATES HE FELT WOULD BEST SUPPORT THE CONTINUING IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CITY LAWS AND FINES ON CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS WHO CONTINUE TO'SKIRT' THOSE LAWS AND ADVERTISE THEIR HOMES AS AIRBNB'S. AND, OF COURSE, THOSE WHO HAD PREVIOUSLY HAD OPINIONS OR BEEN PROPONENTS OF ALLOWING HOME OWNERS TO COMMERCIALLY ADVERTISE AND HIRE OUT A ROOM(S) TO SHORT TERM ( LESS THEN 30 DAY) RENTERS. SOME OF THESE OWNERS, EVEN AFTER THE LAW WAS ENACTED AND FINES ARE BEING ISSUED, CONTINUE TO TRY AND FIND WAYS TO SUBVERT THE LAW. THIS COMMUNICATION CHASTISING MR. HUANG FOR COMMUNICATING HIS OPINION, BY MAYOR CAMPBELL, IS AN AFRONT TO ALL OF US WHO BELIEVE THE LAWS SHOULD CONTINUE TO BE IN PLACE AND BE ENFORCED. WE ARE ALL AWARE OF MR. CAMPBELL'S SYMPATHY AND SUPPORT FOR THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE TO RENT OUT THEIR ROOM(S) ON A SHORT TERM BASIS. HE IS ON RECORD TO THAT EXTENT. AND, UNFORTUNATELY, A NUMBER OF THE CANDIDATES RUNNING FOR THE TWO OPEN COUNCIL SEATS ARE ALSO ON RECORD AS BEING SYMPATHETIC TO THIS. MR. HUANG'S EMAIL TO HIS NEIGHBORS WAS TO THE MANY OF US WHO WILL NOT PUT UP WITH THIS KIND OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY THAT BRINGS SO MANY PROBLEMS TO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. SO, IN OUR OPINION, MR. CAMPBELL IS TOTALLY OUT OF LINE IN TRYING TO INFRINGE ON MR. HAUNGS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS OF FREE SPEECH. WHO DOES MR. CAMPBELL THINK HE IS IN THAT REGARD? HE HAS HIS RIGHT TO HIS OPINON. OK. BUT HE, IN HIS ACTING ROLE OF MAYOR OF THIS FINE COMMUNITY, SHOULD KNOW BETTER THEN TO ATTACK MR. HUANG FOR HIS. AS MAYOR HE IS SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT ALL OF US. ESPECIALLY THOSE OF US WHO SUPPORT LAWS THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE. THE TWO CANDIDATES THAT MR. HALING UPDATED US ON THAT SUPPORT THE CURRENT AIRBNB LAWS WILL CERTAINLY BE GIVEN EVERY CONSIDERATION FOR OUR VOTES FOR THOSE OF US WHO SUPPORT THE CURRENT LAWS APPLYING TO SHORT TERM RENTALS. AND, FOR THOSE CANDIDATES THAT DO NOT THAT WILL ALSO BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN WE FILL OUT OUR BALLOTS. AS MY WIFE AND I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO MAKE TOMORROW'S ( TUESDAYS) MEETING FEEL FREE TO READ THIS TO THOSE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT ARE IN ATTENDANCE. s �� MR. HUANG HAS EVERY RIGHTTO BE HEARD AND ESPOUSE HIS OPINIONS. AND, TO COMMUNICATE THOSE OPINIONS WITH WHOMEVER - AS HE DEEMS APPROPRIATE. LET US NOT FORGET FREE SPEECH. SINCERELY, MR. & MRS. GLENN SPARGO C-45 From: Kit Fox Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 6:05 PM To: CityClerk Cc: Gabriella Yap; Doug Willmore Subject: FW: Mr. Campbell RE: Public Comments on October 17th. Kit Fox, AICP City of Rancho Palos Verdes (310) 544-5226 kitf@rpvca.gov -----Original Message ----- From: maureen spargo [mailto:mspargo@cox.net] Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 12:17 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: Mr. Campbell In my opinion, Mr. Campbell is out of line with his comments in regard to Michael Huang. Michael has been a staunch supporter of our neighborhood and of enforcing the air b and b laws in Rancho Palos Verdes. He has done nothing wrong in expressing his views on the upcoming candidates. We support Michael and think Mr. Campbell should not be using his position as mayor to denigrate others with differing opinions. Thank you, Maureen Spargo a Ppb"��5 Com C-46 From: Emily Colborn Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 12:19 PM To: Nathan Zweizig Subject: FW: Accuracy in Campaign Messages Attachments: RPV Mayor Brian Campbell 10-5-17 email.docx From: Diane Smith [mailto:radlsmith@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2017 6:46 PM To: Brian Campbell (Gmail) <campbell.rpv@gmail.com> Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: Accuracy in Campaign Messages Dear Mayor Brian Campbell, I am confused by your recent email correspondence to me (copy attached) and undisclosed others, and ask you to elaborate for the sake of accuracy. Your October 5, 2017 email states: " Hi, just a reminder that you're receiving this email because you have expressed an interest in the RPV City Council. You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails." Your email is from: "Rancho Palos Verdes Mayor Brian Campbell" and states "I'm receiving this email because I have expressed an interest in the RPV City Council," then refers to "our emails" (emphasis added). My reading at the outset, coming from RPV Mayor Brian Campbell, then referring to the RPV City Council and "our emails" lead me to believe that your email is from/endorsed by the entire City Council. Did the City Council all agree to your publications from this email address "camnbell.rov@gmali.com"? Your subject line refers to "Accuracy." in the body of your message you open up with: "I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list. In it he made a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council." You appear concerned about accuracy but you do not list even one false or one misleading claim purportedly made by resident Huang. Therefore, in the interests of "Accuracy" please identify each and every false and misleading claim by RPV resident Michael Huang about candidates. Again, please set an example of Accuracy in Campaign Messages and itemize each and every false and misleading claim made by Michael Huang. You have also noted that Michael Huang sent his email to his undisclosed list. It appears you also have an undisclosed list. Your email has many disturbing similarities to the City's listserve address list which is supposed to 0001 be confidential. Would you please assure me that you have not somehow obtained the city's listserve addresses or explain how your undisclosed email list is different from Mr. Huang's undisclosed address list? I too have an undisclosed address list. My address list has grown over the years by residents that heard me speak or read my letters and came to me, asking that their names and emails be kept confidential, because they did not trust government. So I really do understand the importance of maintaining trust. I do agree with you Brian that if Michael Huang has lied about any candidate he should come clean and explain his actions. Michael Huang has earned a great deal of respect in Rancho Palos Verdes and I would be very surprised if he lied about anything. I believe every single statement he has made can be backed up with documented support so please send your list of the false and misleading claims made by Michael Huang so we can set the record straight. Also, for accuracy and transparency, please let me know if your reference to "our emails" refers to the entire City Council. If not, please give me the names of the people sending this email besides you, that you reference as "our emails." Thanks so much. Diane Smith • From: RPV Mayor Brian Campbell <campbell.rpv@grnail.com> Date: October 5, 2017 at 4:10:37 PM PDT To: radlsmith@cox.net Subject: RPV Council Race - Keep it accurate please! Reply -To: campbell.rpv@gmail.com Hi, just a reminder that you're receiving this email because you have expressed an interest in the RPV City Council. You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails. &100 U Uke I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list. In it he made a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. I'm disappointed in this approach. Its patently unfair to all of the candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing 2ny of these six individuals who have the courage to run for local office. While they should all be vigorously vetted on the issues during the campaign, they all deserve our respect and honest dialog. There are plenty of worthy topics and positions to openly debate and discuss in this council race. I think the community prefers that we focus on those. As the current mayor of RPV, I think its important that we all do our part to set an example to help ensure a campaign season that at the end of the day we are proud of. C-49 City COUncllrrran, Rancho Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 5afeUnSUbscribell" radlsrnitha1c x,n t Fca,rw r.d._.tEai _e -..,e ( U..iad_ ��..._F�rO e. I At aut._!2gr...5 ryj e._.prove_d_ ,r Sent by cern.iabea,Il„.r y.!5r. m_ .il,.,c..om. in collaboration with Constant Contact,a Try it free today C-50 From: Emily Colborn Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 1:34 PM To: Nathan Zweizig Subject: FW: List inaccuracies RE: RPV Council Race - Keep it accurate please! From: Diane Smith [mailto:radlsmith@cox.net] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 9:18 AM To: Brian Campbell (Gmail) <campbell.rpv@gmail.com> Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Subject: List inaccuracies RE: RPV Council Race - Keep it accurate please! Mayor Brian Campbell, I am still waiting for you to be accurate and to list Michael Huang's "... number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council" Show me and others just how accurate you are. In your subsequent email to me you called Michael Huang a liar but you did not list the lies. Are you afraid to list the lies or did you yourself lie? It has now been well over a week and you still have not listed the false and misleading claims by Michael Huang. I hope to hear from you before the City Council meeting starts. Also let me know when and how I purportedly subscribed to your deceiving mailing list. Maybe I will have to demand a public records request to find out how you put together your mailing list and to see how many email addresses you have. I don't want to burden the city so maybe you can be accurate and provide such information voluntarily. Diane Smith From: RPV Mayor Brian Campbell [mailto:campbell.rpv@gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, October 05, 2017 4:11 PM To: radlsmith@cox.net Subject: RPV Council Race - Keep it accurate please! Hi, just a reminder that you're receiving this email because you have expressed an interest in the RPV City Council. You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails. e I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list. In it he made a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. I'm disappointed in this approach. Its patently unfair to all of the candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing pny of these six individuals who have the courage to run for local office. While they should all be vigorously vetted on the issues during the campaign, they all deserve our respect and honest dialog. There are plenty of worthy topics and positions to openly debate and discuss in this council race. I think the community prefers that we focus on those. As the current mayor of RPV, I think its important that we all do our part to set an example to help ensure a campaign season that at the end of the day we are proud of. Thanks for reading, Brian.• 6*OW104,W, C-52 Sate_i, nsub crib TM..._r.d,ismith..(�r.cox. net Forward this email j Update Profile ( About our service rovider Fent by campbell.rpvd) mail.com in collaboration with Try it free today C-53 From: Teresa Takaoka Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 1:52 PM To: Nathan Zweizig Subject: FW: defamatory letter by mayor From: narinder kapoor [mailto:simrankaro@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 1:52 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Cc: Michael Huang <mikehgalaxy@gmail.com> Subject: Re: defamatory letter by mayor Dear city council members -I am writing to protest the defamatory letter Mayor Campbell wrote against our neighbor Mike Huang- Mike wrote a personal email to our neighborhood expressing his concerns about the various candidates for the council- he was within his rights and we were actually appreciative of his diligent review of each candidate's positions, and feel he was wrongly attacked by the mayor's public response- we ask the city council to therefore make amends for this- this should not be allowed to happen- thank you- Amar and Narinder ❑■ From: Doug Willmore Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 4:18 PM To: Emily Colborn <ecoIborn@rpvca.gov>; Teresa Takaoka <TeriT@rpvca.gov>; Kit Fox <KitF@rpvca.gov>; Gabriella Yap <gyap@rpvca.gov> Subject: FW: RPV - Mayor Brian Campbell violated 5 U. S. Code 1502 (a) (1) - Use of official authority to influence elections / Public Comment for City Council Meeting on October 17, 2017 Late correspondence From: Susan Brooks Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 4:04 PM To: Doug Willmore <DWillmore@rpvca.gov>; Dave Aleshire <daleshire@awattorneys.com> Cc: Brian Campbell <BrianC@rpvca.gov> Subject: Fwd: RPV - Mayor Brian Campbell violated 5 U. S. Code 1502 (a) (1) - Use of official authority to influence elections / Public Comment for City Council Meeting on October 17, 2017 Did everyone receive this, too? I didn't see Brian's name so am forwarding to him. Need to discuss tonite. Susan Susan Brooks Councilwoman Rancho Palos Verdes (Home) 310/ 541-2971 (City Hall) 310/544-5207 The view(s), opinion(s) and content expressed/contained in this email do not necessarily reflect the view(s), opinion(s), official positions or policies of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council, the City of Rancho Palos Verdes or any of its employees, agents, contractors, Commissions or Committees (the "City'). It should be interpreted solely as the view(s), opinion(s) and/or work product of the individual author and should not be relied upon as the official position, direction or decision of the City. Beni from my i rnone Begin forwarded message: From: "Tracy Burns" <akamomma(aggmail.com> To: "info(ae,da.lacounty_gov" <info@da.lacounty_gov>, vo bl I C Cov,rrr1-e-S "Susan Brooks" <SusanB r vca. ov>65 "Jerry Duhovic" <Jerry. Duhovic@rpvca. gov>, "Anthony Misetich" <AnthonyM@Xpvca.gov>, "Ken Dyda" <Ken.D dagMvca.gov>, "Ara Mihranian" <AraM cr rpvca.gov> Cc: "Mike Huang" <mikeh ag laxy@gmail.com> Subject: RPV - Mayor Brian Campbell violated 5 U. S. Code 1502 (a) (1) - Use of official authority to influence elections / Public Comment for City Council Meeting on October 17, 2017 Office of LA County District Attorney and RPV CC, The mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, Brian Campbell, has influenced a local election by using his official title in a public correspondence without any disclaimer indicating it was his personal opinion. In fact he invoked his title within the body of the letter and as part of the signature. Therefore, his published personal attack specifically naming resident, Michael Huang, is easily seen as the official view of the city and has been forwarded and republished on the internet by others. Please review the Nextdoor post by Ling Tang where she reposted a Facebook Post by Maura Mizuguchi. In it she states, "I hope everyone got the email from Mayor Brian Campbell calling out Michael Huang, the man who is known to drive around the neighborhood to find those of us running short term rentals." - dated October 6th. Mayor Campbell specifically maligned Mr. Huang because he does not recommend the two candidates he publicly endorses and supported the ban against short term rentals. His deliberate action was done to coerce and intimidate Mr. Huang through defamation and to effect the results of the upcoming election. Mayor Campbell has used the title of his office in the past to intimidate and hurt others including an employee of LASD Lt. Hummel, so he is no stranger to this tactic. Additionally, Mayor Campbell is in violation of RPV's "Protocol for Elected Officials....", which was enacted to promote the ethical behavior of those in position of authority. Officials with the City of RPV have recently been notified of this violation. 5 U.S. Code § 1502 - Influencing elections; taking part in political campaigns; prohibitions; exceptions US Code Notes Authorities (CFR) prey I next (a)A State or local officer or employmay not— (1) use his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election or a nomination for office; Source: http://uscode.house. gov/view. xhtml?path=/prelimktitle5/part2/chapter 15 &edition=prelim C-56 Ling Tang Lunada Bay RPV city council Accuracy in Campaign Messages I've received a copy of an email today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent yesterday to his undisclosed list. In it he made a number of false and misleading claims about some of the candidates running for the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council. I'm disappointed in this approach. Its patently unfair to all of the candidates to engage in this type of activity. The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign operatives refrain from smearing any of these six individuals who have the courage to run for local office. While they should all be vigorously vetted on the issues during the campaign, they all deserve our respect and honest dialog. There are plenty of worthy topics and positions to openly debate and discuss in this council race. I think the community prefers that we focus on those. As the current mayor of RPV, I think its important that we all do our part to set an example to help ensure a campaign season that at the end of the day we are proud of. Thanks for reading, signature Brian Campbell Mayor - Rancho Palos Verdes. Campbell.rpv@gmail.com Last year, I attend the RPV council meeting in regarding the short term rental. From the meeting, I have two strong feelings: 1. There is a master behind this in regarding the thousands of letters send to the city in a very short period of time, and for total 4 houses ( 80% of those letters were complained 2 houses) Who is the master? Why the city council do some due diligence? 2. The _mavor and the councils who vote Yes to ban the C-57 4p *w rftwrwlSNOW vW%0MA•wwMaw•tAwN4 sp wam"m .r "0 40 00 am .0 we /rte I •4000 •r "a" www rw too~ waaw swOMn #400 ewr0 Last yaw. t &kM tM WV to.^.4 -vw,-rq n rogwafv) itio vwt tan twif.* FpCw 1 t%* e"rtnq 1 ►v•e tr;• ttIve) 1 ThWe A a msaK4w beft Mw r regmd4ng th o vwx^ %Os 01 W42w wd 10 the Cev m a vwv V%w t Cw wsd of t "* , and lot ectal i Mous" 1 $0% of rose if"CO ti IV" t COTIPA&f*d 2 ho"fs1 %O is the pw*W% " VW Of CO.MJ do "a** &A OftW%•' �. Th* p%iy-ty and " COJMA w04 go* Ya" to bA- it* tKa+t W," renra+, a.w+t 1401 k-** Wytt" ab, -AA VW ArtnO ar�4 MWV 011+M Mvpr+"w`1 ttat!cYr.w . MO%W #0 POW WV:#4 any 01 INA naw a" of t*LA*,ts W Shue Now do Owy vot• ***%s wV they M pot kAo*1 That Ow- P* ► c aql of V* Awwo maror't wtw► OW-4med OI 00APtt , so pty Ow primo h+w e+►*+ n y1 AP" V ea ft"d"a" 10 6W%D r"Tand 13 r"at+. O TMa a ft* I TWO Source: littps://countryclubpalosverdes.nextdoor.com/news_feed/?post=66755017 C-58 HOME ABOUT ENDORSEMENTS PHOTOS Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, CA October 5 at 5:29 PM This is also my own top priority and why I support Dave Emenheiser for one of the two open seats on the RPV Council 1 1 Comment A p�) Like Q Comment (�> Share AIIINK Brian Campbell - Mavor of Rancho Palos ®.® C-59 066- AT&T LTE 12:20 PM 7 65%,M Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Pa... ••• Campaign for Krista Johnson! Krista Johnson is running for City Council of Rancho Palos Verdes and needs your support. Please let us know if you can support our campaign for City Council by providing us with your information. We want to hear from you about what's important for RPV. Residents First ! Krista Johnson KJohnsonRPV@gmall.com (320) So8.3201L https://www.facebook.com/KjohnsonforRPVCounci12017/ HOME ABOUT ENDORSEMENTS PHOTOS Brian Campbell - Mayor of Rancho Palos ... Verdes, CA shared Krista Johnson for RPV City Council 2017's post. August 31 I've already got mine up in front of my house! Krista Johnson for RPV City Council 2017 August 30 • 0 I am so excited to announce my RPV City Council 2017 campaign is off and running with signs, mailers, materials and events. If you want to... Continue Reading �1 rG, 1 (nmmPnt 0 CS C-61 Source: https://www.facebook.com/Brian-Campbell-Mayor-of-Rancho-Palos-Verdes-CA-8911207963 0/ Please contact Mr. Huang (cc'd) for further details regarding this specific violation and contact the City of RPV for any documentation or evidence of his violations. I'd recommend a thorough investigation of ALL correspondence and postings Mayor Campbell has issued using his official title to ensure no further violations go unpunished. A public official should not be able to use the title of his office to defame or intimidate citizens and they should not be able to use the office to influence elections. Sincerely, Tracy Burns C-62 From: Teresa Takaoka Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2017 8:22 AM To: Nathan Zweizig Subject: FW: Green Hills Memorial Park - Public Comments Re: Mediation From: Thomas W. Frew [mailto:TFrew@ghmp.com] Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 4:35 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Cc: So Kim <SoK@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>; Doug Willmore <DWillmore@rpvca.gov>; Nick Resich <nresich@ghmp.com>; Steven A. Espolt <SEspolt@ghmp.com> Subject: Green Hills Memorial Park - Public Comments Re: Mediation October 16, 2017 Mayor Brian Campbell City Councilmembers City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 Re: Green Hills Memorial Park Mediation Mayor Campbell and Honorable Councilmembers: On behalf of Green Hills Memorial Park (Green Hills), we appreciate the opportunity for continued dialogue with the City of Rancho Palos Verdes (City) and with our neighbors regarding our park operations. To this end, we would like to clarify comments made during the public comment period at a recent City Council hearing regarding mediation with the Vista Verde Homeowners (Vista Verde). The Conditions of Approval imposed in connection with Green Hills' Conditional Use Permit (CUP) refer to a mediation process among Vista Verde, the City and Green Hills relative to claims Vista Verde made against the City regarding the Pacific Terrace Mausoleum. As a reminder, shortly before that condition was imposed, all three parties engaged in a mediation process. Shortly after the condition was . imposed, the parties began discussing a second mediation process. Unfortunately, Vista Verde refused to allow Green Hills to participate in that mediation, rejecting the notion of a "tri -party" mediation as contemplated by the condition. Instead, and notwithstanding Green Hills' repeated request to participate in the mediation as per the condition, the mediation took place between the City and Vista Verde only. Recently, Vista Verde raised the issue of mediation with Green Hills, and has asked Green Hills to participate without the City. While Green Hills is willing to do so — a fact that has been repeatedly made clear to litigation counsel for Vista Verde — there are certain steps in the litigation process that must be completed as a preliminary matter. Once those steps have been completed, the mediation will be scheduled. As a resource and dedicated partner to the tight -knit South Bay community, being a good neighbor is a top priority. We look forward to continuing to work closely with the City to ensure that we are fulfilling all legal and CUP required obligations responsibly. We continue to strive to ensure that Green Hills best serves the community and remains a close partner and resource now and well into the future. Very truly yours, Thomas W. Frew CFO / General Manager Cc: Mr. Doug Willmore, RPV City Manager Mr. Ara Mihranian, RPV Planning Director Ms. So Kim, RPV Deputy Director Mr. Nick Resich, Green Hills Director of Building and Maintenance Mr. Steve Espolt, Green Hills Manager of Strategic Planning and Compliance Thomas W. Frew CFO — General Manager HIJI Direct Line (310) 521-4412 Fax Line (310) 519-8236 Main Line (310) 831-0311 www.greenhilismemorial.com C-64 CITY OF t iRANCHO PALOS VERDES TO: HONORABLE MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: CITY CLERK DATE: OCTOBER 16, 2017 SUBJECT: ADDITIONS/REVISIONS AND AMENDMENTS TO AGENDA Attached are revisions/additions and/or amendments to the agenda material received through Monday afternoon for the Tuesday, October 17, 2017 City Council meeting: Item No. Description of Material Public Comments Letter from Sandra and Don Hammersmark; Emails from: Janet Nitz; Carolynn and Andy Petru B Correction to Minutes for September 19, 2017 E Revision to rate changes 2 Correction to Ordinance No. 599 3 Emails from: Stanton C. Booth; Michelle Johnson Respectfully submitted, Emily WA01 City Clerk\LATE CORRESPONDENCE\2017 Cover Sheets\20171017 additions revisions to agenda thru Monday.doc C-65 ALL CITY COUNCIL PERSONNEL ccCcD-rpvca.gov October 16, 2017 Jerry Duhovic - jerry.duhovic(cilrpvca.Qov Susan Brooks - susan.brooksa-rpvca.gov Ken Dyda - ken.dvdaO-rpvca.gov Anthony Misetich - anthony.misetich(a-rpvca.gov Re: Public Comment for City Council Meeting on October 17, 2017 - Defamatory Email by Mayor Brian Campbell Dear City Council Members, There is enough DECEIT and DECEPTION in Washington to make us all sick to our stomachs ..... BUT SURELY NOT IN OUR BEAUTIFUL CITYH We are sure that you are all horrified that as Mayor of our great city, Brian Campbell, had the audacity to send an official looking email to the community on October 4th regarding Michael Hwang's opinions and recommendations regarding candidates running for 2 RPV council seats on November Stn The vast majority of the community in my opinion prefers that the Mayor of PRV refrain from smearing the reputations of individual voters who exercise their legal civil rights advising community members of their personal opinions regarding the qualifications and political interests of individuals who have the courage to run for local office. We are requesting that you provide Mr. Hwang with a letter to refute Mr. Campbell's malicious email and to ask that your official body "the RPV City Council" to follow through and implement policies to make sure Brian Campbell or any other council member can NOT abuse their power in this way. Thanks you very much for being DECENT and ETHICAL City Council members. Sinc ely,� Sandra and Don Hammersmark I 14 k Doug Wilmore DWillmore(Mrovca.aov Dave Aleshire daleshire(d-)awattorneys.com Rebecca S. Burleson rburleson(cD-awattornevs.com City Clerk cityclerk .rovca.gov �Ob1k c c.,meAks C-66 From: Emily Colborn Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 5:43 PM To: CityClerk Subject: FW: In reference to the "Public Comment" portion of the 10/16/17 City Council meeting Late Correspondence -----Original Message ----- From: Janet Nitz [mailto:nitzj@sbcglobal.net] Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 4:23 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Cc: Jerry Duhovic <Jerry. Duhovic@ rpvca.gov>; Susan Brooks <SusanB@rpvca.gov>; Ken Dyda <Ken.Dyda@rpvca.gov>; Anthony Misetich <AnthonyM@rpvca.gov> Subject: In reference to the "Public Comment" portion of the 10/16/17 City Council meeting It is my understanding that Brian Campbell wrote an email, using his title of Mayor of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes, in which he accused Michael Huang of "smearing" some of the candidates running for City Council. I received Michael's original email. It was a private email in which Michael clearly expressed his personal opinions. I believe Brian Campbell's email was completely inappropriate. I support Michael Huang's request for a public, written apology from the City of RPV. Sincerely, Janet Nitz From: Emily Colborn Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 5:43 PM To: CityClerk Subject: FW: Public Comments - October 17, 2017 City Council Meeting Late Correspondence From: Carolynn Petru [mailto:carolynn.petru@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, October 16, 2017 4:02 PM To: CC <CC@rpvca.gov> Cc: Michael Huang <mikehgalaxy@gmail.com> Subject: Public Comments - October 17, 2017 City Council Meeting Dear City Council - Please take all appropriate steps necessary to counteract the recent action taken by Mayor Campbell to intimidate, discredit and malign the reputation of our neighbor, Mr. Michael Huang. Although the Mayor's email, which was sent to an undisclosed email group, was not technically a violation of City Council Policy, it was clearly unethical and inappropriate. It gave every appearance of being official correspondence from the City, with the one exception of not including the City's logo. Unfortunately, the email, with it's false statements about Mr. Huang, has been forwarded to more people around the community and has even been shared on social media. We are deeply embarrassed that one of our City Council members, and the Mayor no less, would use a tactic like this during the election season to silence discourse by damaging the reputation of a resident who did not share his opinion about allowing short-term rentals in our neighborhoods and who does not support the same candidates that our Mayor does in the upcoming general election. Please take immediate and decisive action to demonstrate to the public that this was not a City Council -sanctioned message or tactic. Please do what you can to set the record straight and to assure our residents that their right to free speech is valued in Rancho Palos Verdes. Sincerely, Carolynn & Andy Petru CITYOF October 23, 2017 Dear Mr. Huang: RANCHO PALOS VERDES In accordance with your request, this letter confirms that the City Manager, the City Attorney, and each individual Councilmember, et al, (the "City") are in receipt of your emails dated October 9, 2017, October 13, 2017, and October 16, 2017, objecting to an email circulated by Mayor Brian Campbell, on or about October 5, 2017. Your emails requested that the City Council, as a body, clarify if Mayor Campbell was speaking on behalf of the City/City Council. As such, please be advised that the views and opinions expressed by Mayor Brian Campbell in his email on or about October 5, 2017, do not reflect the views and/or opinions of the Rancho Palos Verdes City Council or the City of Rancho Palos Verdes. The email was not directed, sanctioned, or authorized in any way by the City. His email should be interpreted solely as the personal view(s), opinion(s), and/or work product of Mr. Campbell. We trust that this letter satisfies your specific requests. Additionally, the City Council would like to apologize for any inconvenience this matter has caused you. Nl 4xXro Tem C�J �4? Anthony Misetich Council Member Susan Brooks Council Member en yda Council Member 01203.0001/418998.5 30940 HAWTHORNE BLVD. / RANCHO PALOS VERDES, CA 90275-5391 D-1 )L JEFFREY LEWIS /+TTO RN EY AT LAW October 24, 2017 VIA E—MAIL (daleshire@awattorneys.com, cityclerk@rpvca.gov) AND U.S. MAIL Dave Aleshire, Esq. Emily Colborn, City Clerk Aleshire & Wynder City of Rancho Palos Verdes 2361 Rosecrans Avenue 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard El Segundo, CA 90245 Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 RE: Brown Act Violation Dear Mr. Aleshire and Ms. Colborn, This firm represents a group of Palos Verdes Peninsula residents who are concerned about the Rancho Palos Verdes City Concil's adherence to the Brown Act. Pursuant to Government Code section' 54960.2, subdivision (a)(1), this office hereby submits this cease and desist letter to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes ("City") through Ms. Colborn, its clerk. I am writing to you concerning a Brown Act violation that occurred at the October 17, 2017 City Council meeting. The City may respond within 30 days of receiving the lettere or "elect[] to respond to [this] cease and desist letter with an unconditional commitment to cease, desist from, and not repeat the past actions] that [are] alleged to [have] violate [d] this chapter."' The unconditional commitment must be approved by the City in open session at a regular or special meeting as a separate item of business.' The City need not admit that a violation occurred, and providing an "unconditional commitment shall not be construed or admissible as evidence of a violation."' 'All further statutory references herein are to the California Government Code. e 54960.2, subd. (b). 3 54960.2, subd. (c)(1). The format for such a commitment is laid out in section 54960.2, subdivision (c)(1). 54960.2, subd. (c)(2). 54960.2, subds. (c)(1) and (4). p: 310.935.4001 £ 310.872.5389 609 Deep Valley Drive, Suite 200 1 Rolling Hills Estate, CA 90274 jeffLewisLawxom E-1 -1 Page 2 of 5 October 24, 2017 1 ,; L Background Principles of Law Concerning the Brown Act The Brown Act reflects a heavy presumption in favor of transparent government and public meetings: In enacting this chapter, the Legislature finds and declares that the public commissions, boards and councils and the other public agencies in this State exist to aid in the conduct of the people's business. It is the intent of the law that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly. The people of this State do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created! (Gov. Code, § 54950) California court have enforced the Brown Act strictly against public agencies: "Open government is a constructive value in our democratic society." (Citation.) The Brown Act (§ 54950 et seq.), adopted in 1953 and since amended, is intended to ensure the public's right to attend the meetings of public agencies. (Citation.) To achieve this aim, the Act requires, inter alfa, that an agenda be posted at least 72 hours before a regular meeting, and it forbids action on any item not on that agenda. (Citations.) The Act thus facilitates public participation in all phases of local government decision making and curbs misuse of the democratic process by secret legislation by public bodies. (Citation.) The Brown Act dictates that 1a]11 meetings of the legislative body of a local agency shall be open and public, and all persons shall be permitted to attend any meeting of the legislative body of a local agency, except as otherwise provided in this chapter." (Citation.).' Violation of the Brown Act may result in criminal penalties' and civil relief. Civil remedies include declaratory relief, injunctive relief and requiring the Board to record closed session meetings. c'§ 54950. ' Castaic Lake Water Agency v. Newhall County Water District (2 015) 238 Cal.App.4th 1196, 1203. a § 54959 [declaring that violations of the Act are a misdemeanor]; § 54960, subd. (a) [authorizing civil action for declaratory and injunctive relief].) E-2 Page 3 of 5 F October 24, 2017 'I — Violation No. 1 - The Lack of Disclosure of the Closed Session Meeting about Michael Huang's Threats of Litigation At the beginning of the City Council meeting, the council announced it was going into closed session to discuss claims asserted by Mike Doddy. That was entirely appropriate. Mr. Doddy's dispute with the City was fully and adequately disclosed on the agenda.' The City Council also announced that it would be discussing a second matter pertaining to potential litigation. As to this second matter, we understand that the issue involves a dispute between City resident Michael Huang and Mayor Brian Campbell. In preparing to go into closed session, the City Council disclosed that there was potential litigation but did not disclose the facts and circumstances that caused the City Council to believe there was a potential for litigation to be filed against the City. For example, the City Council could have disclosed: Potential Litigation against the City: GC 54956.9(d)(2) and (e) (3) A point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the local agency on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the local agency, based on an e- mail to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes dated October 9, 2017, from Michael Huang. A copy of the e-mail is on file in the City Clerk's Office. Instead, the City Council simply disclosed that there was potential litigation without disclosing any of the facts and circumstances underlying the potential litigation. Although in rare instances, the City may withhold those facts and circumstances from the public, this is not such an instance. Section 54956.9, subdivision (e) provides: (e) For purposes of paragraphs (2) and (3) of subdivision (d), "existing facts and circumstances" shall consist only of one of the following: (1) Facts and circumstances that might result in litigation against the local agency but which the local agency believes are not yet known to a potential plaintiff or plaintiffs, which facts and circumstances need not be disclosed. (2) Facts and circumstances, including, but not limited to, an accident, disaster, incident, or transactional occurrence that might result in litigation against the agency and that are known to a potential plaintiff or plaintiffs, which facts or circumstances shall be publicly stated on the agenda or announced.... (Emphasis added). ' In litigation against other jurisdictions alleging Brown Act violations, I have described Rancho Palos Verdes as having the "gold standard" of disclosure and transparency. The disclosure of the Doddy' discussion on the agenda met that standard. The disclosure as to Michael Huang fell well below that standard. E-3 Page 4 of 5 October 24, 2017 1 ,; L It is beyond Cavil that by October 9, 2017, Michael Huang knew of the facts and circumstances that caused the City to conclude that litigation was possible. Michael Huang himself alerted the City to those facts and circumstances on October 9, 2017. Therefore, it was not lawful for the City to convence a closed session and conceal from the public the facts and circumstances described in Michael Huang's letter. Violation No. 2 - The City Could not Hold a Closed Session to Discuss a Matter not on the Agenda The City did not state on the agenda that it would be discussing the Michael Huang dispute. The City is not allowed to meet in closed session to discuss matters unless they are included in the agenda or unless an emergency situation exists excusing the failure to agendize. (§54954.2, subd.(b). There was no "crippling disaster, mass destruction, terrorist act, or threatened terrorist activity" in the City on October 17, 2017. (§ 54956.5). Nor was there any urgent need to act between the date the City Council Meeting agenda was published and the October 17, 2017 meeting. Impact of the Violation Following the Closed Session, the Council announced that it had voted 5-0 to send a letter addressing the potential litigation. This action is null and void due to the violation of the Brown Act. Motivations for Closed Session The City's intent and motiviation is irrelevant for purposes of judicial determinations of Brown Act violations. Nonetheless, a review of the recording of the meeting demonstrates that with Mayor Campbell's absence, the remaining council members, led by Councilmember Brooks, eagerly and clumsily sought to have a secret discussion about Mayor Campbell outside of the public's view. That is not permitted. It is the role of the City Attorney to advise Councilmembers in the heat of discussions that their actions are outside the Brown Act. My clients are disappointed that the City Attorney did not counsel the paricipants in the meeting that their proposed actions would violate the law. Conclusion and Request As was shown above, there were at least two violations of the Brown Act. By this letter, this office respectfully requests that the City provide a response as required by Section 54960.2, subdivision (b). I am available to discuss these issues at your convenience. Such a discussion, however, would be a supplement and not a substitute for the City's formal obligation to respond under Section 54960.2, subdivision (b). In the event the City does not satisfactorily address E-4 Page 5 of 5 F October 24, 2017 these issues, my clients are prepared to initiate a civil action to enforce the Brown Act. We would prefer that the City voluntarily and publicly acknowledge its transgressions and commit to compliance in the future. Very truly yours, ..'A*'o Jeffrey Lewis cc: Clients David Demerjian, Public Integrity Unit, LA District Attorney's Office Cynthia Washicko, Daily Breeze Ed Pilolla, Peninsula News E-5 ALESHIREcitDavid J. Aleshire ' 18881 Von Karman Avenue, daleshire@awattorneys.com Suite 1700 WYNDER LLP (949) 250-5409 l Irvine, CA 92612 A I R ;,p E ;, A - E A 'V, P (949) 223-1170 F (949) 223-1180 GF`ANGE COUN-TY ( I_OS ANGELES I RIVERSIDE I CENTRAL. VALLEY November 21, 2017 VIA U.S. MAIL Jeffrey Lewis Attorney at Law 609 Deep Valley Dr., #200 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 Re: Alleged Brown Act Violation Dear Jeff: AVVAT ORNEYS.COM As I previously acknowledged, on behalf of the City, we are in receipt of your letter of October 24, 2017, which on behalf of various citizens alleges that the City violated the Brown Act (Govt Code Sections 54950-54963) on October 17, 2017, by adding to the closed session agenda an item to discuss a potential litigation claim against the City. Your letter is submitted under Section 54960.2(a)(1) of the Brown Act which allows the City to respond to the alleged violation by correcting the violation or by making an unconditional commitment not to violate the Brown Act. The particular matter which was added to the closed session agenda involved a claim by a citizen ("Complainant") that the Mayor had been conducting electioneering activity on behalf of certain candidates and had made improper statements impinging the integrity of the Complainant who on October 4, 2017, sent an email to his personal email group advocating for other Council candidates. The Mayor's email was sent the next day on October 5 to an email group he communicates with as a group of interested citizens. The Complainant claimed that in the October 4 email the Mayor failed to identify that his election advocacy was personal and not undertaken on behalf of the City — the Mayor used his Council office to identify himself, used a format and group list similar to that he uses in his official capacity, and failed to make clear that he was acting in his individual capacity and not his official capacity. Your letter alleges that it was inappropriate to add this matter to the Council agenda on October 17, as there was no emergency circumstance, and that in adding it, more details should have been publicly stated concerning the nature of the claim. Attached are a series of emails from the Complainant. The emails largely speak for themselves. The first one was received by the City on October 8 and went to all councilmembers and was entitled "Demand Notice to City of Rancho Palos Verdes Concerning Defamation by Brian Campbell, in capacity as Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes". The Council agenda for the meeting of October 17 went out on October 10. I responded the same day I received the email on October 9 saying that to my knowledge, the Mayor's email was not authorized by the Council but the Council could only consider the question at a Council meeting. Complainant responded 01203.0001/425631.6 F-1 Jeffrey Lewis November 21, 2017 Page 2 by email on October 13 rejecting my response as insufficient and repeating the demand for a response by Monday, October 16, and this email again went to the whole Council. Complainant alleged that his reputation was being harmed and that the longer the City went in not clarifying that the Mayor's comments were unauthorized, the more harm would be done to Complainant's reputation. I believe that the Councilmember who wanted to discuss a response with the Council and spoke with me became more concerned with the tone of this email and the October 16 deadline, and especially when it was realized that if not addressed on October 17, the next Council meeting would not be until November 7. You apparently argue that there was not an "emergency" within the meaning of the Brown Act, and that the matter could have waited until the next regular meeting. The controlling statute reads: 54954.2(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), the legislative body may tike action on items of business not appearing on the posted agenda under any of the conditions stated below. Prior to discussing any item pursuant to this subdivision, the legislative body shall publicly identify the item.... (2) Upon a determination by a two-thirds vote of the members of the legislative body present at the meeting, or, if less than two-thirds of the members are present, a unanimous vote of those members present, that there is a need to take immediate action and that the need for action came to the attention of .the local agency subsequent to the agenda beimo� sted as specified in subdivision (a). (1 rnphasis added). You allege that there was not a "crippling disaster, mass destruction, terrorist act, or threatened terrorist activity" to justify the emergency under 54954.2(b). It is true that Section 54956.5 allows action by a majority vote when such an emergency as defined by that Section exists, but that is not the section we were acting under. The "emergency" is only one grounds tar such unscheduled action. As quoted above, the operative language is that "there is a need to take immediate action," and the need arose "subsequent to the posting of the agenda." This finding requires a different vote than for the Section 54956.5 "emergency." Let me quote some of the assertions by the Complainant in his email on October 16, 2017, the day before the Council meeting: " . . . I have expressed to my friends many times that I also oppose Brian Campbell because he is a foe of the City's ban on short-term rentals. The next day I was informed that Brian Campbell, in his capacity of the Mayor of Rancho Palos Verdes, wrote an email in which he defamed me by calling me a "campaign operative" and basically accused me of "smearing" some candidates... I am a private individual and do not hold office in this City. His email is blatant, abuse of power in his attempt to suppress my freedom of speech. He is trying to 01203.0001/425631.6 F-2 Jeffrey Lewis November 21, 2017 Page 3 intimidate me and has already defamed me. It is unheard of to have a Mayor single out a private resident for attack in this way, especially given that my email was sent, privately to a group of my friends and neighbors... Mr. Campbell did more than just sign the letter as the Mayor of our City. He took great pains to make the email look like a public announcement message from the City in the following ways ... Please understand my distress and concern in finding out that as a private citizen, this malicious attack on my reputation and character by a sitting Mayor is now out there in the public domain and spreading." This email asserting Monday, October 16, as the deadline for response, argued that the damage grew daily, and that the distribution of a letter clarifying that the Mayor's communication was unauthorized was the corrective action required of the City. There is no question in the campaign email by the Mayor that (i) Mayor Campbell did use his title as Mayor in the communication, and (ii) there is no place at which Mayor Campbell uses an appropriate disclaimer that the views expressed were his personal views and not those of his colleagues or the City. Moreover, the City's adopted protocols (Protocol #14, City of Rancho Palos Verdes Protocol for Elected Officials and Appointed Boards, Commission and Committee Members, adopted May 29, 2012) state the following: "Unless authorized to do so by the City Council, refrain from making statements, either orally or in writing, that assert or would cause a reasonable person to believe that you are acting on behalf of the City... Other than personal thank you notes, City letterhead shall not be used without prior City Council approval." So in this matter, a clear case could be made that the failure by the Mayor to clarify his role was a violation of City Protocol. It seemed that the threat of damage to Mr. Huang's reputation was real, and that with an election pending there would be a wide dissemination of charges and counter charges, and that the more immediate the response, the more limited would be the potential for damages. Accordingly, in my opinion, the seriousness of the demand for action, arose subsequent to the October 10 posting of the October 17 agenda, and the matter was properly added to the agenda by a unanimous vote of the Council Members present. You further object to the amount of information stated publicly as the reason for the closed session. Due to the fact that all Councilmembers had been listed on the email chains, they were aware of the circumstances. However, it was my assumption that neither the Complainant, nor the public was generally aware of the matter, and it was my expectation that in the closed session, a clarifying letter could be agreed to and sent to the Complainant and quickly resolve the matter without causing further damage by publishing false charges. I'd even discussed such an approach with the Mayor. The Council unanimously agreed to send such a letter. However, 01203.0001/425631.6 F-3 Jeffrey Lewis November 21, 2017 Page 4 when after the closed session I disclosed this to the Complainant, it was clear he wanted a public airing of the matter, and in public comments a number of citizens spoke, and clearly there was much already known in the public arena. Given the election season, perhaps this should have been anticipated. So the question is where do we go from here? The City's legal budget is over $1 Million per year and the Council is seriously trying to find ways to reduce costs, and disputes over matters like this are a good example of wasted dollars. You have previously acknowledged that the City's general compliance with the Brown Act is good. You say the sending of the City's October 23 corrective letter in response to Complainant's demand was illegal because of your challenge to how the matter was added to the agenda. Although you have asked for action under Section 54960.2 for an unconditional commitment, the City also has the right to act under Section 54960. 1, which permits the City to place the matter back on the agenda and take corrective action by resending the letter. This would avoid litigation and cure your perceived Brown Act violations. This would lead to a discussion of the Mayor's violation of Council Protocols, and possibly the Mayor would try to justify his actions by showing that the Complainant did give misleading information. Complainant would rebut this and show he was not a "campaign operative" and so forth. Such a debate could make the Council meeting a forum for the "smearing" of reputations. Yet arguably this whole matter really arose in the heat of an election now concluded. I would think the City's resources and community's energy could better be spent forging ahead with the new Council team, and I'd say the same to Messrs. Campbell and Huang. If you find my explanation of why the Council acted as it did satisfactory, we can with mutual respect put this matter behind us. If not, I will put this on the next Council agenda for a closed session discussion and recommend that the issue of drafting a new letter to Complainant be placed on the following agenda now scheduled for December 5 for Council action. Accordingly, this letter should be deemed a response within 30 days of the intent to cure any perceived Brown Act violation, if you do demand such action following this written explanation. My recommendation would be made solely to avoid unnecessary litigation. Very truly yours, ALESHIRE & W DER, LLP !r r David J. shire Partner DJA:rsb cc: City Manager City Council Enclosures 01203.0001/425631.6 F-4 G R E S HA M SAVAGE Ellen.Berkowitz@GreshamSavage.com • Los Angeles (213) 213-7249 • fax (213) 213-7391 May 20, 2016 VIA EMAIL AND US MAIL - cityclerk@rpvca.gov Carla Morreale, City Clerk City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Boulevard Rancho Palos Verdes, California 90275 Re: Public Records Act Request Dear Ms. Morreale: RECEIVED CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES MAY 2 3 2010 CITY CLERK'S OFFICE As you know, this law firm represents Green Hills Memorial Park ("GHMP"). Pursuant to the California Public Records Act (California Government Code §6250 et seq.), we hereby request that the City of Ranchos Palos Verdes (the "City") make the following public records available: 1. All Communications from Brian Campbell that reference Green Hills Memorial Park. 2. All Communications to Brian Campbell that reference Green Hills Memorial Park. 3. All Communications from David Tomblin that reference Green Hills Memorial Park. 4. All Communications to David Tomblin that reference Green Hills Memorial Park. For purposes of this request, the term "Communications" includes, but is not limited to, letters, emails, memoranda, notes or other written materials, but excludes copies of agendas or staff reports transmitted to Mr. Campbell and/or Mr. Tomblin by City staff members as part of the City's regular distribution process for public hearings. The term "Green Hills Memorial Park" includes all other names by which the entity may be known such as Green Hills or GHMP, and includes references to members of its Board of Directors individually (Ray Frew, John Resich or Dennis Lane). SAN BERNARDINO 550 East Hospitality Lane, Suite 300 • San Bernardino, California 92408 SAN DIEGO 550 West C Street, Suite 1810 • San Diego, California 92101 LOS ANGELES 333 South Hope Street, 35'h Floor • Los Angeles, California 90071 Gresham Savage.com G583-000--2319353 I G-1 Carla Morreale, City Clerk City of Rancho Palos Verdes May 20, 2016 Page 2 Section 6253(c) of the Government Code requires a public entity to determine whether it possesses documents that are responsive to the request within ten (10) days of its receipt of the request and to produce such documents forthwith upon payment. Please let us know when the documents will be available. We will, of course, pay for the costs of copying documents responsive to this request. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Ver ru yours, Ellen erwitz kb , of �..__�- GRESHAM SAVAGE NOLAN & TILDEN, A Professional Corporation EB:rsk cc: Dave Aleshire, Esq. (via e-mail only) Doug Willmore (via e-mail only) Kevin Brogan, Esq. (via e-mail only) G583-000 -- 2319353.1 G-2 From: Doug Willmore PAGE 1 OF 1,814 Sent time: 05/23/2016 09:19:56 AM To: Brian Campbell Subject: FW: Public Records Act Request Attachments: City Clerk -01 re PRA.PDF FYI From: Ellen Berkowitz [mailto:Ellen.Berkowitz@GreshamSavage.com] Sent: Friday, May 20, 2016 4:41 PM To: Carla Morreale <CarlaM@rpvca.gov> Cc: daleshire@awattorneys.com; Doug Willmore <DWilImore@rpvca.gov>; Brogan, Kevin H. (KBrogan@hfbllp.com) <KBrogan@hfbllp.com> Subject: Public Records Act Request Please see attached correspondence containing a Public Records Act request on behalf of Green Hills Memorial Park. Thank you. Ellen Ellen Berkowitz Principal Shareholder Gresham Savage Nolan & Tilden, PC 333 South Hope Street 35th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90071 Office direct: (213) 873-8395 Office main: (213) 213-7249 1 Fax: (213) 213-7391 1 Cell: (310) 592-3479 www.GreshamSavage.com 1. Privileged and Confidential Communication. The information contained in this email and any attachments may be confidential or subject to the attorney client privilege or attorney work product doctrine. If you are not the intended recipient of this communication, you may not use, disclose, print, copy or disseminate the same. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender and destroy all copies of this message. 2. Notice re Tax Advice. Any tax advice contained in this email, including any attachments, is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by you or any other recipient for the purpose of (a) avoiding penalties that may otherwise be imposed by the IRS, or (b) supporting, promoting, marketing, or recommending any transaction or matter to any third party. 3. Transmission of Viruses. Although this communication, and any attached documents or files, are believed to be free of any virus or other defect, it is the responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is virus free, and the sender does not accept any responsibility for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. 4. Security of Email. Electronic mail is sent over the public internet and may not be secure. Thus, we cannot guarantee the privacy or confidentiality of such information. This email has been scanned for email related threats and delivered safely by Mimecast. For more information please visit http://www.mimecast.com H-'! MGreen bergTraurig Ellen Berkowitz Tel 310.586.7763 Fax 310.586.7800 berkowitze@gtlaw.com December 4, 2017 Emily Colborn, City Clerk City of Rancho Palos Verdes 30940 Hawthorne Blvd. Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275 Re: Public Records Act Request Dear Ms. Colborn: On May 23, 2016, Green Hills Memorial Park ("Green Hills") submitted a request pursuant to the Public Records Act, Government Code Section 6250 et seq., for the following public records: 1. All Communications from Brian Campbell that reference Green Hills Memorial Park. 2. All Communications to Brian Campbell that reference Green Hills Memorial Park. 3. All Communications from David Tomblin that reference Green Hills Memorial Park. 4. All Communications to David Tomblin that reference Green Hills Memorial Park. To reduce the number of documents that could be deemed responsive to this request, we defined the term "Communications" to include, but not be limited to, letters, emails, memoranda, notes or other written materials, but to exclude copies of agendas or staff reports transmitted to Mr. Campbell and/or Mr. Tomblin by City staff members as part of the City's regular distribution process for public hearings. We further stated that the term "Green Hills Memorial Park" includes all other names by which the entity may be known such as Green Hills or GHMP, and includes references to members of its Board of Directors individually (Ray Frew, John Resich or Dennis Lane). In response to our request, the City provided a handful of documents from Mr. Campbell, and advised that Mr. Tomblin did not have any documents responsive to our request. In response to our further inquiry about the paucity of documents produced, the City advised that Mr. Campbell would produce additional documents but if, and only if, he could personally hand - deliver such documents in a face-to-face meeting with Green Hills' President, Ray Frew. We LA 133406252x2 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP ■ ATTORNEYS AT LAW ■ WWW.GTLAW.COM 1840 Century Park East, Suite 1900, Los Angeles, California 90067-2121 ■ Tel: 310.586.7700 ■ Fax 310.586.7800 I-1 Ms. Colborn December 4, 2017 Page 2 were also again advised that Mr. Tomblin did not have any documents responsive to our request. There is nothing in the Public Records Act that permits a public official such as Mr. Campbell to refuse to make public documents available unless the public official's demands dictating the terms for disclosure are met. Rather, the law requires the agency to allow the requested records to be inspected at the agency during its regular office hours. See Cal. Gov't Code § 6253(a); see also Summary of the California Public Records Act 2004 ("Summary")(California Attorney General's Office, at p. 4). Therefore, we renew our request for an inspection of the records in Mr. Campbell's possession that are responsive to our request. With regard to Mr. Tomblin's claim that no records responsive to our request exist, we also renew our request, as Mr. Tomblin's denial of the existence of such records strains credulity. Further, please be advised that since our original request, the California Supreme Court decided City of San Jose v. Superior Court, 2 Cal.Sth 608 (2017), which held that communications on a city employee's personal email account are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act when the communications relate to the conduct of the public's business. Id. at 629. The Court was careful to note that, to qualify as a public record subject to a disclosure, the "writing must relate in some substantive way to the conduct of the public's business." Id. at 618. "Resolution of the question, particularly when writings are kept in personal accounts, will often involve an examination of several factors, including the content itself; the context in, or purpose for which, it was written; the audience to whom it was directed; and whether the writing was prepared by an employee acting or purporting to act within the scope of his or her employment." Id. In light of the holding in City of San Jose, our renewed request includes all Communications on Mr. Campbell's and Mr. Tomblin's personal email accounts that qualify as public records pursuant to the standard set forth in that case. If either gentleman is unsure whether the nature of the particular Communication meets the definition of a public record (i.e., whether it relates to "the conduct of the public's business"), we would urge him to confer with the City Attorney for further guidance rather than simply claim there are no records responsive to this request. We further remind the City of the breadth of the scope of the Public Records Act, and the City's obligation to make the public's business accessible to members of the public. As articulated by the California Attorney General: "The public may inspect or obtain a copy of identifiable public records. Writings held by state or local government are public records. A writing includes all forms of recorded information that currently exist or that may exist in the future. The essence of the CPRA is to provide access to information, not merely documents and files. However, it is not enough to provide extracted information to the requestor, the document containing the information must be provided." LA 133406252x2 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP ■ Attorneys at Law ■ www.gtlaw.com 1-2 Ms. Colborn December 4, 2017 Page 3 Summary at p. 2. (footnotes omitted, emphasis added). To ensure that the City does not take an unduly restrictive reading of our request, we also augment our request for the term "Communications" to include references to Green Hills' management team (Thomas Frew and Nick Resich), its attorneys (Kevin Brogan and Ellen Berkowitz) and its consultant (Rudy Svorinich). Additionally, Communications referring to Green Hills should also include references to "the cemetery" or "burial grounds" or "your neighbor" where it is clear that such terms are alluding to Green Hills. Finally, we add the following new requests: 5. All Communications between Brian Campbell and residents or owners of the Vista Verde Condominiums, located at 2110 Palos Verdes Drive, Lomita, CA ("Vista Verde"). 6. All Communications between Brian Campbell and Attorney Noel Weiss. 7. All Communications between David Tomblin and residents or owners of Vista Verde. 8. All Communications between David Tomblin and Attorney Noel Weiss. Should the City refuse to provide Green Hills with the opportunity to inspect Communications responsive to this request, please be advised that we will not hesitate to pursue all available remedies, including but not limited to, our right to institute proceedings for injunctive or declarative relief or writ of mandate. Cal. Gov't Code § 6258. Pursuant to the Public Records Act, please further be advised that should the court find that the City is improperly withholding the requested records, the court shall order the records disclosed, and shall award attorney's fees and costs to the prevailing petitioner. Id. at 6259(b), (d). Thank you for your renewed consideration of our request. We look forward to your prompt reply. Sincerely, ZlIenBPkowWitz cc: Kevin Brogan LA 133406252x2 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP ■ Attorneys at Law ■ www.gtlaw.com 1-3 ALESHIRE & WYNDERL P ATTORNEYS AT L A W ORANGE COUNTY I LOS ANGELES I RIVERSIDE I CENTRAL VALLEY February 6, 2018 VIA EMAIL Jeff(&jeffLewisLawxom Jeffrey Lewis Attorney at Law 609 Deep Valley Dr., #200 Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274 Re: Draft Unconditional Commitment Dear Jeff: David J. Aleshire daleshire@awafforneys.com (949)250-5409 18881 Von Karmen Avenue, Suite 1700 Irvine, CA 92612 P (949) 223-1170 F (949) 223-1180 AWATTORNEYS.COM The City of Rancho Palos Verdes received your cease and desist letter dated October 24, 2017 submitted pursuant to Govt Code Section 54960.2 of the Brown Act alleging that a certain past action of the City Council violated the Brown Act and requesting that such action not be repeated. While we do not agree that the acts you describe were violations of the Brown Act, we agree with you generally on the requirements of the Brown Act, and are willing to make unconditional commitments as to compliance with certain of the provisions contained therein. We agree that on October 17, 2017, a closed session matter was added to the regular City Council Closed Session agenda to discuss a threat of litigation made by Mr. Michael Huang with respect to unauthorized emails sent by then former Mayor Brian Campbell for what appears to have been political purposes as a part of an election campaign. In the email in question, Mayor Campbell used his title as Mayor of the City without any disclaimer noting that he was speaking personally as an individual, and not as an official of the City, Protocol 14 of the City's Rules of Procedure requires such a disclaimer. Protocol 14 provides that a councilmember must refrain from making and statement(s) which could be construed by a reasonable person as representing the position of the entire Council or City without consent or approval of the entire City Council. Mr. Campbell's email was sent on October 4, 2017. On Sunday October 8th, Mr. Huang responded via email to certain Councilmembers stating that he had been accused by Mayor Campbell of being a "campaign operative" and of "smearing" candidates by making false claims. He asked as to whether former Mayor Campbell's email represented the position of the City Council/City as a whole, or was former Mayor Campbell's email reflective of his personal opinion/position. He requested an answer to his inquiry by October 16,2017 . This email was then followed up with another email on Friday October 13 2017. This email was more emphatic and more detailed and more forcefully asserted his argument, that his reputation was being damaged. He again repeated his request for an official answer from the City Council by October 16, 2017. Meanwhile it should be noted that, the City Council agenda for the meeting on Tuesday, October 17,° 2018 went out on Tuesday October 10,° 2018 without listing a closed session to discuss 01203.0001/443717.2 J-1 Jeffrey Lewis February 6, 2018 Page 2 the litigation threat from Mr. Huang or his request that the Council clarify if Mayor Campbell was speaking on behalf of the City or not. It is unclear as to when Councilmembers actually read the emails, but in any event, it wasn't until later in the week, after the agenda had been posted, that the request was received by staff for a closed session item to be agendized for discussion by the Council. You have raised objections as to whether the matter was legally added to the agenda, either because it didn't constitute a work stoppage, crippling disaster, terrorism or other dire emergency under Section 54956.5; or there wasn't a need for action, or the need didn't occur after the agenda was posted, under Section 54954.2. The City Council believes the matter did in fact qualify to be added to the agenda under Section 54954.2. Within the meaning of subsection 54954.2(b)(2), there was a finding of the need for immediate action arising subsequent to the posting of the agenda. As such, The City Council will not make a commitment to forgoing similar action in the future under similar circumstances. However, you also allege that under Section 54956.9(e) the City Attorney failed to adequately explain publicly the rationale for the addition of the closed session item, which, you believe should have specifically stated as involving a threat by Mr. Huang to take legal action against the City. We agree that the specific nature of the litigation threat and of the Mayor's alleged improper conduct could have been presented with more specific detail. Accordingly, the City makes the unconditional commitment that in the future, when a litigation matter is added to the agenda due to a threat of litigation, and the facts and circumstances are known as to the potential plaintiff/issue, the City Attorney will make an oral disclosure of the threat publicly at the time the matter is considered for addition to the agenda. Furthermore, and in accordance with Section 54960.2, the approval of this letter will be on an a regular business agenda item (and not on the consent calendar) on February 6, 2018. Moreover, in an abundance of caution, we will also reauthorize a letter and send a new letter to Mr. Huang clarifying that former Mayor Campbell was not speaking for the entire City Council/City in the email in question, that it was an apparent violation of Council Protocol 14, and that former Mayor Campbell was/is also being uncooperative in dealing with Mr. Huang's subsequent public records requests. Additionally, we commit that the City Council may only rescind this commitment by a majority vote of its membership taken in open session at a regular meeting, which was noticed on its posted agenda as "Rescission of Brown Act Commitment." You will be provided with written notice, sent by any means or media you direct in response to this letter, to whatever address or addresses you specify, of any intention of the City Council to consider rescinding this commitment at least 30 days before any such regular meeting. In the event that this commitment is rescinded, you will have the right to initiate legal action pursuant to subdivision (a) of Section 54960 of the Government Code. That notice will be delivered to you by the same means as this commitment, or may be mailed to an address that you have designated in writing. 01203.0001/443717.2 J-2 Jeffrey Lewis February 6, 2018 Page 3 Again, we reiterate in accordance with Section 54960.2(c), this action is taken solely to prevent unnecessary litigation and without admitting any violation of the Brown Act. Should have further questions, do not hesitate to contact this office. Very truly yours, ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP David J. Aleshire Partner DJA: sgf cc: City Manager City Council Enclosures 01203.0001/443717.2 J-3