CC SR 20181204 G - Campbell PRA Expenses01203.0001/522489.2 1
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 12/04/2018
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business
AGENDA DESCRIPTION:
Consideration of and possible action to receive and file this report that provides updates
on the City’s efforts to comply with various Public Records Act Requests for Mr. Brian
Campbell’s e-mails, costs to taxpayers resulting from Mr. Campbell’s non-compliance
with his statutory duties under the act, and discovery that the website titled
“www.rpvcrg.org” that was responsible for recently sending anonymous emails/postings
to residents was registered by Mr. Campbell’s company, BC Urban, LLC.
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) The City Council on February 6, 2018 and again on July 17, 2018,
received reports from the City Attorney on the efforts to comply with public
records requests from Michael Huang and Green Hills and to obtain any
and all City-related emails located on Mr. Campbell’s private email
accounts. These reports included the chronology showing that, over an
almost three year period, Mr. Campbell had not complied with any such
public record requests. This report is an up-date to these two earlier
reports. The City Council is asked to consider this report, receive and file
the same, and take such action as the Council deems appropriate
consistent with the requirements of law.
FISCAL IMPACT: N/A
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: William W. Wynder, City Attorney
REVIEWED BY: Gabriella Yap, Deputy City Manager
APPROVED BY: Doug Willmore, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. June 20, 2018 Letter from the City Attorney to Attorney Lewis (page A-1)
B. “Supplemental Declaration of Subpoened[sic] Party Brian Campbell” (page
B-1)
C. E-mail string, commencing on October 8, 2017 from Mr. Michael Huang
(page C-1)
D. February 6, 2018 Staff Report (excluding exhibits) (page D-1)
E. E-mail string, commencing October 4, 2018 from Ms. Tracy Burns (page
E-1)
F. October 29, 2018 letter to Ms. Tracy Burns from the City Clerk (page F-1)
1
01203.0001/522489.2 2
G. PDF from the web site CuteStat.com identifying the “domain registrant” of
www.rpvcrg.org (page G-1)
H. BC Urban LLC web site posting (Brian Campbell bio) (page H-1)
I. Partially redacted PDF of a letter posted by the “Peninsula Taxpayers
Association” (page I-1)
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This staff report is provided at the request of the City Council and is an update on the
effort that has been expended by the City to obtain compliance from Mr. Campbell for
Public Records Act requests that sought emails to/from Mr. Campbell on his private
email accounts.
Having reviewed the documents produced thus far, and having reviewed the two (2)
declarations provided by Mr. Campbell, we are of the opinion that Mr. Campbell has
failed to comply with the City’s subpoena and may made a material misstatement of
fact(s) under oath.
We further note that there remains an outstanding public records act request from Ms.
Tracy Burns seeking e-mails from Mr. Campbell, on either a city or private e-mail server,
which has been ignored by Mr. Campbell despite repeated efforts of the City Clerk to
obtain documents from him responsive to this request.
Finally, City Staff have discovered that a company owned and/or controlled by Mr.
Campbell, BC Urban, LLC, is the “domain registrant” of the web site “www.rpvcrg.org”
on which recent postings, which can most charitably be characterized as “hit pieces”
attacking the Mayor Pro Tem and the former City Attorney, have been posted and
circulated.
II. BACKGROUND
On April 3, 2018, the City Attorney presented a report to the City Council in open
session summarizing the cost of legal fees incurred by the City as a result of Public
Records Act requests propounded by Mr. Campbell, or attempting to obtain compliance
from Mr. Campbell for Public Records Act requests that sought emails to/from Mr.
Campbell on his private email account (for the Huang, Green Hills Yudess, Hildebrand,
and Pilolla PRRs for example).
Additional fees were reported for legal analysis relating to the possible consequences to
the City of Mr. Campbell’s failure to respond to the CPRA requests, and whether and to
what extent the City has an affirmative obligation to compel compliance. The total cost
reported was approximately $87,000.
The City Council next authorized the issuance of a legislative subpoena to Mr. Campbell
to compel his compliance with the PRA. That subpoena was issued on April 19, 2018.
2
01203.0001/522489.2 3
The City Attorney next up-dated the City Council on July 17, 2018. The total cost as of
July, 2018, was $130,000 ($87,000 as of April 3, 2018, and almost $43,000 since then).
Our office, working with your dedicated City Clerk, then completed the following tasks
(relevant to this staff report – please note that there have been still other PRARs from
Mr. Campbell which have been responded to in the interregnum between these
updates):
1. Mr. Campbell’s 5/1/2018 PRAR – 5,908 pages reviewed
2. Mr. Campbell’s 5/15/2018 PRAR – 1,200 pages reviewed
3. Mr. Campbell, by his legal counsel, provided responses to the legislative
subpoena on April 30, May 4, May 8, and May 22, 2018.
4. Mr. Campbell’s Responses to City’s Legislative Subpoena – 2,502 pages were
screened by our office and then reviewed by the City Council ad hoc committee.
In a June 21, 2018, follow-on letter to counsel for Mr. Campbell the City Attorney noted
the following:
“Finally, and importantly, it bears noting that the documents produced
thus far by your client in response to the legislative subpoena
presented no difficulty in segregating exempt records from
disclosable public records. In fact, when the lay members of the City
Council [ad hoc] sub-committee reviewed the productions, both were able
to easily and immediately identify privileged/exempt documents from
otherwise disclosable public records. The ease with which a review of
your client’s document productions were categorized as either
exempt or to be disclosed confirms what has long been suspected;
Mr. Campbell’s repeated requests for legal assistance from the City
Attorney (and his rejections of offers of legal assistance from other
attorneys in the City Attorney’s office) was a ruse designed to drive
up City costs, delay, and obfuscate his mandatory duty to comply
with public records act requests sent to the City. His actions exposed
the City to litigation from a variety of public records act requestors who
have shown remarkable restraint in allowing the City to go through a
tortious (and utterly unnecessary) process of compelling your client to
comply with the law.” (Emphasis added.)
III. UPDATE ON MR. CAMPBELL’S COMPLIANCE WITH THE LEGISLATIVE
SUBPOENA
Among the records obtained from Mr. Campbell were documents potentially responsive
to the PRARs by Mr. Michael Huang and Green Hills in 2017. We received four sets of
documents in May, through Mr. Campbell’s attorney Jeff Lewis. Following receipt of
3
01203.0001/522489.2 4
these public records provided by Mr. Campbell, the City Attorney and the Council ad
hoc committee undertook a careful review of the same.
There followed an exchange of correspondence between legal counsel for Mr. Campbell
and the City Attorney noting that the production of public records pursuant to the
legislative subpoena was incomplete. Specifically, in a June 20, 2018 letter
(Attachment A) to Mr. Campbell’s legal counsel, the City Attorney noted that Mr.
Campbell had failed to provide:
“[a] list of all e-mail addresses to which Mr. Campbell, acting in his
capacity as Mayor, sent any comments to or about Mr. Huang and a copy
of each of such e-mail must be identified and produced. The sharing of e-
mails comments about Mr. Huang with residents of the City of Rancho
Palos Verdes are clearly public records and must be identified and
produced by your client.”
In response, Mr. Campbell submitted a supplemental declaration (Attachment B), under
penalty of perjury, in which he declared that:
“[a]ll e-mails sent about Mr. Huang (and incorporated into the legislative
subpoena) were sent in my personal capacity outside the course and
scope of my duties as Mayor of the City.”
However, review of public records produced to our office (Attachment C) discloses that,
on Wednesday, October 5, 2017, Mr. Campbell sent out an e-mail blast to an unknown
group of addresses/addressees from his “campbell.rpv@gmail.com” address (one of the
e-mail addresses used by Mr. Campbell to conduct City business) making what Mr.
Huang later characterized as “defamatory statements” about him and which is signed
“Thanks for reading, Brian Campbell, Mayor – Rancho Palos Verdes
Campbell.rpv@gmail.com.” (Emphasis added.)
To the extent that it was not otherwise crystal clear that Mr. Campbell has sent out
communications about Mr. Huang in his capacity as Mayor (thereby making all such
communications public records which he was obligated to produce), in a staff report to
the City Council, dated May 2, 2018 (Attachment D), there was a lengthy discussion of
the October 5, 2017 Campbell e-mail blast. In that staff report, the City Attorney
advised the City Council that “[t]here was a consensus in closed session to send [a]
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.” (Emphasis added.)
Accordingly, the October 5, 2017 Campbell e-mail blast and the following City Council
discussion of the same, flatly contradict Mr. Campbell’s sworn testimony noted above
(compare Attachments B, C & D). In light of this plain contradiction, the City Council
may wish to direct the City Attorney to either take steps to commence appropriate
4
01203.0001/522489.2 5
proceedings in the Superior Court, or afford Mr. Campbell one final opportunity to
product the list of “e-mail addresses to which Mr. Campbell, acting in his capacity as
Mayor, sent any comments to or about Mr. Huang and a copy of each of such e-mail
must be identified and produced” in the sound discretion of the City Council.
IV. MR. CAMPBELL’S NON-COMPLIANCE WITH PUBLIC RECORDS ACT
REQUEST FROM MS. TRACY BURNS
On October 4, 2018, the City Clerk received a public records act request (Attachment E)
from Ms. Tracy Burns seeking production of public records from Mr. Campbell of “all
emails relating to city business Brian Campbell received or sent using any and all
private email accounts from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015.” (Emphasis in
original.) This PRAR was forwarded to Mr. Campbell on October 15, 2018 with a
request that Mr. Campbell “kindly respond to [the City Clerk] no later than Monday,
October 22, 2018 with a response whether you do or do not have any responsive
documents.” (Emphasis in original.)
To date, the City Clerk has had no response from either Mr. Campbell or his legal
counsel to the Burns PRAR. On October 29, 2018 (Attachment F) the City Clerk sent a
letter to Ms. Burns advising that:
“[t]he City has reached out to Mr. Campbell twice with your request for
records and to date he has not responded. You may want to consult with
legal counsel as to the remedies (if any) you may have with respect to Mr.
Campbell’s non-compliance. You may be aware that Mr. Campbell has
engaged in a pattern and practice of failing or refusing to comply with his
obligation to comply with the Public Records Act. Our office will also
consult with the City Attorney’s office to consider possible action(s) to
compel Mr. Campbell to comply with his obligations under that law. If and
when a determination on ‘next steps’ is reached we will notify you of any
actions.”
Again, should the City Council, in its sound discretion, wish to take action to compel Mr.
Campbell’s compliance with the Burns PRAR, it will be necessary to direct City Staff
and the City Attorney to issue a further legislative subpoena to compel production of
public records responsive to the Burns request, again in the sound discretion of the City
Council.
V. DISCLOSURE OF “BC URBAN, LLC” AS THE DOMAIN REGISTRANT OF
THE WEB SITE “WWW.RPVCRG.ORG.”
Related to the efforts of the City Council to obtain compliance by Mr. Campbell of his
statutory duties under the Public Records Act and to investigate potential violations of
the confidentiality of closed session(s), of recent date City Staff (and an unknown group
of recipients) have been in receipt of what can only charitably be characterized as a “hit
piece” targeting the Mayor Pro Tem and the former City Attorney.
5
01203.0001/522489.2 6
/ / /
As at least one recipient (Mr. Tim Scott) of the posting(s) from “www.rpvcrg.org”
sent the web site an e-mail comment with these telling observations:
“It doesn’t matter if [a] complaint is half-baked or dishonest nonsense over
a trivial matter or well-founded and about something significant. You
present the form of a letter with a name on it and all other information
blocked out. This is what a certain President would call fake news -
with an actual basis for that charge, and when you blast that out
there like its real, you taint a reputation with no justification. It is both
unreasonable and unfair to report this as if the Bar suspects that the
attorney is somehow unethical or the like. . . . I also don’t know who you
are – not even your name, or what motivates your clear animus. I don’t
even know if you made the complaint that you are now reporting. Such
reporting is a despicable political tactic, and if you made the
complaint it is even more so. Anonymously slandering someone is
immoral and reprehensible. That’s you.
What I have learned is that I cannot, and should not, trust your
reporting. My advice to you is to identify yourself/yourselves on your
web page and write a note about what has motivated you to be an
activist. Only then will you have any credibility at all. Only then can the
people you send these emails to begin to build any fair basis for
evaluating your claims against what we hear from the City and other
sources.
I don’t write this anonymously - you shouldn’t either.” (Emphasis added.)
In his public comments on the hit piece(s) posted on “www.rpvcrg.org” at the last City
Council meeting Mayor Pro Tem Duhovic stated:
“Many in the community have stated that they believe they know who is
responsible for these dirty politics and . . . such abhorrent behavior. Their
motivation includes trying to influence the outcome of the current [City
Council] investigation [into possible Brown Act violations] and the actions
of council in pursuing the investigation. But even more problematic is their
desire to scare good people from getting involved in the process of local
government. . . . I too believe I know who the individual is responsible for
this cowardly action. But I will take a different path and will refrain from
calling him out publicly in that it is just not my style to do so.”
These responses, together with a number of telephone inquiries to City Staff regarding
the posting(s), prompted Staff to ascertain the identity of the person or entity who acted
as the domain registrant for the web site “www.rpvcrg.org.” Staff utilized a public
domain analytics web site which identified the domain registrant of “www.rpvcrg.org” as
6
01203.0001/522489.2 7
BC Urban, LLC (Attachment G, the yellow highlighted text from CuteStat.com). When
you “Google” BC Urban, LLC, you get to the attached web site which identifies one
Brian Campbell as the “Managing Partner” (Attachment H, Campbell Bio PDF) of this
real estate company.
Lastly, Staff further learned that a second redacted version of a letter referencing the
former City Attorney that was posted on “www.rpvcrg.org” had also been posted by the
“Peninsula Taxpayers Association.” This later posting includes enough of an
addressee’s return mailing address to reveal that the addressee is located in “Rolling
Hills Estates” (Attachment I, the Peninsula Taxpayers Association PDF
attached). Rolling Hills Estate is listed as the address for BC Urban, LLC on its web
site (904 Silver Spur Rd # 282, Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274) and is the city listed on
the address of the law firm that represents Mr. Campbell.
7
ATTACHMENT A A-1
ALESHIRE&
WYNDERLLP
/\T OrtNL S ,o., LAVV
ORANGE COUNTY I LOS ANGELES I RIVERSIDE I CENTRAL VALLEY
June 20, 2018
William W. Wynder
wwynder@awattorneys.com
(310) 527-6667
SENT VIA E-MAIL jeff@jefflewislaw.com & FIRST CLASS MAIL
Jeffrey Lewis, Esq.
Attorney at Law
609 Deep Valley Drive, Suite 200
Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274
2361 Rosecrans Ave., Suite 475
El Segundo, CA 90245
p (31 0) 527-6660
F (310) 532-7395
AWATTORNEYS.COM
Subject: Mr. Campbell's Document Productions m Response to City Council
Legislative Subpoena; May 22, 2018
Counsel:
We have completed our review of the documents you forwarded to our office pursuant to
correspondence dated April 30, 2018, May 4, 2018, and May 8, 2018, respectively, and in
response to the above-referenced legislative subpoena. Our review reveals that your client's
responses to the same are deficient in at least the following respects:
(a) A list of the e-mail addresses used by Mr. Campbell to conduct City business is
missing from the production.
(b) All City business e-mails sent and received from Mr. Campbell's private e-mail
accounts relating to closed session communications. As you know, the former City Attorney
distributed these memos electronically the Friday before the scheduled closed session(s). We
have confirmed that Mr. Campbell's City e-mails were automatically forwarded to at least two of
the listed personal e-mail addresses, to wit: Bssi.campbell@gmail.com, b.camp@cox.net,
Campbell.rpv@gmail.com, b.campbell@bcurban.com, and Campbell.rpv@gmail.com.
From none of these e-mail addresses did your client produce closed session memos
forwarded to him. There would have been several such memos each month from the City
Attorney. These must be produced and any responses to these e-mails must also be produced. In
the event that any such e-mails were forwarded to others, they must also be produced.
(c) A list of all e-mail addresses to which Mr. Campbell, acting in his capacity as
Mayor, sent any comments to or about Mr. Huang and a copy of each of such e-mail must be
identified and produced. The sharing of e-mails comments about Mr. Huang with residents of
01203.0030/483503 .2
A-2
Jeffrey Lewis
June 20, 2018
Page 2
the City of Rancho Palos Verdes are clearly public records and must be identified and produced
by your client.1
(d) As this City is required to do when it responds to a public records act request,
your client is obligated to identify which documents are being produced in response to each of
the categories of the documents requested in the legislative subpoena. That is necessary to
enable the City to make its required supplemental responses to the various public records act
requestors. Moreover, to the extent that your client has no documents responsive to one of more
of the categories of documents being requested in the legislative subpoena, he must advise the
City of each such category for which there are no responsive documents.
Finally, and importantly, it bears noting that the documents produced thus far by your
client in response to the legislative subpoena presented no difficulty in segregating exempt
records from disc losable pubic records. In fact, when the lay members of the City Council sub-
committee reviewed the productions, both were able to easily and immediately identify
privileged/exempt documents from otherwise disclosable public records.
The ease with which a review of your client's document productions were categorized as
either exempt or to be disclosed confirms what has long been suspected; Mr. Campbell's
repeated requests for legal assistance from the City Attorney (and his rejections of offers of legal
assistance from other attorneys in the City Attorney's office) was a ruse designed to drive up
City costs, delay, and obfuscate his mandatory duty to comply with public records act requests
sent to the City. His actions exposed the City to litigation from a variety of public records act
requestors who have shown remarkable restraint in allowing the City to go through a tortious
(and utterly unnecessary) process of compelling your client to comply with the law.
Accordingly, your client is hereby afforded fourteen (14) calendar days from and after the
date of this letter to complete his responses to the City's legislative subpoena. His immediate
attention in fully complying with the above-referenced legislative subpoena is now required.
Very truly yours, w J)/~ U)'tr"'~
William W. Wynder
of ALESHIRE & WYNDER, LLP
See Exhibit "l," Requested Documents, Category "A," request nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 13, 14, 15,
16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 to which your client must either respond or advise the City that there
are no documents responsive to the same in his possession, or under his custody or control.
01203.0030/483503.2
A-3
Jeffrey Lewis
June 20, 2018
Page 3
Copies:
01203.0030/483503 .2
Mr. Doug Willmore,
City Manager
Elena Q. Gerli, Esq.,
Assistant City Attorney
A-4
ATTACHMENT B B-1
8 i! NN
·~ ~
"' I> vi. 6 ·~ ,;:\ 1:! "' j +-"' 't:l u ~ ~ 5
>, OJ" \:;-. !J) ~~~~ ~1j >~ «: o..::C
"M "" O;=i °' 0 @~
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Jeffrey Lewis (Bar No. 183934)
609 Deep Valley Drive, Suite 200
Rolling Hills l~states, CA 9027 4
Tel. (310) 935-4001
Fax. (310) 872-5389
E-Mail: Jeff@JeffLewisLaw.com
Attorney for Subpoenaed Party
BRIAN CAMPBELL
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO PALOS VERDES
In re:
BRIAN CAMPBELL
LEGISLATIVE SUBPOENA FOR
PRODUCTION OF PUBLIC
RECORDS
) SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF
) SUBPOENED PARTY BRIAN
) CAMPBELL
)
)
)
)
Date:
rfime:
Place:
1:00 p.m.
Palos Verdes City Hall
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~> ' 30940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos Verdes, CA 90275
I, Brian Campbell, declare as follows:
1. I am the former mayor of the City of Rancho Palos Verdes and the
22 subpoenaed party herein.
23 2. I have personal knowledge of the truth and accuracy of the facts set
24 forth herein, and if called upon as a witness, I could competently testify thereto. I do
25 not intend to waive the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine by making
26 any statement herein.
27 3. In response to the legislative subpoena issued by the City of Rancho
28 Palos Verdes (the "City") on April 19, 2018 (the "Subpoena,") I declare as follows:
SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF SUBPOENED PARTY BRIAN CAMPBELL
B-2
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
~~
H8 13 ·3"' ~ I> v:j ·~ f~ ·~ rI 14 j "p..,
?-> ~"" ~ ~ ~~ 6 0 ~ 15 ~ 0 ~ ~ .!!-,~~~
~ ~ 16 c::i:=i °' Cl 8~
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Ill
Ill
a. I estimate that I have spent approximately 120+ hours to identify
collect and transmit to my attorney, Jeffrey Lewis, documents
responsive to the Subpoena. I have engaged in a diligent search and
reasonable inquiry of all sources available to me for responsive
documents.
b. I neither sent nor received public records that I recall from or at
JifK!ent{f1}{;.QX~net and that email address has not functioned for over 3
years.
c. I have conducted a diligent search and reasonable inquiry and was not
able to locate closed session memos the City provided me and I affirm
that no closed session memos that I am aware of were forwarded by me
to anyone.
d. All e-mails sent about Mr. Huang (and incorporated into the legislative
subpoena) were sent in my personal capacity outside the course and
scope of my duties as Mayor of the City.
e. I have an email list that is not public record and is, therefore, not
responsive to the subpoena.
f. I have conducted a diligent search and reasonable inquiry and produced
all responsive documents that I could locate.
g. I have conducted a diligent search and reasonable inquiry and was not
able to locate the responsive documents.
h. Previously, on May 22, 2018 a CD-ROM with the following electronic
copies of documents was produced to the City: BC-MH 0001-BC-MH
0468, BC-GH 0001-BC-GH 1460 and BC-S 0001-BC-S 0574.
L The documents identified in subparagraph 3(b) above constitute all of
the documents responsive to the Subpoena that I could locate.
- 2 -
SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF SUBPOENED PARTY BRIAN CAMPBELL
B-3
g t! NN
i,io ·s °'
' (/)...:: "'j ·U ·s. t; vi ~ ~ '\:: ~ "p l:i (>--(i" tr. <n
tE g ~ ~ ~~~:rl
.., bl)
0 " Cl :3
"' 0 ~ r.:
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
J. The documents contained on the previously produced CD-ROM are true
and correct copies of the responsive documents.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the state of California
that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed this pt day of August 2018, at Rancho Palos Verdes, California.
. 3 -
--8-U-PP_L_E_M_E_N=T_A_L_D::-E'""""C--:LAR:::-:"'.::-A-T=r::-:o'.C":'N~O=Fc-'.'.SUBPOENED p ARTY BRIAN CAMPBELL
B-4
ATTACHMENT C C-1
From: Michael Huang <mikehgalaxy@grnail.com>
Date: Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 8:43 PM
Subject: Update on Status of Short-Tenn Rentals in RPV I 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-tenn rentals in our City. The ban on the
advertising and operation of short-tenn 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-tenn 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-tenn 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 arc six candidates running for two City
Council seats. Councilman Anthony Misetich and Brian Campbell are both tenned out. Anthony Misetich is a staunch supporter of the ban on
short-tenn rentals, and Brian Campbell is a foe of the ban on short-term rentals. Here are some infonnation 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 1 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 al Clarernent 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 cunent 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 Jive at the property. Then at the 11/29/16 Planning Commission, John voted in favor of the ban on the advertising of
short-tenn 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-tcnn 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 Misctieh 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 ofRPV 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-tenn 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. furthennorc, Google is a search engine; it has nothing to do with the short-
tcrrn rental websites. In my personal opinion, the reasons Dave gave for his nay vote on the adve1tising 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-tenn rentals and was against any type of restrictions against it. In fact, he has said that he is happy that a doctor was
making $I 00,000 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-tenn 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 oppose voting for Krista Johnson because she is so heavily endorsed by Brian Campbell.
C-2
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-tem1 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-
informcd 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 arc both endorsed and
supported by Councilwoman Susan Brooks and Councilman Anthony Misetich. Both of these council members arc 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 ow"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 <mikehgalaxy(a)gmail.corn>
Date: Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 10:27 PM
Subject: Fwd: Update on Status of Short-Tenn Rentals in RPV I 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 al i/2. Here's a picture of the ballot below:
2
C-3
I don't know why they don't start numbering with #1.
Sincerely,
Mike Huang
** End of my original emails **
** Stmt 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 <camp be ll.mv@gmail.co m>
Date: October 5, 2017 at 4:10:37 PM PDT
To: ------------------------
Subject: RPV Council Race -Keep it accurate please!
Reply-To: campbel l.rp v@gma il.com
Hi, just a reminder that you're receiving this email because you have expressed an interest in the RPV City
Council.
You may un su bscr i be if you no longer wish to receive our emails .
ID
C-4
Accuracy in Campaign Messages
I've received a copy of a n ema il today from a Mr. Michael Huang that he sent
yest erda y to his undisclosed list. In it he made a number of false and
misleading claims about some of the candidates runn ing for the Ra ncho Pa lo s
Verdes City Cou ncil.
I'm disappointed in this ap pro ach . It s patently unfair to a ll of the cand idat es to
engage in this typ e of activity.
T he va st majority of the community in my opinion prefers that campaign
operatives refrain from smearing any of these six ind iv idua ls who have the
courage to run for local office. While they shou ld a ll be vigorou s ly vetted on the
iss ue s during the campaign, they a ll deserve our respect and honest dialog.
T here are plenty of worthy topics and positions to open ly debate and d iscuss in
this council race . I think the community prefers that we focus on those.
As the current mayor of RP V, I think its impo rtant that w e a ll do our part to set
an example to help ensure a campaign season that at the e nd of the day we
a re proud of.
Thanks for reading,
Br ian Campbe ll
Ma yor -Rancho Pa los Verd es
Campbell.rpv@gmail .com
C-5
From: RPV Mayor Bria n Carnpb e I <ca mpbell.rpv@g ma il.com >
Date: OctOber 5, 2017 at 4:10:37 PM .PDT To: ____ _
Subject: RPV Council Race -Keep it accurate please!
Reply-To: ca rn p bell.rpy@g ma jl.com
Hi, just a reminder that you 're "ece 1v1ny thi s email be cau se y ou have ex pressed an interes t In th e RPV
Cit y Counc il.
You may un subsc rib e if you no longer wish to receive our e mail s.
I] Li ke I
Accuracy in Campaign Messages
I'm disappointed in this approach . Its patently unfair to all of the candidates to
engage in this type of activity .
The va st majority of the community in my opinion prefers tha a
r. t iv efra in fro e rln of these six individu als who have the
courage o run for local office . Whil e they shou ld all be vigorou s ly 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 cur rent m ayor of RPV, think its important that we a ll 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-6
Brian Cam pb ell
Mayo1 Ranc ho Pa los Verdes
Campbe ll.rpy@gma il com
City Co unc ilman, Ranch o Pa lo s Ve rd es , Ranc h o Palos Verd es , CA 90275
Sa feUn sub scrjbP"' 3
Forward thi s email I .!.m.dat.e.J=>J:Qfij_e_ I 8.bJllil:..Jlur se rvic e prov id er
Se nt by ca mpb ell.roy@ qm ail .com in coll aboi-atio n wiU1
Constant Contact ·,,,;"'•
Try it free today
C-7
"}.'
t '!' ;'j.
,; :~ \~ ~ ,•
L~ -~ ~p 'I'
~.\ !' :, L
t t ~! t ,;
li· ;,~ " ?:' r t> ...
f: V• :M ~~J l ; ,,,
:1, m r,, 1· '.i i' ?!> •ii I !r ~ '~· (\ t if.
ti. ~ ?~ 0 ~ " 'l• '·
,,, ,.>
~. ~ •i '\> " t ~ •
o· :}.' r: ~· : i.~
L ~ ;.; t_ ... 1•
P. ,, ~J .. .. !, ;'l ,. ..
:Jl
,, "'' i ~· ~: d H I
•/{ t (. f· '· !i' .;
~· f. 'I •' "
,,
r't1
,,, 1 1
,. '
,.
1:
Ii f,, (\I •IJ 1c ·j ~ ... "
., :·
)-~ ~-:
,,, ·f •'
~ '-' ' "" ~ " l I ., '· ' ~· .k " "' ! :Y. ~·'' \ ~ ~ :H. " ;';.! ,. 9 '
•1
• I f, ~(. ~' ,• ~! -. 0 ;• '1 " l:J i '"
,, ' L
,, ,, /' " ~ ' ' .. ~~ d •1'.
.N~ ·~ (.) ~= ., ~; ' ~ 1 ii ~ . !1 f". 'f 'll l> !l' '1 " 1,1
•I ~ v~ ~: if• " ~~. (" t " u ;/ ! '-' ·-~ c• (',' (: 'l' :-.\ "' ~ ,,
() ! ;~
1\. !i ; ~ '.l.
<".J f 'I \.
8 c t. \!'
(t •l! s v ~. .~ f ;.; (! •V :~ t J
,. r:. ~ ~
,, !
-L
M' ~ . Ci ! ;,, u " ~' nl ,,
OJ '.'!' •' ~· "' IV c:: Cl > )>' ~fl r ,,, 11' '.~ '"
•I) m
:l ~ ..
,.,, I ("'_,
t:: L 1: c :<) I~ ;,:_, i. : .. \!I
0 r; "·' <I• '" f o '\\
\ ~
Q) u >'(' <{' •I E > " ~ ~~~ ~· \.? ~· \
,
~: i; f ~ ~· if,
.f" ... ill ~· •I• 6 ~ 1:· ·. F~ '" ~· f
c: ~i~ (! 1: ·~ ~:; .. ~' l,i
u d> .. " IV t/1 "' f~ "'
> I. i!
,.
*
~l' f ... ~~ ,, ·' :.: :~ •Q
V'.I a. ~l> t' ~ !:: ~~~ " <.
ex: t<) <) r ,,
0 ' ,. " l\
c..
J
" fl
·I • ,.,
r ~.{
')
,\' ;1 . .( " .,
G " r •j,.' ,.'!' c !'
1' t.'
"·"' fiJ
. ~,
r •~I '.r ~l
,.,,
'· •'• ·•", [" ~~; ·~
~ ).. r: ,'J !! U! 'Y ~ '· t J
~ ~~ : .. ~ ; ... >ii v ·~ r •. ' ~; .j •I.I ~ ,, )j i t,I -~1 .. '• t1 t ;µ .. ,. ·~
r \ & il :. ,,, >'t I () (' " -1: •! r''; 1;.
t. 9· J
"
,, :.: ,,,
') " ..
C-8
r....e rec{:'Jved a copy o1 an ematt too.iv from a Mr fA:hilt?l HYang th.it he
s ' y ·1 ,tcby to i11'l u ~lowd t '!lt 1t1 11,i rr1t dt! a t'lllrl'lbcn '-'' f;• 1t1l(l
mistea<ing ciaITT'ts about some ot the caod1da es n.lflrut'\9 for the Ra.l)(;ho
P s Verd s City Council
I'm ~ointed #\ th4s <l(>proach Its r»t ntly .. inft!Ji to. of the
candid to ~ 1n thus tyl)t' of KtMty.
The vast mafC'Kity o4 the cornmumty 1n my opwYOn prefers H t carnpaign
OIP4W. #'ff r•ft .wi from , 1ng .-iv of l1'w!Mt s.lx lfldi~ who ~..,., the
to run tor kM::al office . Wh'e lhev shOu d a.11 be vigoro.r.;ly vett~
on •'llSU during the c m 1gri, they cM-se<W QI.if rt$1)t'Ct and
honestdl.tlog
"'-'• •• ptenly ol ~ topic~ and positions to ~11ty ~ba.~ an(!
disc:u in ltvs council race . r thinl. the community prefers tM • tocu11
on thaw
Its the current rn.t;'Ot of RPV, l thint( ih l'l'l'lp()f'lant !!'\at ~" ti do ou1 part to
set an •u~ to help ensuttto a ca<"t'\Pai:}fl se1tson 1tiat at the ~d cJf t~
d.ry wt am tir-OW of
~ure
8t nCamptiell
MlyQI . Ral"IChO Patoi> Verd~
Cornp~.r po;@gmail .com
0 .. '.
-w
C-9
Ots.eussion
MCf'TIDers
Events
V'Ceos
Pootos
Yu Tang
1
... ~s· "·ear ! .anena the =l::i>.. ~r::~;~ctt trl€e!1r.q ''"" r-ega~ITT-g ~ne snor. ~en-r
reri:a1 =1om the !i1e~i:>c !";dv€' :wo str(,ng '.:>e1,n~s.
• 7 "ere ;s a 111 as1e~ ::i-eiwi-a ms 1n '~;iardrflg :~e l"l'.Jusa rv,:s of le tte-s ser·~ ·o
me i:1 ~,· m a ver1 snort :i-e r:OV '.)ftime . anc: for ~eta. J !".ou sts ( 8Ci"~ cf !.~'.>Se
i-et ers ... ere complamec 2 1''iJJSi:OS 1
".'.il"rC :s :ne mas \ef'/
.'Irr. '1l<: ot;: cuunc:I do S.iJ;r>-..:: ~ue r:i11ig.::nce-.:
2 -r:e m'3',·01 and '.h.,: cv;.inc.i:s wr.u vote Yes: :o :-ar. tr.e sr.or' !Cir· ren·~i
;:-·;t<r.t '1(.: !mo-... any1nmg ablx~ :r-~ Alrbno anc tT>af": o'.f\eG rnanager-;o!'l'.
;:•.a"<)iir nev€r ex;;err.o <ICeC arJ\' ·Jf this ne;<. w~v r::' n<:-1.J Sl:','tl!r<e st\are
-10'<• 00 lhev vc!E: somett\<riq ;~>;€'\-· ac n ot Kno·A?
""'h.:; a:<ach ed .:opv o' ;,"le c;urre n~ rnavc r·s le:tEr :c-nfi!'l1"€1J my dout\5 s.::i :•1'.•
:l'l e ::irr•<HE' house er ... nE>rs •o-; ;:; PY tost the;r n g rit
t ~~""'er'~~ U. ~ t~..A"r. W.a·,"()(° Bt~ ~ ~C"Q OU!
""""'~ ~ ..... ,..,.... .. ;,,, !S k<'C)'.-"l lo (!!''¥(' ll'C>.i!'O ""' ·~lvJ<>d
!o fo"rl ~host-d us~~ 'Shor-: :crrn ~s
""'"' ~ anan·~ ~
-=~~·~r~~~
,..., tee"""°~~ e' '¥'-...._, 1<><13y ,..,..., .. M< ~ ~ thM""
"""' ~te<O..,. ~ --rd~ lt'S! "'~ ... """"" • ..,,,._ <;! fai'>(l ll!'d
~i:"'"<) .... ,~ ~~ ~tei r.'1' tf'IV c~te.: !'L .. ..,\~ •<Y the 9.ancho
?~to; V~t"'J~ ::1~"v C~=<·(
r~ rt•s..?'POC~ on. t ":irs ~o.K.,. ~ s Co:)!~~-,. -.,..rt1-,..,, ~'C-.#!! :-' ~
·_.)fl(j:;d.at...,.-s.:0~~1~l';V«OfXtn,.;fT'
"r!-te-·1Mt ~~~-4 c,t t..~C'Or"'-~"I I"\ m., ~ ~'!:<-.:,. :~ ·-:.at'r~
O~(a':fve-i re!ra...-i ~~ '>-~«"19 ant Ott~~'¥" ~~ ~ ha'-~~ t?".e
<"Oot"aQ!i :o ~~ f~"o'! l:!::C~ o.,£.fc !f'~~ ttw:-; ~ ~ t:w> "'""9~~ ~::eo
cm ttw 1s:1.L-e5 du'-.1'-iJ ~ .. lit' t:~~. Thoe-; ..-l de'w ... i.. ... O;.Jt ~t ~
•-.,::.;1("'•.to.~
r~ {'S;fJ Oie~t ~ ~""'; tciu-cs and pc.siliOr'::S. !o ~ ~~ ~
~..Cll~ ~ th-1. CG.l':'I<:~ ~ : t'Wd.; !hp \.~.At:.'° t_Yl"~r.'S !.."91 \"<IC 1-tX.V'O
~~ ,
A-s the r,i; .. rnrr, ~,-::-.1 ":'#' R';r··.: ~.,1i, ·3 l"'f'!-OO't~ ~~~ 'W'IF a; co our~, :o
<.~ ~ e~.a~ ~::i ~*'-~su~ .4 ::A'UT\Oa.gr: SE>-3-'-'.-. t~ ~!~-end of tn~
d..1'1 ,..,..,.. ~e O"Q1j ,-,t
"'tta."':¥..\ •c.! ~~~.i;
!.~.Z!:tl.!ff>
Sr-.V'C-~
•.l<>y<Y '· ?;;."'"""' ?1¢.X ""'?<>:>
:'M't1'··b0» 1~~.» cc;r-,
0
·-s· ~:
:: . •·. _ .. •."':,,.,.
/
-.:)f_d. ---;:.,-::.~£J.:.,.~~ -::~ !~1E< :!a ··;· ..... ;:.·c~·.s
:'.'i.:.:">:n:.:_r·:: (':-"~~1...",-"'
S 'i:)...:OS ~,,3 t..-o: ~ >:'6'S~t:h a r.
'9 \'~r to -s h a r-? ~~ trie-nds .
?a oi ir! a nc lsamma ~e7i
•
; ~~ .. ·; ... ,;\
'af' PFu1fC f.r<"rr:. .\n:: .i11;~~ .1r~r1
\fi!fJ pv;uC
,, T·;:.rrt'l1v:..€-C'J.a1fy :: ·)~l •
j.-::)l!~.--~,:C:"').:j C(:.;;--.o:> ;,'.! : .. <." if'"?P:!-("'.'•
1103&?
r.:-7 .;. R ..
..:.. ~l-~
... J·)~fi
• ~•0t n
C-10
ATTACHMENT D D-1
RANCHO PALOS VERDES CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: 02/06/2018
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 Manager03
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 D-2
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 D-3
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).
8. 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 D-4
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 I), Ms.
Berkowitz renewed her request. Evidently, litigation has now been commenced.
01203.0030/444060.2
4 D-5
11. 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 D-6
8. 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 D-7
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 llA 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 D-8
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 D-9
Ill. 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 D-10
ATTACHMENT E E-1
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Emily Colborn <e colborn@rpvca .g ov >
Tuesday, October 23, 2018 11:19 AM
Brian Campbell (Gmail)
Teresa Takaoka
RE : PRA Request, Brian Campbell
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flagged Flag Status:
Hello Mr. Campbell,
I am following up on the email below that I sent to you on 10/15/18. I did not receive a response from you and wanted
to reach out to you once again.
We have received a public records request for any correspondence relating to city business using any private accounts
during 2015. Please kindly respond to me by the end of the day today w ith a response whether you do or do not have
any responsive documents. At this time, I would only need a response . If you have documents I can ask for an extension
to give you time to retrieve documents.
Thank you,
Emily Colborn, MMC, City Clerk
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
3 0 940 Hawthorne Blvd.
Rancho Palos V erdes, CA 90275
(310 ) 544-5208
Please consider the env ironment before printing t his e-mail.
From: Emily Colborn
Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 1:11 PM
To: Brian Campbell (Gmail) <campbell.rpv@gma il.com >
Cc: Teresa Takaoka <TeriT@rpvca.gov >
Subject: PRA Request, Brian Campbell
Hello Mr. Campbell,
Our office received the request below from Ms. Tracy Burns for any correspondence relating to city business using any
private accounts during 2015 . Please see the request below for full details.
Please kindly respond to me no later than Monday, October 22, 2018 with a response whether you do or do not have
any responsive documents.
:Iii Emily Colborn, MMC, City Clerk
City of Rancho Palos Verdes
3 0 940 Hawt horn e Blvd.
Ran cho Pa l os Ve rd es , CA 90275
(310 ) 544 -5208
Please co nsider the environment before printing thi s e-mail.
E-2
From: Tracy Burns <akamomma@grnail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 04, 2018 11:00 AM
To: Emily Colborn <ecolborn@rpvca.gov>; Teresa Takaoka <TeriT@rpvca.gov>
Cc: CC <CC@rpvca.gov>; Ara Mihranian <AraM@rpvca.gov>
Subject: RPV -PRA Request, Brian Campbell
Official Public Records Request
Please provide any and all emails relating to city business B1ian Campbell received or sent using any and all
private email accounts from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015. After perusing the previous PRA
documentation provided by Mr. Campbell, there seems to be some discrepancies that need clarification.
The California Supreme Court (City of San Jose v. Superior Court) decided that City-related emails on public
officials' private email accounts were public records and discoverable.
Sincerely,
Tracy Burns
2
E-3
ATTACHMENT F F-1
CITY OF
Via Electronic Mail
October 29, 2018
Ms. Tracy Burns
akamomma@gmail.com
l~CHO r:JALOS VERDES
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
Re: Public Records Act request received via email on October 4, 2018, for City related emails
from Brian Campbell's private email accounts for the year 2015
Dear Ms. Burns:
This letter is in response to your request for public records to the City of Rancho Palos Verdes
("City"), received via email on October 4, 2018, pursuant to the California Public Records Act
(Government Code § 6250, et seq., hereinafter "PRA"), as discussed herein.
Your PRA request seeks documents with the following information:
"Please provide any and all emails relating to city business Brian Campbell received or se~t
using any and all private email accounts from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015. After
perusing the previous PRA documentation provided by Mr. Campbell, there seems to be some
discrepancies that need clarification. The California Supreme Court (City of San Jose v. Superior
Court) decided that City-related emails on public officials' private email accounts were public
records and discoverable."
On October 15, 2018, pursuant to Government Code section 6253(c), the City requested a fourteen
(14) day extension due to the need to search through, collect, and appropriately examine the
records sought by your request. This letter serves as a follow up to the City's October 15, 2018,
response to your request.
CITY RESPONSE
The City has reached out to Mr. Campbell twice with your request for records and to date he
has not responded. You may want to consult with legal counsel as to the remedies (if any) you
may have with respect to Mr. Campbell's non-compliance. You may be aware that Mr.
Campbell has engaged in a pattern and practice of failing or refusing to comply with his
obligation to comply with the Public Records Act. Our office will also consult with the City
Attorney's office to consider possible action(s) to compel Mr. Campbell to comply with his
F-2
Ms. Tracy Burns
October 29, 2018
Page 2
obligations under that law. If and when a determination on "next steps" is reached we will
notify you of any actions. In the event documents are collected and examined, and a
determination on their disclosure is made prior to that time, we will provide you with that
determination sooner.
Should you have any questions, I can be contacted at (310) 544-5217.
Sincerely,
Emily Colborn
City Clerk
F-3
ATTACHMENT G G-1
Domai n Name: RPVCRG.ORG
R eg i st ry D oma in ID: D 4022 000000 06366 1 27-L R OR
R eg i str ar 1.i\f H OIS Serve r: w h oi s.godaddy.com
R eg i stra r URL htt p :/!wwwg o daddy com
U p d at e d D at e: 20 18-06-04T1 7:46 :1 4Z
Cr eati o n D at e : 20 18-06-0 4T1 7:46:12Z
R eg i stry· Expiry D at e 2 01 9-06-04T1 7 :46 12Z
R eg i st rar R eg is tr ati o n Exp irati on Da t e:
Reg i str a r Go D a ddy.com , LLC
R eg i str ar IAN .A. ID : 146
R eg i str ar Ab u se Co nt a ct E ma il : a bu se@gocladdy.com
R eg i stra r Abuse C ont act Ph o n e: +1.4 80 62.425·05
R ese ll er:
D omain Statu s : cli entD e l et e Prot1i b it ed htt ps :l/i ca nn .or g.i'ep.p#cli entD e l et e Pro hi ll itecl
D omain St atu s : cti e ntRe n ewProhi bit ed https ://i ca nn .o rg/epp#cti e ntRen ewPro hi ll it ed
D oma in St atu s : cli e ntTr an s f erP ro hi bited https ://ica nn .o rg.l epp#cli entTra nsf erPro hi b it ed
D oma in Statu s : cli entU pd ate Pro h i b ited https ://i ca nn o rgJepp#cli e ntUpd at ePro hi bit ecl
Domain Statu s : serve rTr a n sf e rPr o hi bite d htt ps:l /i ca nn .o rgJ'epp#sel';'erTr a nsf erP ro hi llited
D omain St atu s: addPe ri od https ://i ca nn .org/epp#ad>d Pe ri o cl
Registrant Organization: BC Urban u::c
R eg i stra nt Stat e/Prov in ce : Ca l if orni a
R eg i str a nt Co untry: U S
N ame Serve r: N S49 .D OMAIN CO NTRO L .CO M
N ame Server : N S50 .D OMA IN CO NTROL .COM
DN SSEC: un s i g ned
URL of th e tCANN W h oi s In accura cy Compl aint Form : t1tt ps :lb,i\J,/lflfll'.i ca nn .org .1~1vi cf.I
>>>L as t upd ate of W H OIS da t abase: 2 01 8-06-0t3T0 1 S 4:22Z
G-2
ATTACHMENTH H-1
BRIAN CAMPBELL
COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE BROKERAGE I ADVISORY
SUMMARY
BC Urban
COMMERC IAL RE/IL ESTATE LLC
BROKERAGE I ADVISORY
B.CAMPBELL@BCURBAN.COM
OFFICE 424 237 2582
CELL 310 544 7400
Mr. Campbell has over 30 years of experience in commercia l real estate negotiating comp lex
leasing and sa le transactions with both public and private organizations around the w orld.
His exper ience negotiating industrial and office lease transactions of all sizes includes managing
the leas in g of a six million square foot industrial portfolio, another six million square foot port-
fo li o of in dustria l and mixed use properties on the West Coast, and many industrial and office
leases for both Tenants and Landlords across the nation.
Current leasing assignments for cli ents in clude a 27,000 sq uare foot industrial lease for a long-
t ime indu stria l cli ent in the specia lty adhesives industry in Carson, CA, over 100,000 square feet
of office space for Blue Shie ld of CA, and the leasing and management of over 250,000 square
feet of retail, office and restaurant space at the Redondo Beach Fisherman 's Wharf, Pier Plaza,
International Boardwa lk and the Redondo Beach Marina.
Litigation ass ignments over the past three years have included multiple industrial and re lated
leasing /sa le disputes for Sears Roebuck, Masco/BrassCraft and AAA Auto Club.
Mr. Campbell has studied and completed many courses pertaining to real estate and business
practices from organizations such as CCIM, JPIA, Kosmont Associates, and other regularly attend
industry seminars.
EXPERIENCE
BC Urban LLC, Managing Partner Sep 20 06 -present
Commercial real estate li sting; brokerage and facility advisory services for both Landlords
and Tenants.
Stud ley, Sen ior Managing Director
Internationa l Real Estate Advisory firm.
Jun 2003 -May 2007
H-2
ATTACHMENT I I-1
!\c:
·11 u s·1 rh BAr~
< H' CAI ,J F< >Ji NIA
Rcsp4. i m.l'-'nt
C<t~c N,umbcr:
DaviJ J, Alc*'h1i·e
IK 0 16022
'fhe cmni)fair•l tlgnin:d :;Homey l)iwid /\lc~birc has been reviewed and forwa""d. ffi,l'tJ Enforll~n;l;lfft
Unit f{1r rurchc•· investisation and prosecu!i.on, ifwarranlcd. .
All documents that. you send to the State Bat. whe1her (!Opiesor ori&inals •. ,~~Qme
nnd arc: subject to de§lruc:tion. lf y·ou have any questions re.1ard!n1 !~i$11tl.1t.tcr, o
change «lf address or telephone number, please callln'\·estig,t•r·"' · XXX Ii.
Thank you fbrbringh:r
I
I-2