2022.06.08 Fortis Law LLP PRAR - Production Letter 06.08.22-c1_REDACTED65462.00001\40140013.1
Bend OR
(541) 382-3011
Indian Wells
(760) 568-2611
Irvine
(949) 263-2600
Los Angeles
(213) 617-8100
Ontario
(909) 989-8584
300 South Grand Avenue, 25th Floor, Los Angeles, CA 90071
Phone: (213) 617-8100 | Fax: (213) 617-7480 | www.bbklaw.com
Riverside
(951) 686-1450
Sacramento
(916) 325-4000
San Diego
(619) 525-1300
Walnut Creek
(925) 977-3300
Washington, DC
(202) 785-0600
Christine N. Wood
(213) 542-3861
christine.wood@bbklaw.com
File No. 65462.00001
June 8, 2022
VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL
City of Cypress
c/o Fred Galante, City Attorney
5275 Orange Avenue
Cypress, CA 90630
fgalante@awattorneys.com
Re: Councilmember Frances Marquez - Public Records Act Request
Received on May 9, 2022 – Production Letter
Dear Mr. Galante:
Best Best & Krieger LLP represents Councilmember Frances Marquez (“Councilmember
Marquez”) as an individual. This letter is in response to the Adam Harris, Fortis Law, LLP request
for public records pursuant to the California Public Records Act (“PRA”)(Government Code §
6250, et seq.), and received by the City of Cypress (“City”) on May 9, 2022.
Records responsive to this request are attached to this correspondence. The PRA permits
local agencies to withhold records, in whole or in part, that are exempt from disclosure. (Gov.
Code § 6250, et seq.) Please be advised Councilmember Marquez is withholding certain records
from disclosure, in whole or in part, pursuant to the following exemptions:
privileged communications between Councilmember Marquez and her legal counsel
are exempt from disclosure pursuant to Evidence Code § 954 and incorporated into
then Public Records Act pursuant to Government Code § 6254(k);
attorney work product is exempt from disclosure pursuant to California Code of Civil
Procedure § 2018.030, which is incorporated into the PRA through Government Code
§ 6254(k);
the home address, telephone number, e-mail address, precinct number, or other number
specified by the Secretary of State for voter registration purposes, and prior registration
information shown on the voter registration card for all registered voters, are
65462.00001\40140013.1
City of Cypress
June 8, 2022
Page 2
confidential and shall not be disclosed to any person pursuant to Government Code §
6254.4(a);
constituents’ names were redacted when they had a personal complaint pursuant to
Government Code § 6255 and San Jose v. Superior Court (1999) 74 Cal.App.4th
1008; and
public disclosure of the redacted personal identifying information, such as personal
email addresses, would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.
Therefore, the public interest served in withholding the redacted information clearly
outweighs any public interest served in disclosure pursuant to Government Code §
6255.
Councilmember Marquez is under the impression the City will review the suggested
exemptions, assert the applicable exemption(s) when producing records to the requester, and cite
the city personnel responsible for the claim of said exemption(s).
With this production and the provisions within this letter, Councilmember Marquez has
completed a reasonable search for records. Please feel free to contact me directly should you have
any additional questions or concerns.
Sincerely,
Christine N. Wood
for BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP
CNW:cmb
cc: Frances Marquez, City of Cypress Councilmember
Still, heated disputes bubble beneath the surface. And sometimes they erupt.
In meetings, city officials openly bristle at newcomer Frances Marquez – who, they say, introduces agenda
items that are needlessly contentious, such as flying the LGBTQ Pride flag.
Three weeks ago, in an awkward outburst, Councilman Jon Peat angrily yelled at her about a subcommittee
committee from which she was excluded.
“I am tired of being scolded by you in public,” he said. “What gives you the right to sit here and criticize all of
us?”
At the podium, residents address the negative tenor of council meetings – noting the “bad optics” of the four-
member majority chiding the lone woman of color.
“I am appalled and shocked by how our City Council members treat one of their colleagues,” said resident
Brittney Cook, an insurance agent. “If I behaved like that in the corporate world, I’d be fired.”
Residents complain that, with all the council members except Marquez living close together, other
neighborhoods are overlooked. They grouse about the huge Amazon distribution center inserted on Katella
Avenue near their homes, and a pay-to-use sports park now under construction in another part of town.
Some denizens slam a no-bid extension of a trash collection contract, maintaining it was swayed by conflicts of
interest on the council.
And now, adding stress upon stress, the city must decide whether to carve out council districts – with the
alternative of a potentially expensive lawsuit.
Threat of litigation
Like a dozen Orange County cities before it, Cypress last September received a letter alleging that its election
system dilutes minority voices.
Currently, all Cypress voters decide on all five council seats. With districts, voters choose only one council
member who lives within their area.
The by-district method, intended to better serve groups with common interests, is generally favored by the
California Voters Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA).
Cypress’ threat of a lawsuit came from prolific Malibu attorney Kevin Shenkman, who specializes in going
after cities and school districts that still hold at-large elections.
Fighting CVRA violation claims in court has proved costly and fruitless for those that try. Seven years ago,
Anaheim spent $1.1 million before relenting to by-district elections. In 2015, Palmdale backed down after
forking over $4.7 million. Santa Monica has spent more than $8 million on still-active litigation.
Therefore, most cities – including Fullerton, Garden Grove, Santa Ana, Tustin, Westminster and Los Alamitos –
grudgingly agree to transition to precincts rather than risk a burdensome legal battle.
Shenkman’s missive, written on behalf of a Latino civil rights group, offers a laundry list of Cypress’ purported
vulnerabilities.
Although Asians comprise 35% of the city’s population – the same percentage as white residents – the
“complete lack of Asian representation” on the council “is revealing,” the letter states.
Shenkman points to an Asian American candidate, Carrie Hayashida, who came in third for two City Council
seats in the 2020 election. Six months later, after a councilwoman resigned, Hayashida and five other female
applicants were passed over for Scott Minikus, one of two men who applied.
Dragging its feet?
After receiving Shenkman’s notification, the council met eight times in closed session to discuss next steps
before calling a special meeting – announced on Christmas Eve and held Dec. 27.
But instead of approving the creation of sample precinct maps, the council voted to hire a consultant for
$40,000 to solicit public input about whether even to proceed.
Questioning the $200-per-hour price tag, Marquez, a college professor, was the one “no” vote. “We have a
fiduciary responsibility to spend the money of taxpayers in Cypress responsibly,” she said.
Cypress city councilwoman, Frances Marquez, who was elected in 2020 finds herself at odds with the other
council members over the city’s garbage collection contract. Sunday, February 6, 2022. (Sam Gangwer,
Contributing Photographer)
Some wonder if the city is procrastinating the inevitable.
“We’ve made it very clear to them that districts need to be in place in time for the November elections,”
Shenkman said. “They are running out of time.”
Shenkman speculated that the council’s desire to hold opinion-seeking forums “could be an effort to orchestrate
an AstroTurf uprising against districts.”
“When they waste millions of taxpayer dollars fighting a lawsuit they can say, ‘Our constituents wanted us to,’”
Shenkman said.
However, city watchdog George Pardon, a retired Cal State University administrator, does not foresee a lawsuit.
“They’re just kicking districts down the road to get past the November election,” Pardon said. “They have
people in mind who they want to see elected, which might not happen in districts.”
George Pardon of Citizens for Responsible Development of Cypress, outside of the Cypress city council
chamber on Thursday, February 3, 2022. Pardon is the city watchdog and city council critic who supports by-
district representation. (Photo by Mark Rightmire, Orange County Register/SCNG)
But, Mayor Paulo Morales asserted, “We are absolutely not using the workshops to drag our feet.”
“The majority of people don’t understand what districts are for and need to learn more about them,” Morales
said.
“I hear, ‘I’d only have 20% of the vote!’” Morales added. “I say, wait a minute, is that the end of the world?
That’s the way we do it with Congress.”
District elections can result in pitting allies against one another, depending on where they live.
Three seats will be open this year. Peat and Morales term out, and Minikus will be up for election after serving
15 months as an appointee.
Asian American representation
One person planning to be on the upcoming ballot is Hayashida, the candidate who recently placed third.
“I’m saddened that the council missed an opportunity to check off several boxes last summer in its appointment:
a strong candidate in the last election; the first Asian American councilwoman; and someone who represents a
neighborhood currently not well represented,” said Hayashida, who works as a career coach.
“But I didn’t run because I’m Asian. I wanted to represent all of Cypress, and I still feel that way.”
Melina Nagpal, a psychologist, also threw her name in the hat to fill the opening. “I didn’t have a chance in
hell,” she said, now laughing over her unsuccessful interview.
“One of the job requirements was that you had to be a ‘team player,’” Nagpal said. “They didn’t want different
viewpoints. It’s a tight-knit group with a lot of overlap.”
Morales and Minikus are both retired police officers. Peat is chairman of the Boys & Girls Club of Greater
Anaheim-Cypress, where Mayor Pro Tem Anne Hertz-Mallari serves as president.
Whatever happens next, it appears that City Council meetings will, at least in the near future, remain
acrimonious.
At the Jan. 24 meeting, Peat requested that the Council consider a motion of censure against Marquez for
disclosing to the public closed session discussions.
In a brief telephone conversation, Peat declined to provide specifics, saying only, “We need to keep our
business among ourselves.”
Sent from my iPhone
Many have agreed to do so, though some have resisted before capitulating.
Shenkman’s legal cudgel is the California Voter Rights Act, which for 15 years has made it easier for minority
groups to prove that they are disenfranchised by at-large elections, where all voters of a city vote for all
members of a city council.
Many believe this practice has institutionalized racial discrimination, allowing blocs of white voters to
overwhelm the choices of blacks and Latinos. Until Shenkman sued Palmdale, for instance, where about two-
thirds of residents are minorities, only one Latino, a Republican, had ever been elected to office.
“Obviously, the leadership did not represent the people they served,” said Darren Parker, who serves as
chairman of the California Democratic Party’s African-American Caucus. “I’ve lived in the Antelope Valley for
over 30 years, and had been trying to obtain some sort of equity or diversity in the leadership.”
In 2012, Parker decided the only way to change things was to sue the city for violating the California Voter
Rights Act. He did some research and found a story about a young attorney who had sued Panda Express for
failing to disclose that it put chicken broth in its steamed vegetables. Something about that appealed to Parker,
who had once worked for McDonald’s, so he phoned Shenkman.
I think he is so zealous that he forgets to eat and sleep.
Darren Parker, chairman, California Democratic Party’s African-American Caucus
“When he called, I told Darren I had no idea what he was talking about, but I thought, ‘I’m a Democrat, and this
sounds important, I’ll look into it,’” Shenkman told me. He asked his law partner, Mary Hughes, who happens
to be his wife, what she thought. “She said, ‘You are crazy.’ I said, ‘Yeah, let’s do this.’ ”
He contacted three voting-rights experts — constitutional law professor Justin Levitt of Loyola Law school, Cal
Tech history professor Morgan Kousser and demographer David Ely — who helped him figure out how to
approach the case, and then brought in two experienced trial lawyers, R. Rex Parris (who happens to be the
mayor of Lancaster) and Milton Grimes, perhaps best-known as the late Rodney King’s attorney.
Shenkman expected the Palmdale case to resolve quickly, but the city fought back. In 2013, the case went to
trial. Palmdale lost. A judge ordered new, by-district elections.
In November, Palmdale elected its first Democratic Latino City Councilman, Juan Carillo, from a new district
on the city’s east side, “one of our first success stories,” as Parker told me.
“I think Kevin was heaven-sent,” Parker said. “He is dedicated to serving others in spite of himself sometimes. I
think he is so zealous that he forgets to eat and sleep.”
As the Voting Rights Act requires, Palmdale had to reimburse Shenkman’s legal costs, which were about $4.6
million.
Even if other cities didn’t see the benefit in switching to district elections for the right reasons, it soon became
clear that moving to district elections was a sure way to avoid sky-high legal fees. Because they were probably
going to lose.
::
Shenkman first came to my attention last week because he was the subject of a meandering profile on the
Breitbart website, “the platform for the alt-right,” as its former executive chairman Steve Bannon so memorably
described it. I like to read Breitbart to keep an eye on how the far right filters the news.
I got a chuckle out of the original headline, which has since been changed: “Meet the Malibu Lawyer Playing
the Race Card — and Making Millions — All Over California.”
More columns »
With loaded language like that, imagine my surprise when the first paragraph praised Shenkman as “one of the
most prolific and successful civil rights lawyers of his generation.”
Of course, this being Breitbart, there was also a line about how some consider Shenkman “a villain, a do-gooder
from Malibu who is creating racial divisions where they do not exist.”
Shenkman, a father of four girls, said he didn’t mind the story but was taken aback by some of the anti-Semitic
comments from Breitbart readers. “I’m Jewish,” he said, “and there were a number of comments like, ‘Look at
his last name, that explains it all.’”
When it comes to civil rights activists, this kind of garbage goes with the territory.
::
After he won in Palmdale, Shenkman was contacted by the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project, a
Lincoln Heights-based group with a decades-long history in “the voting rights business,” as its president
Antonio Gonzalez put it. He considers district elections “a paramount tool in the voting rights toolbox.”
“Palmdale created a new conventional wisdom for cities, which is, ‘We are not going to win, so let’s work it
out,’” Gonzales said. “We just sent another 15 demand letters, so we are up to 25 jurisdictions.”
Before the year is out, he said, “We’re going to do 100.”
As my colleague Phil Willon reported last month, out of California’s 482 cities, only 59 hold district elections,
and no city that holds at-large elections has ever prevailed in a California Voting Rights Act lawsuit.
Some critics have carped that the promised changes have not occurred, that despite all the letters and lawsuits,
relatively few Latinos have been elected to traditionally white city councils.
“Listen, I’ve been doing this for 30 years,” Gonzalez said. “If you create a viable district, minority voters will
elect their candidate. It takes several years to marshal forces.”
Last year, Shenkman sent demand letters to Hemet, Wildomar, Hesperia, Upland and Costa Mesa, among
others. All adopted district elections for no later than 2018. Other cities that have recently made the switch
include Oceanside, Carlsbad, Vista, Fremont and Anaheim.
He also filed lawsuits against San Juan Capistrano, West Covina, Rancho Cucamonga and Santa Monica. All
but the liberal bastion of Santa Monica have either settled or are in the process of doing so. In court papers,
Santa Monica city attorneys say that the city’s at-large system does not deprive minorities of representation and
that two of seven City Council seats are occupied by “presumed Latinos.”
Santa Monica,” said Shenkman, “has vowed to fight to the death.” A trial in that case is scheduled for Oct. 30.
On Friday, I reached Juan Carillo, Palmdale’s first elected Democratic councilman. He represents District 4, in
Palmdale’s heavily Latino east side.
“If it wasn’t because of the Voter Rights Act lawsuit,” he said, “I am sure we would still have all five council
members, including the mayor, residing on the west side.”
Some of the things he’d like to bring to his constituents: free wi-fi for children whose parents can’t afford it,
better parks, more commercial development and perhaps a nice restaurant or two.
Palmdale spent about $7 million defending its losing position. What a waste. Imagine how many kids could be
getting better parks and free wi-fi with that kind of money.
For more on politics »
robin.abcarian@latimes.com
Twitter: @AbcarianLAT
ALSO
An aggravating anniversary for Simi Valley, where a not-guilty verdict sparked the ’92 L.A. riots
Guns, ghosts and guilt: Helen Mirren portrays the widow whose Winchester Mystery House defies logic
More from Robin Abcarian
I have attached the completed transcript of Sonni Waknin's oral communication from November 22, 2021.
Thank you,
Kelly Rojas
Transcript
Transcript of Sunny Walkmen’s oral communication for the City of Cypress’ regular city
council meeting on November 22, 2021.
“Hi, um, my name is Sonni Waknin. I’m from the UCLA Voting Rights Project, um I
currently live in Los Angeles. Um, I’m here on behalf of the UCLA Voting Rights Project, we’re
a nonpartisan academic research center at UCLA, focused on ensuring that everyone has the
ability to cast a ballot, and have that ballot weighed equally. I’m here to talk about the California
Voting Rights Act. I know that you were all sent a letter by uh Mr.Shankman, um about
compliance with the California Voting Rights Act, or I’ll call it the CVRA. I want to preface this,
we’re talking about the 2020 census growth in Cypress. It’s clear from the 2020 census that the
Latino and Asian population growth fueled Cypress’ continued growth. The Asian population
today based on the census has grown by about four thousand residents and the Latino population
has grown by about two thousand residents. Um, the White, non-Hispanic population on the
other hand has declined by about forty-five hundred residents in Cypress. And as of today the
Asian population consists of-is thirty-seven percent of Cypress and the Latino population is now
thirty-three percent of the city’s total population. The California Voting Rights Act, as I’m sure
you know, prohibits the use of at-large methods of election if the application impairs the ability
of racial or ethnic minorities to elect candidates of choice. Um, a candidate of choice is a
candidate that most of the protected class population vote for, or coalesces around, um and a
candidate of choice does not need to be the same race of the protected class whose votes are
being diluted. And the type of evidence that will be presented, um in a potential CVRA lawsuit
include demonstrating that Latinos and Asian Americans vote for different candidates or have
different electoral choices than non-Latinos and Asian Americans. So for example, in the 2020
Congressional election in which Cypress voters voted in, in three of the highest density White
precincts in Cypress candidate Briscoe won about fifty-two percent of the vote and in three of the
lowest density White precincts Briscoe only received forty-one percent of the vote, and that is
indicative of racially polarized voting. So that’s the type of evidence that a potential suer or a
plaintiff would provide against you. Um. Now that Cypress has received notice under the CVRA,
you will either have to adopt a districting scheme that respects Asian and Latino voting power in
the-in the-and is uh equitable or be subject to a CVRA lawsuit. The UCLA Voting Rights
Project, as I said, is an academic research project. Um we’re based in the Luskin School of
Public Affairs at UCLA, and we’re here to assist cities, such as Cypress with redistricting and
can provide assistance to the city if you decide to make a plan to switch with help with mapping
and understanding the demographic changes in your city. Um, so we urge the city to take the
CVRA very seriously, to take the notice letter very seriously, and to offer um and provide
assistance if you do decide to go to districts and how to do so in a fair manner. Thank you.”
Since the City of Cypress received a demand letter on
September 20 to go to district elections the entire process has
been disrespectful to the residents/taxpayers of our
community. The city has held eight closed session meetings
over the past three months with little or no feedback to the
community so I will tell the story. Because the City of Cypress
did not comply with the California Voting Rights Act like our
school district did in 2018 the demand letter cost the city
$30,000. The majority on our council voted to and held eight
closed session meetings to discuss the issue. The one open
meeting that was held on the Monday of Thanksgiving week
when community members are busy with their families.
Especially when dealing with the difficulties that Covid-19 has
thrown at us on a daily basis. The meeting was used to select
members of an adhoc committee to take the issue to the
community. I feel that this is a tactic to halt having to comply
with the law. Members on this council are worried about
having to go to district elections and possibly having their
homes drawn into the same district which means that current
members and those that will run might not have the
opportunity. Someone will be forced to have to sit out the next
election. Why would members comply with the law when they
are benefitting from a system that works for them. Thus
denying the growing Asian American and Latino communities
from being able to elect the candidate of their choice which is
occurring today. I know because as a professor I have studied
this issue.
I asked to serve on the committee because I felt it was
important to have members with differing viewpoints serve on
the committee in order to present both sides of the issue.
Mayor Peat told me that I would not be able to serve on the
committee since I would face another election. He stated that
the collective experience of he and Mayor Morales would serve
the committee well. However, Mayor peat failed to mention
that he had a foot in the game as his wife Bonnie Peat will run
for city council this coming year. Therefore, the ad hoc
committee has a bias and in my eyes the process is unfair. On
December 13 I asked Mayor Peat and the Council in writing to
not meet about this issue without me and they did. I sustained
an injury and apparently my views did not matter. In our first
redistricting meeting Mayor Peat stated that all members
should be present in the room when we discuss the issue
because it was important for the future of the city.
Here we are today. Its Christmas break and the staff is on
vacation. This meeting was not advertised as usual. The
Facebook post was distributed at 1:07 p.m. because of my
complaint. I received this powerpoint from the Consultant on
Friday night, Christmas Eve. We should have had more time to
review this information. I do not think it is right that we are
approving this without more of the public’s involvement.
I have reviewed the contract and there is not a specific plan for
how the meetings will be carried out. I would like to have more
time to review it since I received it on Thursday, the day before
Christmas. The salaries for the staff in this contract are
outrageous. The salary ranges from $200 for the CEO to $75 for
the Account Intern.
Moreover, there are errors with the data listed here in this
powerpoint which will go out to the community. The U.S.
census data is incorrect and not updated. We are paying
thousands of dollars for incorrect data and information. It
states that demographers cannot create a majority Asian
district when we were told by Attorney Sonny Wachnin from
the UCLA Voting Rights Project that it is possible.
This is what people despise about elected officials…making
decisions when the community has not been made aware of a
meeting. We have a fiduciary responsibility to spend the money
of taxpayers in Cypress responsibly. I do not see that happening
with the current process. I ask for more time to review this
information and I will not be voting tonight due to the reasons I
stated.
Cypress city councilwoman, Frances Marquez, who was elected in 2020 stands in front of the home
her parents bought in the 1970’s and have lived there since. Cypress on Sunday, February 6, 2022.
(Sam Gangwer, Contributing Photographer)
By SUSAN CHRISTIAN GOULDING | sgoulding@scng.com | Orange County Register
PUBLISHED: February 7, 2022 at 4:57 p.m. | UPDATED: February 7, 2022 at 5:34 p.m.
Depending on where and how you look at it, Cypress is either a quiet bedroom community or a
bustling center of commerce.
The north Orange County city is home to 50,000 residents, with a comfortable median household
income of about $93,000.
While small in size at 6.6 square miles, Cypress boasts a healthy tax base and a host of employers
– including UnitedHealth Group, Yamaha Motor, Costco, Home Depot, Los Alamitos Race Course,
Cypress College, Forest Lawn Memorial Park, several hotels and, as of November, a 23-acre
Amazon last-mile facility.
Still, heated disputes bubble beneath the surface. And sometimes they erupt.
In meetings, city officials openly bristle at newcomer Frances Marquez – who, they say, introduces
agenda items that are needlessly contentious, such as flying the LGBTQ Pride flag.
Three weeks ago, in an awkward outburst, Councilman Jon Peat angrily yelled at her about a
subcommittee committee from which she was excluded.
“I am tired of being scolded by you in public,” he said. “What gives you the right to sit here and
criticize all of us?”
At the podium, residents address the negative tenor of council meetings – noting the “bad optics” of
the four-member majority chiding the lone woman of color.
“I am appalled and shocked by how our City Council members treat one of their colleagues,” said
resident Brittney Cook, an insurance agent. “If I behaved like that in the corporate world, I’d be
fired.”
Residents complain that, with all the council members except Marquez living close together, other
neighborhoods are overlooked. They grouse about the huge Amazon distribution center inserted on
Katella Avenue near their homes, and a pay-to-use sports park now under construction in another
part of town.
Some denizens slam a no-bid extension of a trash collection contract, maintaining it was swayed by
conflicts of interest on the council.
And now, adding stress upon stress, the city must decide whether to carve out council districts –
with the alternative of a potentially expensive lawsuit.
Threat of litigation
Like a dozen Orange County cities before it, Cypress last September received a letter alleging that
its election system dilutes minority voices.
Currently, all Cypress voters decide on all five council seats. With districts, voters choose only one
council member who lives within their area.
The by-district method, intended to better serve groups with common interests, is generally favored
by the California Voters Rights Act of 2001 (CVRA).
Cypress’ threat of a lawsuit came from prolific Malibu attorney Kevin Shenkman, who specializes in
going after cities and school districts that still hold at-large elections.
Fighting CVRA violation claims in court has proved costly and fruitless for those that try. Seven
years ago, Anaheim spent $1.1 million before relenting to by-district elections. In 2015, Palmdale
backed down after forking over $4.7 million. Santa Monica has spent more than $8 million on still-
active litigation.
Therefore, most cities – including Fullerton, Garden Grove, Santa Ana, Tustin, Westminster and
Los Alamitos – grudgingly agree to transition to precincts rather than risk a burdensome legal
battle.
Shenkman’s missive, written on behalf of a Latino civil rights group, offers a laundry list of Cypress’
purported vulnerabilities.
Although Asians comprise 35% of the city’s population – the same percentage as white residents –
the “complete lack of Asian representation” on the council “is revealing,” the letter states.
Shenkman points to an Asian American candidate, Carrie Hayashida, who came in third for two
City Council seats in the 2020 election. Six months later, after a councilwoman resigned,
Hayashida and five other female applicants were passed over for Scott Minikus, one of two men
who applied.
Dragging its feet?
After receiving Shenkman’s notification, the council met eight times in closed session to discuss
next steps before calling a special meeting – announced on Christmas Eve and held Dec. 27.
But instead of approving the creation of sample precinct maps, the council voted to hire a
consultant for $40,000 to solicit public input about whether even to proceed.
Questioning the $200-per-hour price tag, Marquez, a college professor, was the one “no” vote. “We
have a fiduciary responsibility to spend the money of taxpayers in Cypress responsibly,” she said.
Cypress city councilwoman, Frances Marquez, who was elected in 2020 finds herself at odds with
the other council members over the city’s garbage collection contract. Sunday, February 6, 2022.
(Sam Gangwer, Contributing Photographer)
Some wonder if the city is procrastinating the inevitable.
“We’ve made it very clear to them that districts need to be in place in time for the November
elections,” Shenkman said. “They are running out of time.”
Shenkman speculated that the council’s desire to hold opinion-seeking forums “could be an effort to
orchestrate an AstroTurf uprising against districts.”
“When they waste millions of taxpayer dollars fighting a lawsuit they can say, ‘Our constituents
wanted us to,’” Shenkman said.
However, city watchdog George Pardon, a retired Cal State University administrator, does not
foresee a lawsuit.
“They’re just kicking districts down the road to get past the November election,” Pardon said. “They
have people in mind who they want to see elected, which might not happen in districts.”
George Pardon of Citizens for Responsible Development of Cypress, outside of the Cypress city
council chamber on Thursday, February 3, 2022. Pardon is the city watchdog and city council critic
who supports by-district representation. (Photo by Mark Rightmire, Orange County Register/SCNG)
But, Mayor Paulo Morales asserted, “We are absolutely not using the workshops to drag our feet.”
“The majority of people don’t understand what districts are for and need to learn more about them,”
Morales said.
“I hear, ‘I’d only have 20% of the vote!’” Morales added. “I say, wait a minute, is that the end of the
world? That’s the way we do it with Congress.”
District elections can result in pitting allies against one another, depending on where they live.
Three seats will be open this year. Peat and Morales term out, and Minikus will be up for election
after serving 15 months as an appointee.
Asian American representation
One person planning to be on the upcoming ballot is Hayashida, the candidate who recently placed
third.
“I’m saddened that the council missed an opportunity to check off several boxes last summer in its
appointment: a strong candidate in the last election; the first Asian American councilwoman; and
someone who represents a neighborhood currently not well represented,” said Hayashida, who
works as a career coach.
“But I didn’t run because I’m Asian. I wanted to represent all of Cypress, and I still feel that way.”
Melina Nagpal, a psychologist, also threw her name in the hat to fill the opening. “I didn’t have a
chance in hell,” she said, now laughing over her unsuccessful interview.
“One of the job requirements was that you had to be a ‘team player,’” Nagpal said. “They didn’t
want different viewpoints. It’s a tight-knit group with a lot of overlap.”
Morales and Minikus are both retired police officers. Peat is chairman of the Boys & Girls Club of
Greater Anaheim-Cypress, where Mayor Pro Tem Anne Hertz-Mallari serves as president.
Whatever happens next, it appears that City Council meetings will, at least in the near future,
remain acrimonious.
At the Jan. 24 meeting, Peat requested that the Council consider a motion of censure against
Marquez for disclosing to the public closed session discussions.
In a brief telephone conversation, Peat declined to provide specifics, saying only, “We need to keep
our business among ourselves.”
expertise to inform our work, and to help us better represent our community and respond to the concerns voiced
by residents. They are an irreplaceable part of what conducting City business is all about.
Let’s look at reality. To my knowledge, no City staff has complained of being abused. No City staff has begged
my colleagues for protection from my questions. No one hides under their desk when I walk into City Hall.
They don’t need and never requested the protection they’ve been offered.
If you’re truly concerned that someone is breaking the law, the solution is to give them more access to experts,
not less. The analogy is giving a student a homework assignment, encouraging them to use the library, and then
banning them from talking to the reference librarians.
The beauty of democracy is that I can opt to ignore the character attacks, ignore the diversion tactics, ignore the
attempts to control my behavior and dismiss my views. So I have, as best I can. But enough is enough. I’m
writing to invite Mr. Peat, my colleagues on the Dias, and the City Manager to respect democracy by attacking
my ideas, not my character.
Because democracy is about listening, not censoring. Democracy is not about control, it’s about freedom, and
an accessible marketplace of ideas — all ideas, even the ones that make my colleagues uncomfortable.
And it’s not just my ideas that are being ignored. Concerned residents take the time and trouble to address us at
the end of every Council meeting. That’s great. What’s not great is to ignore them. Residents don’t need the
opportunity to vent — they can do that without us. They need the opportunity to hold us to account, and to ask
us to explain ourselves. Cypress residents have the right to know the reasons behind our decisions, because our
decisions affect their lives.
Democracy is not theater. No one believes their voice is heard when it’s never acknowledged. Providing a
chance for the community to talk to us when no one responds—not then, not at a subsequent meeting, not
ever—is, to put it bluntly, disrespectful. Democracy is not about the freedom to speak and never receive a
response.
How many times will residents bother to show up if we continue to ignore them, if we vote behind closed doors,
and our only response to criticism is “no laws were broken?” If that’s the definition of good governance—that
no laws are broken, and nothing else need be explained—it’s evidence of broken government.
So rather than protect City staff from my questions, and themselves from the questions of residents, I invite my
colleagues and the City Manager to protect something they’ve long neglected: free speech, participatory
democracy, and transparent and accountable governance, so that all of us can contribute to the marketplace of
ideas, and our City can reap the benefits.
Rather than calling critics gadflies and using concerns about decorum to chill free expression, let’s try
something different. When we’re faced with a problem, let’s solve it together — out in the open. Let’s invite
input, criticism, and brand new ideas from the people who trusted us to use our Council seats not to attack one
another, but to do our best to make Cypress a better home for all of us
Democracy is messy because it’s supposed to be. Transparent government requires lawmakers to explain
ourselves, to face pushback by concerned residents who don’t like our positions before we vote, not afterwards.
Let’s listen, and respond with more than “we didn’t break the law.”
As more than one resident pointed out, elected officials are supposed to be role models. Let’s rise to that
challenge, open wide the gates to the marketplace of ideas, and encourage participation by every resident —
even the “gadflies”—who demonstrate their love of Cypress by showing up to voice their ideas, offer
constructive criticism, and share their dreams about the future of our City.
Let’s benefit from everyone’s ideas, welcome dissent, listen to each other with open minds, and work together
to encourage more rather than less participation by everyone who cares about the future of our great city.
If we don’t pry open the gates to the marketplace of ideas, all of us lose. So let’s go down a different path. Let’s
listen to each other with respect, especially those who disagree with us. Let’s stop throwing accusations around,
and respond to criticism with facts and counterarguments, as Mr. Peat so skillfully modeled in the first part of
his March 30, 2022 letter. It’s not too late, and our community deserves no less.
No one would want to live anywhere near these facilities. The primary
beneficiary of this proposal is Valley Vista. The quality of life
for our residents has to be the top priority. This proposal has
serious negative impacts on our neighbors.
If you want to fight for , you can email the City Council asking
them to oppose this proposal. This would be a great way to thank
for his service.
Mayor Rob Johnson rjohnson@cypressca.org
Mayor Pro Tem Mariellen Yarc myarc@cypressca.org
Council Member Stacy Berry sberry@cypressca.org
Council Member Morales pmorales@cypressca.org
Council Member Jon Peat jpeat@cypressca.org
City Attorney Anthony Taylor ataylor@awattorneys.com
A compressed natural gas (CNG) Fueling Station has safety concerns that were evidenced as recently as June 2020
in Riverside where there was an explosion at a CNG Fueling Station that injured 2 people, 1 critically.
Both of these facilities emit smells that no one would want to live near.
Zoning – Zoning for the City Yard is Public/Semi-Public (PS) and these projects should not proceed without a vote
of the residents pursuant to Measure D.
While Alternate Fuel Facilities are allowed on the property, zoning indicates that it must be an accessory to a
permitted use.
This project primarily benefits Valley Vista Services which is a private enterprise and the agenda item also says
they could generate income from other private parties.
A trash facility is not a permitted project in the PS zone, especially not a trash facility for a private enterprise.
Both of these projects are a business use for a private enterprise on property that is zoned PS. Commercial and
Industrial projects are not permitted uses.
These facilities are lawsuits waiting to happen.
critically. Also, both of these proposed facilities emit smells and generate noise levels that no one would
want to live near. The City should not be leasing out city owned property to a private business that will
cause both health and financial damage to the residents.
Along with many other residents, Lord's Light Community Church is yet another organization being
impacted. Lord’s Light is a growing Korean Church. While their address is 5271 Lincoln Ave, Cypress,
their parking lot entrance is off of Cypress St. across from the City Yard. The church has a lot of
programs during the week for children and seniors and during the summer, they have a full daycare and
summer school program for children. The church is in the process of getting a loan to renovate and
expand on that site. Instead of looking forward to expanding, the church is now concerned about the
ramifications of the Valley Vista proposal on the health and safety of their congregation.
I know the residents have already gathered over 500 signatures opposing this project even during a
pandemic. I have asked the City how many more signatures are needed to convince them that this is
not a project the community wants. I have not heard back. It is sad to think that residents in this area
are left no alternative but to go out during the pandemic spread that is underway to get more
signatures, but they will. That’s how important this is to them.
We also don’t want to forget the 2018 agreement that the city entered into with the Cypress School
District to park and maintain their school buses at the City Yard. The purpose of this agreement was to
help facilitate the school district’s efforts to sell their administrative site at Moody and Orange. Now
that the school district has entered into an agreement to sell the Moody and Orange site, all the school
buses will also be housed and maintained at the City Yard. Let’s pray that if the city approves the Valley
Vista proposal that the rats and other vermin from the trash don’t find their way onto our school buses.
Everyone should check out where the White Pages indicate George Briggeman lives. He is the person
who is pushing this proposal for Valley Vista. You can be sure residents in his upscale Newport Beach
neighborhood wouldn’t tolerate a project like this in their neighborhood and I am sure Mr. Briggeman
would be leading the charge in opposition. Given where Mr. Briggeman lives, he certainly isn't
struggling with the finances of the Valley Vista current agreement yet our residents will be significantly
impacted if this proposal is approved.
This proposal should be a concern for every Cypress resident because it means that every trash truck will
need to navigate their way through the city in order to get to the City Yard and then return to where
they left off. It also means that if the City Council is willing to consider this proposal for this
neighborhood north of Lincoln, what will they consider for your neighborhood in the future?
The City Council has done more than enough to meet the needs of Valley Vista. This proposal is going
too far. Please email the Cypress City Clerk at cityclerk@cypressca.org with a statement of opposition to
the Valley Vista proposal and ask that your comments be included in the Public Comments section of the
next Cypress City Council agenda.
Thank you.
Cypress Resident
To: Frances Marquez <fmarquez@cypressca.org>
Cc: Fred Galante <fgalante@awattorneys.com>, Alisha Farnell
<afarnell@cypressca.org>
Subject: Request for Public Records - RESPONSE
REQUIRED
Council Member Marquez,
Peter Grant
City Manager
City of Cypress
Office 714-229-6680
Cellular 714-335-1685
pgrant@cypressca.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: KeepCypressUnited <KeepCypressUnited@protonmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, March 27, 2022 6:26 AM
To: ADM <adm@cypressca.org>
Subject: Request for Public Records
Dear Cypress City Clerk Alisha Farnell:
We are hereby requesting public records of all communications by City Councilmember Dr.
Frances Marquez as per Public Records Act related to the California Voting Rights Act or any
discussion related to the formation of voting districts or district voting of the City of Cypress.
This is to include but not limited to phone, personal text, personal cell, personal email, from
the time Dr. Marquez was sworn into office to present day.
Sincerely,
Cypress Residents:
Clare Chu
Beth Culver
Robin Itzler
Harumi Lucak
Marilyn Low
Robin Westerkamp
Sent with ProtonMail secure email.
<image002.jpg><Public Records Affidavit - Personal Accounts and Devices.pdf>
Sent from my iPhone