Larry Agran may have tried to get Great Park CFO Colleen Clark fired because she was “speaking about Great Park issues to these Republicans.”
Tuesday’s release of the Deposition of Colleen Clark by Great Park forensic auditors was about as expected: more solid evidence of shoddy work, over-payment, and dictatorial control by Larry Agran. CFO Clark also tells of trying to get the billing reduced for some particularly shoddy feasibility reports from The Design Studio.
Amongst four redacted pages of CFO Clark discussing her interactions with Larry Agran, two brief sections remain un-redacted:
Q All Right. And the CEO would be present, and you as Deputy CEO would be present, as well, a these visioning meeting?
A Yes, I would … he [Larry Agran] would invite me in. …
[three pages redacted]
“Q All right. And was the implication that you were speaking about Great Park issues to these republicans [sic]?
A Yes
Q And what was Mr. Cooper’s role with the city?
A He was the Manager of Operations for the Great Park
[ one page redacted]
Q What did you do after that? Did you take any steps to seek other employment?
A I did.
A lot could be in those redacted sections. The remaining unredacted comments may not actually be related. But….
Poor Colleen. She struck me as pretty honest at the County and that’s saying a lot in the Hall of Admin, although, tellingly she wasn’t there very long.
Too bad about the redactions, although I’m not sure what the purpose is. There is no criminal investigation going on. We ought to get the whole story. Then we will really see how badly the Agran/Forde klown kar botched this whole thing up.
“There is no criminal investigation going on.”
Read the transcript, where only the prosecution’s side (on which Judge Stock appears de facto to be there) is represented in questioning. That doesn’t trouble your anti-government sensibilities? The selective release of these documents, timed to influence an election, doesn’t concern you either? Really? Or is it just that, in this case, you like the people whose hands operate the government machinery?
Either you and others have been bluffing and blustering about wanting to see Agran in jail over this, or you think that these proceedings may well end up in criminal convictions. If the latter is true, then the question is: do you want to commit yourself to due process or not? Sadly, you’ve come at least quite close to answering it.
The given reason for the redactions is that the City is preparing a lawsuit that will claw back enough money from various contractors to pay for the Audit.
However, given the current depth of division of Irvine City politics, I would guess some folks are looking for an indictment before the November elections, even if the charge won’t ultimately stick.
A lot of people want Larry gone
This is your grist for scandal? A random sentence coming after a three-page redaction.
Come on, Tyler. This is embarrassing. Up your game.
Zenger, I hope that you agree, but whatever….
” This is embarrassing’
Yes, but for whom?
For whom, indeed.
The apologists are going to be running out of room on the melting floe. Who will be the last to jump off? Let’s start a pool…
For you. And for David, if he still wants to defend you.
You’re whole freaking premise for the story is based on reading something into a single statement that lacks context almost to the maximal degree. We have no idea what was said before that, except that it apparently may have involved a Mr. Cooper. We don’t know if “talking the Republicans” involves something that Agram supposedly dislikes (as your question about it being a “firing offense,” despite that she was not fired in its wake, implies), or if she was referring to Republicans like Arthur Forde, to whom NOT talking might be, you would better be able to argue, a firing offense.
You’re conjuring this out of nothing. That’s embarrassing. This isn’t an ideological observation; we have plenty of conservatives here who can conjure a hypothesis out of, at least, something. But this is simply irresponsible. I could construct questions preceding this comment that would make the best reading of it maligh, benign, or neither. There’s no story there.
Zenger? Does this stab in the dark followed by victory dance really meet your standards of citizen journalism?
Greg, I believe you are an actual lawyer, right?
I would love your take on this deposition — and not just the redacted part.
Thanks –Tyler
I’ve read up to the redacted section. So far, I am not blown away.