Politics & Government

City Leaders Seek to Prosecute Councilman for Allegedly Sharing Secrets with Legal Foes

The Los Alamitos City Council voted to refer Councilman Warren Kusumoto for prosecution in a move that his supporters see as political retaliation.

The Los Alamitos City Council voted Tuesday night to prosecute one of their own for allegedly divulging secrets about confidential city business in violation of state law.

In the latest salvo of accusations fired across the dais in the Los Alamitos City Council chambers, the council voted 3 to 1 to ask the Orange County district attorney or the California attorney general to investigate Councilman Warren Kusumoto for allegedly disclosing the details of closed session meetings about the ongoing trash lawsuit against the city in violation of the Brown Act.

The Brown Act is a law that essentially prohibits elected officials from making decisions about city business behind closed doors with the exception of discussions about confidential matters such as ongoing lawsuits against the city.  It’s illegal for elected officials to discuss those closed session meetings publicly in detail.

Find out what's happening in Los Alamitos-Seal Beachwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

Kusumoto said he has retained a lawyer and is looking forward to the investigation.

“I believe the scrutiny of an independent investigation will find me not to be in violation of the Brown Act,” said Kusumoto.

Find out what's happening in Los Alamitos-Seal Beachwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

In addition to clearing his name, Kusumoto said he would expect an independent investigator to look into all of the city affairs surrounding the controversial $24.5-million trash contract with Consolidated Disposal Services. The lawsuit against the city accuses the Kusumoto’s political foes on the council of corruption.

In 2010, two residents, including Kusumoto supporter Art DeBolt, sued the city, alleging the contract was not awarded to the lowest responsible bidder in violation of city policy. The suit further accused the council majority – Mayor Troy Edgar, Councilwoman Marilynn Poe and Councilman Kenneth Stephens – of corruption by awarding the contract to a campaign donor instead of the most qualified bidder. Last year, a judge threw out the corruption allegations but ruled that the council did violate city code by awarding the contract to Consolidated Disposal. Both the city and the plaintiffs are appealing the suit even as they negotiate a settlement.

According to City Attorney Sandra Levin, Kusumoto ran afoul of the Brown Act in December when he excused himself from closed session discussions of the lawsuit in a letter released to the local media.

“I have consistently been the minority viewpoint, so my vote is easily overcome by the Council majority,” Kusumoto wrote in the letter, which was addressed to the mayor and released to reporters by Kusumoto.

“The existence of a disagreement among the Council members in closed session is information a Council member can only acquire by being present in the closed session. That information is confidential,” concluded Levin in a report to the City Council. “Furthermore, in this case, Council member Kusumoto made his disclosure just as the City began sensitive settlement discussions. In the context of ongoing settlement negotiations, the existence of dissent on the Council could be perceived as a weakness that could be exploited by the City’s legal opponents, thus increasing the risk of harm to the City from the disclosure.”

Councilwoman Gerri Graham-Mejia scoffed at the notion that alluding to dissention on the council could be in any way revealing to legal opponents. Sharply divided, the council members and their supporters have frequently accused one another of corruption, dishonesty or hypocrisy during council meetings over the last year.

“My concern is that this is really an attempt to find cause to remove Mr. Kusumoto from office just because he doesn’t agree with the (council) majority,” said Graham-Mejia.

Graham-Mejia accused the council of applying a double standard by prosecuting Kusumoto while gently chastising previous council members who committed Brown Act violations.

“He is an honorable, moral man, and I think that to make this formal, it just looks like retaliation,” Graham-Mejia said. “I am just wondering why there is a double standard all the way around. It just seems very personal.”

However, Edgar, Stephens and Poe, who voted to refer the matter for prosecution, said it’s a matter of principle.

“You have to hold firm the line, or the line continues to move,” said Edgar. “We can’t uphold our duty as City Council to go into closed session if we can’t trust the people back in the room.”

Poe said she had no choice but to pursue the matter.

“When I found out what took place, I was absolutely shocked,” she said. “There has never been a time, any time, when I have seen any council member purposely violate the Brown Act…If we don’t take it a step further, then we are all guilty because we are not upholding the law.”

A handful of residents also spoke at the meeting, urging the council to refer the case for prosecution.

Describing Kusumoto as a double agent for the people suing the city, Lisette Gabler called for his resignation.

Once the matter is referred to the state and county agencies for prosecution, investigators may decide it warrants investigation and prosecution, or they could simply decline to take up the case.


Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

We’ve removed the ability to reply as we work to make improvements. Learn more here