LBReport.com

News / Detailed Coverage

See/Read Extended Salient Portions Of Correspondence Documenting Escalating City Hall Displeasure And Actions Seeking Greater Control Over Information About Queen Mary And Its Maintenance Issues; In November, QM Inspector's Lawyer Informed Mayor/Council About Management's Stance; LB's Electeds Voiced No Public Objections; In December, Inspector's Contract Terminated

Action occurs as City blocks Public Records Act release of his June inspection report and perhaps others


If LBREPORT.com didn't tell you,
who would?
No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to development interests, advocacy groups or other special interests; or is seeking or receiving benefits of City development-related decisions; or holds a City Hall appointive position; or has contributed sums to political campaigns for Long Beach incumbents or challengers. LBREPORT.com isn't part of an out of town corporate cluster and no one its ownership, editorial or publishing decisionmaking has been part of the governing board of any City government body or other entity on whose policies we report.

LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. Support independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.
(January 1, 2020, 1:20 p.m.) -- Correspondence released (in part responding to a request by LBREPORT.com) shows that in late October 2019, senior city management informed Ed Pribonic, the independent professional engineer contracted by the City since 1996 to perform monthly inspections of the Queen Mary, that management believes his statements to media outlets about the ship's condition along with his monthly inspection reports obtained by media outlets violated confidentiality provisions of his contract.

The correspondence shows efforts by city management to exercise greater control over information about the ship's condition, a LB taxpayer-owned asset leased for operation to a private entity to which the City Council also gave leasehold rights to develop land adjacent to the ship.

In late October, city management informed QM inspctor Edward Pribonic, PE that in the future, it "would expect you to obtain approval from the City prior to sharing information obtained during the course of your duties."

In mid-November, a lawyer retained by QM inspector Pribonic informed LB's Mayor and all Councilmembers by letter of management's stance. The attorney's letters denied management's contentions that Mr. Pribonic had violated the contract and the attorney sought retraction of those statements.

Although LB's Mayor and Council had been made aware by mid-November of city management's efforts to exercise greater control over information about the Queen Mary and its maintenance, LB's electeds didn't publicly object. In late December, the City Attorney's office informed QM inspector Pribonic that his contract was terminated.

Mr. Pribonic's descriptions of the ship's condition were similar to concerns independently raised by a non-profit group "QMI Restore the Queen." The group had routinely obtained from city staff copies of Mr. Pribonic's monthly inspection reports following their review by city staff...but in mid-2019, that abruptly stopped. In November, the City declined to release Mr. Pribonic's June report under the CA Public Records Act, contending the public interest in withholding its release "clearly outweighs" the public interest in its disclosure (LBREPORT.com coverage here.).

[Scroll down for further.]








On October 1, Economic Development Director John Keisler, informed that the City's lessee, Urban Commons LLC, that it was "falling behind" in its lease obligations to the City regarding certain maintenance issues, sought a response from the lessee and noted that absent a timely response the City could declare the lessee in "default." Some media outlets prominently headlined the word "default" (notinig that previous QM lessees had lost their leases over financial issues (but less prominently reported thereafter that the City's current lessee Urban Commons responded to management's Oct. 1 letter and no default was declared.

A few days after appearance of the "default"-headlined stories, media accounts surfaced of Mr. Pribonic's most recent monthly inspection reports along with comments by him critical of certain ship maintenance matters and voicing concerns over the extent of maintenance required.

Sponsor

Sponsor

On Oct. 23, Mr., Keisler sent QM inspector Pribonic a letter stating that the City believes his statements to third parties had violated provisions of his 1996 contract regarding confidentiality of information and privileged communications, that he had "provided privileged and confidential information obtained during the course of your contracted work with the City and shared information without prior approval of the City, both activities in violation of the following terms of the Agreement:

  • Section 9. Ownership of Data, clearly states that all materials, information and data prepared, developed, or assembled by consultant, including reports and summaries, shall be the exclusive property of City. It further states consultant warrants that this information shall not be made available to any person or entity without prior approval of City and that said warranty shall survive termination of the Agreement for five (5) years.

  • Section 11. Confidentiality, additionally requires that consultant keep information and data confidential and that consultant shall not disclose the information during the term of the Agreement, or during that same five (5) year post-termination period. Additionally, Section 11 states that the consultant shall keep confidential all information, whether written , oral or visual, obtained by any means whatsoever in the course of your work under the Agreement and will not disclose information to any third party.

Mr. Keisler's letter also alleged that Mr. Pribonic had made comments re QM matters outside of his contracted engineering scope of work. "We have always treated the inspection process with a great deal of attention, sensitivity, and respect," Mr. Keisler wrote and continued:

Over the past several years in conjunction with the new operating lease, the City began routing monthly reports to responsible parties, made final reports publicly available, and scheduled monthly meetings to review and address report recommendations. These inspection reports commissioned by the City have helped identify priorities, invoked outside review, and provided valuable information for managing and preserving the historic Ship.

The healthy working relationship we have established over the last few years depends on an honest, transparent, and collaborative effort. Your recent actions in violation of Sections 9 and 11 of the Agreement, have created a level of tension and distrust between parties -- City, operator, and maintenance staff on the Ship.

In an effort to continue our work together under the terms of the Agreement, the City expects that you will (a) provide a written response to these issues and (b) refrain from further violations of the Agreement. In the event that you wish to speak publicly about your work under the Agreement, we would expect you to obtain approval from the City prior to sharing information obtained during the course of your duties.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. I am happy to meet with you in person to discuss these issues.

Sponsor

Sponsor

On November 1, Mr. Pribonic conducted another QM inspection. Three days later on November 4, city management sent the Mayor and City Council a non-agendized memo (linked here) that indicated it had retained a separate engineering firm, Moffat and Nichol (which has done previous work for City Hall) to conduct a "peer review" of Mr. Pribonic's inspection reports and offer possible changes to QM inspection procedures.

[Nov. 4 management meno text] Preserving a historic asset like the Queen Mary requires an elevated level of due-diligence and technical expertise. Although the City currently employs an independent third-party engineer [Mr. Pribonic] to conduct monthly inspections of the Ship, there are specific issues identified in the monthly inspection reports that require a deeper dive. To conduct this investigation, the City has executed a scope of work with an experienced local engineering firm with the capacity and expertise to conduct a peer review of critical issues identified in monthly inspection reports. It is anticipated that this peer review will be completed in November 2019.

Sponsor


On November 8 and November 12, attorney Philip Kaufler retained by Mr. Pribonic sent letters to city management -- explicitly co-addressed (not merely cc'd) to LB Mayor Garcia and all of LB's then-eight Council incumbents (1st dist. vacant) -- that effectively alerted the electeds of city managemenht's contentions and Mr. Pribonic's response to them.. Attorney Kaufler's letters stated in pertinent part:




On November 13, Mr. Keisler sent Mr. Pribonic a second letter; it reiterated management's position and added that Mr. Pribonic's Nov. 1 inspection ran counter to an Oct. 25 email directing him not to perform further work until he had addressed the issues raised by management.

The October 23, 2019, letter identified activities you engaged in that were in violation of your service agreement with the City of Long Beach for inspection of the Queen Mary. Please refer to that letter (Attached) for detail regarding these violations.

In an effort to work through these violations, I requested that you provide written response to the issues identified. Furthermore, the email dated October 25, 2019, communicated that you should address these issues before proceeding with any additional work for the City related to the Queen Mary. [emphasis in original]

In violation of this direction, you conducted an on-ship inspection on November 1, 2019, including areas not open to the general public. You also prepared and submitted an October monthly inspection report dated November 9, 2019.

It continues to be our expectation that you (a) provide a written response to the violations noted in the October 23, 2019 letter before proceeding with any additional work related to the Queen Mary and (b) refrain from further violations of the agreement, particularly those related to Section 9 and Section 11.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me directly. I am happy to meet with you in person to discuss these issues.

Sponsor

Sponsor

At or about roughly the same time in November, the City's Public Records office (which operates under city management) informed the independent non-profit group that the City would not release Mr. Pribonic's June inspection report, citing a section of the Public Records Act that allows (but doesn't require) a government agency to withhold preliminary drafts, notes, or interagency or intra-agency memoranda "if the public interest in withholding those records clearly outweighs the public interest in disclosure." LBREPORT.com coverage here. Also in or about December, the non-profit group received a "cease and desist" letter from an attorney retained by the city on intellectual property matters asserting trademark grounds to halt the Queen Mary-protective non-profit group's use the term "Queen Mary" in its fundraising materials.

On December 23, 2019, with no publicly audible objections by Mayor Garcia or any City Councilmembers to what was taking place, the LB City Attorney's office (by letter signed by Deputy City Attorney Rich Anthony) stated that the City would not retract management's previous statements and the City was terminating Mr. Pribonic's contract:



On December 31, 2019, city management psent the Mayor/Council a memo -- linked here -- describing initial work and recommendations by the management hired engineering firm retained in November to review Queen Mary inspections and offer improvements including measures to [management's memo text] "professionalize the process "

On December 31, the City also released an official statement (attributable to Economic Development Director John Keisler) about the contract termination letter regarding QM inspector Ed Pribonic:

While Urban Commons is responsible for maintenance and repair of the Queen Mary under its 66-year lease agreement with the City of Long Beach, the City retains the professional services of third-party engineers to provide monthly inspections of the Queen Mary. Recent inspection reports submitted by the City’s third-party inspector Mr. Ed Pribonic raised important questions about the condition of the Queen Mary that required additional investigation and clarification.

Although the City made multiple requests, Mr. Pribonic, through his legal counsel declined to provide the clarifying information. As a result, the City hired subject matter expert, Moffat & Nichol, to perform a peer review of the draft inspection reports in question, assess the current inspection process, and make recommendations to improve the oversight of the Queen Mary. The initial review from Moffat & Nichol revealed several specific recommendations to improve the inspection process. Moffat & Nichol will continue to assist the City with monthly inspections while the new inspection process, tracking and reporting systems are implemented. The City will continue to make the results of these ongoing reports available to the public as they are finalized.

Further context / background

Over a period spanning more than two decades, LB city management and various electeds had effectively allowed the City's previous lessees to let the Queen Mary's maintenance condition to decline while development of its adjacent land had stalled. LB Mayor Garcia (a policy-setting Councilman from 2009-2014 but without voting authority as Mayor) has sought to prioritize development of the adjoining land.

In Nov. 2015, the Council voted to authorize a new lease with Urban Commons, LLC, for the City-owned Queen Mary and adjacent shore side property...but it didn't happen. In August 2019, LBREPORT.com reported that nearly nine months fter the Council authorized it without seeing it, there was still no new lease with Urban Commons; city management acknowledged to us it was still being finalized.

In April 2016, Mayor Robert Garcia, alongside 2nd dist. Councilwoman Jeannine Pearce and Urban Commons principals Taylor Woods and Howard Wu, held a high visibility press event aboard the ship announcing that the firm planned to spend $15 million in the next two years on the ship's interior. Mayor Garcia heralded the event as the start of a "new golden era" for the ship.

On November 1, 2016, the Council voted 6-1 (Price dissenting, Gonzalez and Richardson in China) to authorize a new lease accompanied by $20+ million allocation of public money tapping Tidelands reserve-funds along with a new debt-bond to address what city manaement acknowledged were urgently needed repairs (a fraction of repairs city management said are ultimately needed; Urban Commons has disputed city management's cost estimate.) Shortly thereafter, Urban Commons released artist conceptions future development plans for the adjacent land, now dubbed "Queen Mary Island."

Since then, Mayor Garcia has acknowledged (with some audible irritation) that those development plans haven't progressed as rapidly as anticipated. Urban Commons also recently indicated it expects at least a two year delay in its previous timeline for development of Queen Mary Island.

Developing. Follow this story in continued detail on LBREPORT.com.. .


Jan. 2, 2:30 p.m. Details added on the chronology of the new lease with Urban Commons.
Support really independent news in Long Beach. No one in LBREPORT.com's ownership, reporting or editorial decision-making has ties to development interests, advocacy groups or other special interests; or is seeking or receiving benefits of City development-related decisions; or holds a City Hall appointive position; or has contributed sums to political campaigns for Long Beach incumbents or challengers. LBREPORT.com isn't part of an out of town corporate cluster and no one its ownership, editorial or publishing decisionmaking has been part of the governing board of any City government body or other entity on whose policies we report. LBREPORT.com is reader and advertiser supported. You can help keep really independent news in LB similar to the way people support NPR and PBS stations. We're not non-profit so it's not tax deductible but $49.95 (less than an annual dollar a week) helps keep us online.


blog comments powered by Disqus

Recommend LBREPORT.com to your Facebook friends:


Follow LBReport.com with:

Twitter

Facebook

RSS

Return To Front Page

Contact us: mail@LBReport.com



Adoptable pet of the week:



Carter Wood Floors
Hardwood Floor Specialists
Call (562) 422-2800 or (714) 836-7050


Copyright © 2020 LBReport.com, LLC. All rights reserved. Terms of Use/Legal policy, click here. Privacy Policy, click here