Rose Bowl Renovations and NFL Redux: Paul Arevalo and Victor Gordo Need to Go

Rose Bowl Stadium, 1934

The almost 90-year old Rose Bowl is going through the financial ringer while poor oversight by the Rose Bowl Operating Company ("RBOC") , plagues renovation costs for a budget heading towards the $200M mark.   The answer seems to be with inviting the National Football League ("NFL")  to temporarily hold 13 games per year for 5 years at the Rose Bowl while a franchise is set up at Farmers Field in downtown Los Angeles.

The Pasadena City Council voted 7-1 to approve amending the Public Lands Ordinance, allowing the NFL to consider the Rose Bowl a temporary home, as well as, the council certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”). 

Now, let's make this clear, I am a big NFL fan though without calling allegiance to any one particular team, I do have many players I follow throughout their careers.  There is nothing like going to a game and losing your voice after cheering and ruckus.  The electricity of the crowd can get anyone involved, including the novice.  I love football.

Renovations: 3^rd Down and 42M:

The RBOC is reviewing its Rose Bowl renovation project, which started in January 2011 with a budget of $152,000,000 and now has now reached the $194,000,000, reports the Los Angeles Times.  You do the math.  It’s a $42 million overage the community is now straddled by, unless the NFL can save the day. 

It seems the 3-person committee overseeing the costs related to the project including Pasadena District 5 Councilman and RBOC Chairman, Victor Gordo and Pasadena District 7 RBOC committee member, Paul Arevalo need to do similar math.  How does a board in charge of oversight of the Rose Bowl renovation costs get to the point where they are now having to review their original ill-conceived plans and budgets? 

Pasadena District Map

Back in October, Arevalo told the board,  "At this point, we're looking at working with some world-class firms that have significant experience in stadium renovations and they're going to (offer) a kind of bird's eye perspective on the project."  To have a project get this out of control in such a short period of time is nuts.  Not only are there cost overages, but now litigation is mounting, both of which are very familiar to Arevalo, as his day job is the City Manager for West Hollywood where legal costs for the city continue to climb yearly due to poor management and counsel oversight. 

Player’s Strike and Management Lockout:

The latest in events plaguing the RBOC is it has not been able to court the right bids for its Rose Bowl Renovation and Improvement Project, as they had to reject the recent offers for Phase 3A Field Level Construction.  All bids were 1-3M above the RBOC's estimate of $4,500,000. 

The RBOC was also recommended to reject the Earthwork / Site Storm work / Asphalt Phase 3A improvements as all three bids were grossly over the estimated $310,000. 

They did move into contract with Phase 3A Concourse Structures for the amount of $3,450,700 with KAR Construction, Ontario, CA attached to do the work.  Oddly, the RBOC approves this when the estimated budget was for only $2,242,000.  Who is running the show over there because following a budget isn’t too difficult if created with realistic guidelines?  Decisions are becoming alarmingly arbitrary by the RBOC committee.  

The contractors who cannot land a contract with the city are equally frustrated with the RBOC while residents worry about Sunday NFL fans creating noise pollution and congestion to a park-like area of Pasadena, as the city tries to solve the financial stress of the Rose Bowl renovations.   If the RBOC were a business, people would be fired.  The city should act on the same impulse and investigate why such gross differences in budget versus actual totals for the renovation project.

“Band-Aid” Solutions for Losing Team:

The answer the RBOC has for Pasadena at the moment through their recent review costing $400,000, is to increase the current ordinance to large events from 12 events per year to 25 or more events per year.  Daniel S.Barrett of the Barrett Sports Group, LLC ("BSG"), Manhattan Beach, brought in to review the NFL plan, estimates Pasadena could generate income of $5M-10M if an NFL deal was struck. 

Gordo sees a tremendous economic engine for the city of Pasadena and surrounding area.  "Any deal would have to be respectful of surrounding park land. This is a stadium in the middle of a park," Gordo said. "Any deal would have to be respectful of the surrounding neighborhood. This is a stadium in the middle of a neighborhood."  Gordo then goes on to state, "Pasadena must position itself to negotiate with a team."  It's economics, folks.  Plain and simple, how can we make several tens of millions of dollars in a few short years?

The city of Pasadena and the Rose Bowl Stadium will host an NFL team for up to five years:

• if the City of Los Angeles signs an NFL team to a contract
• if Farmers Field in downtown Los Angeles gets approved and built
• if Pasadena residents in nearby neighborhoods do not protest the added traffic and noise
• if at the required second reading of the EIR on December 3, the council votes to finalize action
• if an NFL team signs a contract with Pasadena to use the stadium in the interim between coming to Los Angeles and the completion of a stadium in Los Angeles.

The December 3, 2012 second reading of the EIR will be very important evening for neighbors and residents to attend the Council Meeting to voice their opinions about the EIR and impacts to the city both positive and negative. 

Sadly, both Gordo and Arevalo are looking for Band-Aid solutions for a bigger problem seen here with the Rose Bowl’s financial mess mounting and the community is just beginning to see true mismanagement at its finest.  A deal with the NFL would surely take the pressure off of the 3-person committee and settling the overages incurred with the project.  But, the question is whether or not those responsible should continue on the project or be removed?   
With Gordo and Arevalo rubbing elbows with many developers around town, one would think they had the system covered and the community protected from escalating costs.  We would be wrong to assume.  This is not the case.  Now, “The Band-Aid” has to be used out of the coach's playbook.  The city deserves more community-minded commitment and financially conscious representatives than Arevalo and Gordo. 

23-Skidoo - EIR Alternative #2:

Within the draft Environmental Impact Report ("EIR"), there is mention of a Reduced Attendance Alternative indicating if a temporary use of the Rose Bowl Stadium by an NFL team, Alternative #2 would limit the attendance at the Rose Bowl to 50,000 fans per NFL event.  The stadium could hold an estimated 88,000 fans.  Due to the adjustment of 38,000 fans, the EIR suggests this approach would not be feasible due attendance the NFL could find elsewhere. 

This opinion by BRG suggests the average of 67,270 of all NFL stadium attendance is a far cry from the Alternative #2 condition of only 50,000 attendees.  Just to give you an idea, Oakland's attendance is on average of 50,000 per NFL game.  They seem to be doing just fine.  It's the RBOC who want more attendees.  More attendees equal more money!  Why not scare people into believing "Alternative #2" would never work? 

Alternative #2 of the draft EIR was a very sound and doable situation for a temporary stadium for the NFL, if the NFL chooses to use the facility, at all.  There are many better-suited stadiums around town with better infrastructures to accommodate a temporary NFL stadium than the Rose Bowl.  The NFL just presents an easy way out for the Rose Bowl Operating Company of a very bad financial state they are experiencing. Sometimes the modest approach is better in the end.

"Do-Overs" Not Allowed:

If only the NFL could act in the same manner as the RBOC and add 'Do-Overs" to the mix.  What a lively event those games would be.  In turn, the RBOC should adopt a better approach to its oversight and start to manage the Rose Bowl with integrity and without sloppy management.  The board itself should be under review and all fired!  The city should clean house and revamp a troubled board.  Economic trends are always shifting.  Why is it the RBOC does not shift with the times before it's too late?   

Ultimately, the residents and people of the community surrounding the Rose Bowl lose this financial game.  This is for sure. If the NFL had to chose between the Rose Bowl or the Los Angeles Coliseum, at Exposition Park, the new home of space shuttle Endeavor, I would put my money on the Coliseum.  Even though the LA Coliseum Commission is no better that the RBOC, and equally corrupt, downtown Los Angeles has better infrastructure for the 93,600 fans the Olympic stadium could accommodate, along with MTA alternatives.  

At the end of the day, it is plain and simple.  The Rose Bowl Operating Company is a mismanaged mess.  Why would the NFL chose to settle for less in Pasadena when the obvious choice for any temporary accommodation for the NFL is the Los Angeles Coliseum?  After all, I am a USC fan. 

1350 Hayworth Continues: Will Outcome Be Affordable?

Once again, residents of the Edward H. Fickett, FAIA designed, Hollywood Riviera and other supportive neighbors attended the City Council meeting as 1350 N Hayworth Avenue found itself back on the Council’s agenda after the continuance from the September 6, 2011 Council meeting. The neighbors were not alone as the developers and architect, Jay Vanos, who presented to the chamber a second version of their proposed plans to Council, were in attendance. Everyone was there for the same reason; what is the fate of 1350 N Hayworth Avenue, and whether it affordable?

West Hollywood City Council meets to discuss 1350 N. Hayworth Ave.

First to present was staff who basically presented more of the same re-hashed, re-tooled Staff Report.  Noted was the fact no one from City Staff reached out to any of the neighbors of Hayworth or the historical Hollywood Riviera next door.  Council member Land was the first to question the communication to residents during the latest 6 months of redesign of the proposed development.  Staff replied they were not specifically told to do so.  Nor did staff take much of the public comment all ready presented last year when reviewing the recent designs while working closely with the developer and architect for months.  Did they not hear the comments and take notes from prior meetings like the rest of us?  They came across looking foolish.  This, after a Planning Commission meeting on the basics of Land-Use last week addressing bias, community input and other basics of Staff reports and responsibilities? Clearly, McIntosh needs to evaluate her staff.

Residents and Council seemed to have a similar perspective of a building with less mass and better suitability to the street. The developer has a right to build and entitled to build a four-story building due to the ordinance litigation originating in 2007.  Regardless, the same elephant sits in the room.

Land Questions Staff on Resident Outreach with Design

As conversation from Council commented, Heilman noted that anyway you have it, development at 1350 N Hayworth Avenue is going to happen and never would affordable housing be a part of this particular site, whether we liked it or not.  Mayor Duran had a different perspective stating the issue would only find itself in further litigation.  He may be right and Heilman could be overwhelmingly wrong.

Simply put, affordable housing could most certainly be accommodated on that site located at 1350 N. Hayworth Avenue.  They just have to buck up the cash and pay off the developer for wasting the people’s time and the developer’s time and efforts.  The city is no immune to litigation and this particular case is a “WOW-sa!” kind of unique situation that has long lasting recourse judicially. It would make most sense to evaluate the pros and cons of settling with the developer and pay the guys deserved money due and give the neighbors some dignity within preserving cultural heritage.

Hogan and Arevalo Discuss

This would be time litigation would actually be embraced by the community!  Versus shudder and ask, how did we get into this mess?  Again it all questions City Manager, Arevalo and City Attorney, Michael Jenkins abilities to drive the ship properly and wisely with economic restraint and thoughtful legal advisement.  Same tune, different channel.

Mayor Duran started his conversation by addressing the litigation involved with this particular site due to the Moratorium Ordinance initiated by Duran and Prang in 2007, suspending all demolition permits.

Take note this battle between City and developer began in 2007.  It is now 5 years since the developer applied for their demolition permit.  The City tried to shut them down early on and the developer’s rightfully fought back.  To a small degree you have to appreciate the spirit for taking on the city management and legal counsel to let the courts ultimately decide.  The City was wrong and the judgment was appealed in favor of the developer. The City had no other choice than to work with the developer or pay them out.  No one seems to be happy with the litigation and time involved.

(L-R) Prang, Duran, Arevalo, Land & Heilman

With public and Council support of retaining the charm and significance of Hayworth Avenue, it’s important to note Hayworth Avenue is, for the most, one of the last untouched and preserved streets in West Hollywood.  You walk down the sidewalk and gain a true sense of the community with its eclectic nature of historic buildings and glow of yesteryear.

Why not stop this ‘Mad Max’ of a train and let everyone get off, instead of going back to the table and having the developer not budging on a four-story design because of legal entitlement, and the neighbors and council only finding the mass and scale of a three-story building suitable for a historic neighborhood?

John D'Amico pensively reviews plans

When Council member D’Amico was on Planning, he was successful in transforming the beautiful Hancock Firehouse into affordable housing.  That made sense fiscally as well as part of a true effort to create affordable housing through sustainable measures.  That’s what redevelopment is all about, introducing development through initiatives that make sense to everyone involved.  The 1350 N Hayworth Avenue site is a very unusual site having a historic building next door and an ongoing litigation with the developer.

The City actually has a chance of doing good on something gone bad.

In the case of 1350 N Hayworth Avenue, everyone who has been involved with this for the past five years is certainly fed up with the continuance given to the agenda item so the City can crack open the same demons as last year and the year before and the year before that…

This is the one time you say, buck up and PAY!

City Manager Salary Breakdown

With continued scrutiny over what is being paid to City Manager, Paul Arevalo, it is important to understand three things: City/population averages, pension pitfalls and reporting of salary.  Mr. Arevalo fell into his position in 1999, after serving the city as Assistant City Manager, a move more times than not taken by a City when a Manager leaves office.  Due to the lack of qualified candidates in California, it places cities into corners where at times have to find the right candidate who understands the intricacies of the environment to make a smooth transition.  By now means is replacing a City Manager an easy task.  Some California cities have spent over $50,000 with the search taking up to a year.  Most municipalities cannot afford the time.  Time is money, and with my evaluation of West Hollywood’s City Manager, nothing is truer.

In 2010, the State Controller released new salary reporting requirements to California cities, directing them to clearly identify elected officials' and public employees' compensation.  The authority to collect this information is granted under Government Code sections 12463 and 53892.  Through this resource, we now have access and more transparency within local government. 

WeHo’s Warranted Wages?

Should Arevalo, a hired official, receive a salary, close to $300,000, not to mention his generous pension, comprehensive health and life insurance packages, car and phone allowances and other perks unrecorded or disclosed?  High-paid city employees have become focus on local government salaries and pension packages.  Attention is drawn to the highest positions in West Hollywood, which are City Manager ($295,870), Assistant City Manager ($223,688), Directors of Human Services ($214,319), Director of Public Information & Prosecution Services ($202,912) and Director of Public Works ($201,258). 

Again, each of these high-paid positions comes with a healthy “package” associated with their employment and retirement.  For example, in 2010 Mr. Arevalo was paid an additional $23,651 in Pension Contribution, $13,692 deferred Compensation, $14,522 in health care provisions, 6,100 in car allowance and a “defined benefit” pension formula of 2.7%@55 where at age 55 Mr. Arevalo would collect 2.7% of his wages times the years of employment to gouge the city more.   He has hit over 20 years of employment with the city.

We are seeing more and more cities reducing the pension formula percentage from 2 to 2.5 percent along with increasing the year of retirement from 55 to 67.  Until changes are made in West Hollywood, the course is equally daunting in evaluating the performance along with the salary of Mr. Arevalo.  It is a hefty price tag for someone who has created more litigation on behalf of the city in the last few years to double the costs for the City Attorney and Legal Services.    With the litigation scent in the air, the direction my nose goes towards is lack of proper management. 

Troubling West Hollywood Legal Services for increased litigation in the past few years.

Averages

As a standard, we shall review 2010 findings due to the most accurate U.S. Census.  The Pacific Coast states and California average base salary for city managers is $144,806 with an average population of 25,000 to 49,999.  For a community size of 50,000 to 100,000 residents, the salary is a slightly higher $150,522.

2010 Figures:

City                          Population    City Manager Salary    Salary/Pop.

Culver City                  43,000              $293,478                    9.15

Palm Springs              48,000              $211,000                     4.39

Pasadena                  151,000              $270,937                    1.79

Santa Monica              97,000              $300,814                    3.10 

West Hollywood          34,000              $295,870                    8.70

Problems with Pensions 

Even Pasadena where Mr. Arevalo resides has seen their City Management salaries and pension packages reviewed and reduced due to the costs associated with the pension assets falling short of the obligations to retirees.  Palm Springs has had to reassess their City Manager position and salary.  The latest scrutiny is coming from Sana Diego with pension overhaul becoming a political hot button drawing eyes nationally.  Bell was only the beginning of the outrageous.  Now, municipalities are evaluating wages and pension plans to figure out a way to fix the shortfalls.  If adjustments are not made, the greater the risk for failure in pay-outs.  In the case of Arevalo and his clan in City Hall, we are looking at a very sizable sum.  As example, Arevalo is given a 'Defined Plan" pension formula of 2.7%@55.  

(2010 Salary  x  2.7%)   x   Yrs of Employ   =   “Defined Plan” Pension Payout

($295,870   x   2.7%)   x   23Yrs   =   $159,770

Not too shabby for a guy who also has deep relations with major developers in the area.

At the state level, Governor Jerry Brown has put forth a pension reform plan changing retirement ages from 55 to 67, replacing current “defined benefit” pensions with a hybrid program also including a 401(K)-like contribution component, prohibiting retroactive pension increases, requiring all employees to contribute 50 percent or more of their pensions, along with other points.  Pensions are the new dirty word for local governments as they have become more and more liable with time.  Questions of will there be money 25-35 years down the road with the course currently taken are being evaluated along with the value associated with a City Manager and Assistant City Manager, as well as City Attorneys? 

With corporate salary climbing having been kept to a minimum in the last few decades, it seems very odd a city with 34,000 people should be paying outrageously high salaries for it’s city employees.  The City’s job descriptions are much too vacant to warrant the six figure salaries and pensions being doled out.  Is a man who is responsible for millions of dollars of escalation of costs over the Master Plan and litigation expenses, along with not able to wrangle simple budgets and costs associated with event planning, as seen in the Christopher Street Report that had no financials to speak of in front of City Council recently. 

It is the thriving businesses and tax dollars generated along with area homeowners that deserve the championing of sorts.  While we are at it, we should probably recognize all those individuals who received the $10 million dollars worth of parking fines, meter fines and camera citations.  Each year, this line seems to grow larger and larger.  These folks are the ones truly responsible for the way the city is moving, not Arevalo. 

For a guy who continually nods off during Council meetings, I personally think he and others are over paid.  At the end of the day in 2010, Arevalo walks away with a total of $513,605 ($353,835 + $159,770 Pension after age 55).  

Paul Arevalo: A City Manager's Performance Anxiety

West Hollywood City Manager, Paul Arevalo

When it comes to community, it is important that we all share in voicing our concerns over how chosen leaders and employees perform in their capacity on a scheduled basis.  It is now time for the West Hollywood City Manager, Paul Arevalo, to have his job performance reviewed by the Council this evening, Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 6:30pm in the 1st floor Community Room of City Hall.  Sniff, sniff, I smell Bell Hell coming down the street.

This meeting is not under the Brown Act, as Mr. Arevalo is an employee and is entitle to have a closed session meeting versus a review in front of the public, per se.  Hence, public opinion most definitely can be expressed during this time while being heard by the Council.  What other times do we have to focus on discussion surrounding the performance or the lack there of, of Mr. Arevalo.  

When reviewing the 2011-2012 Budget submitted by Mr. Arevalo, it is noted the City Manager manages to make $568,402 in salary with fringes covering retirement, social security and payroll taxes.  With such a small city reaching 1.9 miles of area, I have to question the exorbitant amount being paid to this hired official overseeing the community at large?

As I have stated before, there is a sense of Bell going on in West Hollywood.  The Sacramento Bee points to its database where you can look up various salaries of California City Managers.

Created with Caspio

Definitions for the Detail Salary Report:

Pension Formula: Shows the amount a city manager gets upon retirement based on salary and years of service. For instance, a city manager retiring at 55 after 30 years of service in a "2 @ 55" plan would get 60 percent of her salary in annual pension benefits.

Employer Retirement Contribution: Any amount of the employee’s share of pension contribution paid by the employer.

Deferred Compensation: Any amount the employer contributed to a deferred compensation plan, such as a 401(k) style plan, on behalf of the employee.

Back in August of 2010, the Los Angeles Times wrote an article revealing the fact Weho's salary for City Manager makes it the highest per capita salary in the country, "The Times analysis found cities with more residents and larger budgets tended to pay their chief executives more, but the exceptions were more notable than the rule. West Hollywood, a city of 36,000, had one of the county’s highest payouts: Paul Arevalo earned $285,496 last year."  Not only was Arevalo's 2010 payout one of the highest in California, but it also tops the nation in highest paid City Manager's.  The corruption of the City of West Hollywood is supported if not established by Arevalo.  Take notes folks, because tonight you are able to question the actions of this man and the allowance by the City Council members.

L-R Mike Jenkins, City Attorney; Paul Arevalo, City Manager & John D'Amico, Council Member

I am not sure where the Sacramento Bee and Los Angeles Times got the information pertaining to Mr. Arevalo's salary, perhaps the foolish fodder the City feeds people and organizations, but when I look at the West Hollywood 2011-2012 budget, I am faced with much different figures than those reported to the paper, back in 2010.  With the budget presenting figures for City Manager Salary for 2007-08, it states $502,108; 2008-2009 $573,626; 2009-2010 $580,746; 2010-2011 $559,410 and for 2011-2012 he is being paid $568,403 for his services and including the fringes I mention above.  He is averaging $2,255 per Business Day.  

Detail from the West Hollywood Budget 2011-2012

For a hired gun, isn't there someone else less corrupt, better with his/her job and more affordable?  I think it's time to give the guy 'the boot'.