The drama began when the current assistant city manager/interim financial officer unilaterally decided to terminate the contract with the city’s outside auditors. This decision, taken without consulting either the audit committee or the city council, immediately raised red flags. Why? Because he had neither the authority nor the justification to terminate a contract meant to scrutinize his own department’s work. He dismissed the independent firm hired to audit his performance and report directly back to the city council.
The plot thickened as he single-handedly controlled every aspect of the Request for Proposal (RFP) process for hiring a new auditor. From drafting and posting the RFP to responding to potential bidders, he kept a tight grip on the process.
When one firm inquired whether the current auditors were invited to bid, his response was a definitive “No.” However, during the Aug. 13 city council meeting, he stated that they were informed of the public RFP process when questioned about the termination—a bit ambiguous and disingenuous.
Further confusion arose when another bidder asked why the city was considering a change in auditors. The ACM/CFO cited concerns about the quality of the previous firm’s work. Yet, in statements to both the audit committee and in written communication to a resident, he blamed the change on the firm’s inability to meet a Dec. 31, 2024 deadline—without any documented concerns about their quality of services. So, which of his statements holds water?
The inconsistencies continued when asked if the auditors identified any noncompliance, significant deficiencies, or material weaknesses in the fiscal year 2022-23 audit. His initial response was a flat “No,” but he later admitted this was incorrect when evidence from the prior year’s audit surfaced. Why, then, was such a misleading statement made to bidders?
During the July 2 Audit Committee meeting, the ACM/CFO updated the audit committee on the RFP process. Residents attending the meeting expressed loud and clear their dissatisfaction with the termination of the existing auditors and the opaque process being followed. Asked how the contract was terminated, the ACM/CFO stated it was done verbally; there was no written communication. Yet at the Aug. 13 City Council meeting, he stated, “I did communicate with Eide Bailly, the partner involved. I did verbally communicate to them through a meeting, and I also followed up with an email…and also let him know that we would be issuing an RFP, which was a public RFP, and anyone could propose on that RFP.” Again, inconsistent responses to the same question.
Unilateral actions, opaque decisions and conflicting statements made by the ACM/CFO cast a shadow over the integrity of the city’s financial oversight and raise serious concerns. Accountability and transparency are required of those entrusted with leadership. If those managing the city’s finances can so easily evade established protocols and scrutiny, what does that say about the state of the city’s governance?
Robin K. Hall, Laguna Beach
Robin Hall’s letter raises serious and valid concerns about the unilateral actions and inconsistent statements by the assistant city manager/interim financial officer. The troubling discrepancies she highlights are not just isolated incidents; they are symptomatic of a deeper issue within our city’s governance. When key decisions, especially those as critical as terminating an audit contract and managing the RFP process, are made without transparency or proper oversight, it undermines the integrity of our entire municipal system.
This isn’t just about one person or one department—this is a reflection of how governance is being handled across the board in Laguna Beach. If the city can’t manage its finances with the transparency and accountability that residents deserve, what other areas are being mismanaged? From large capital projects to everyday city operations, these governance issues could have far-reaching implications for our community’s future.
With the November election approaching, we have an opportunity to elect candidates who are not afraid to challenge the status quo and demand better for our city. We need leaders who won’t simply go along to get along, but who will stand up for transparency, accountability, and the long-term well-being of Laguna Beach. It’s time for our city leaders to address these concerns head-on and restore public trust through actions that reflect true stewardship of our community’s resources.
I have tremendous hope in our new City Manager, Dave Kiff, and in the council members who helped bring him to Laguna Beach. His commitment to addressing the weaknesses in our city’s governance and improving the effectiveness of our staff is exactly what we need at this critical time. Dave has already shown that he’s willing to tackle the tough issues head-on, and I believe he can help steer our city in the right direction.
I encourage everyone to vote for candidates who align with our City Manager’s vision for improving governance culture. We need leaders who will support his efforts to enhance transparency, accountability, and the overall effectiveness of our city’s operations. Let’s work together to ensure that Laguna Beach is managed with the integrity and dedication it deserves.
Sue the City Manager? He’s apparently violated his contract. Throw him out.
Thank you Robin Hall for sharing your observations and concerns about the internal governing and oversight of our City finances.
Your comment should be a wake up call to all LB stakeholders: “Unilateral actions, opaque decisions and conflicting statements made by the ACM/CFO cast a shadow over the integrity of the city’s financial oversight and raise serious concerns. Accountability and transparency are required of those entrusted with leadership. If those managing the city’s finances can so easily evade established protocols and scrutiny, what does that say about the state of the city’s governance?”
The uncovering of our CFO/ACM’s unapproved solo actions should be dealt with by City Manager Kiff. Seems like it warrants a deep-dive employee performance evaluation and review of how this took place without CM Kiff’s knowledge.
Thanks to residents for paying attention and not being afraid to expose government finance transparency related issues and concerns. Hate to think about what else may have happened internally in this same manner that we don’t know about. The City of Laguna Beach should not be operating this way. Our taxpayer dollars are at stake here folks.