Agran questioned for Great Park audit
Saying he’s “proud of what we achieved,” former Irvine Mayor Larry Agran defended how $200 million was spent under his watch during his deposition in the lingering Great Park audit.
The 28-year Irvine City Council member and three-term mayor, who was voted out of office last November, served as chairman of the Great Park Board of Directors from 2005 to 2010. The audit covers expenditures from 2005 to 2012.
During his deposition March 13, Agran told attorney Anthony Taylor of the firm Aleshire & Wyndner representing the city that cost projections compared to revenue went “sideways” in the economic downturn beginning in 2007, but he does not regret decisions to move forward with design and construction.
“We not only created a master design of exemplary quality, but we also built various features of the park, activated them, did so in accordance with complete transparency and with a great deal of success at a time when everybody else was hunkering down or refusing to build anything,” Agran stated.
Agran testified he had no oversight of personnel decisions and contractor billing processes. He said that was the domain of the Great Park CEO and the Design Studio.
“I always saw my role as encouraging the parties to work it out,” Agran said.
He also defended the boost from $50,000 to $100,000 per month for public relations work contracted to the Newport Beach firm of Forde & Mollrich. He called principal Arnold Forde a “brilliant strategist” who was instrumental in first defeating the airport measure before executing major campaigns for the Great Park beginning with the international design competition.
Asked if he thought the $100,000 per month was justified, Agran stated: “In light of the responsibilities that they had, yes, I do.”
Agran was previously subpoenaed to appear Feb. 25 but did not comply. Taylor recorded the proceedings as an Agran no-show then requested City Council approval to seek a court order to compel testimony.
The roughly six-hour deposition conducted in the Los Angeles office of Agran’s attorney Fred Woocher was at times combative on questions relating to park construction and political campaign contributions.
Taylor conceded to meet in Los Angeles to accommodate Woocher, who is recovering from a medical procedure. Agran’s son Ken Agran, also an Irvine attorney, was present as co-counsel for the deposition.
Refuting testimony in one of more than 20 earlier depositions of contractor and city staff members, Agran denied the park has almost nothing to show for close to $200 million in expenditures.
“These are obviously subjective and ridiculous assertions,” he said. “Do you think the Palm Court is a disaster? Do you think the Arts Complex is a disaster? Do you think the South Lawn and the athletic fields are a disaster?”
When Taylor’s probe turned toward Agran’s knowledge of anyone who worked on the Great Park also assisting him with his campaigns, the deposition ground to a stalemate.
After Agran stated that all contributions above $100 have already been submitted as required by disclosure laws, Woocher objected to what constituted a campaign “volunteer” on the grounds that private, unpaid consultation with someone the candidate may have an association with is protected under the first amendment.
Taylor did not budge on stating the question to include campaign volunteers. Before adjourning, he reserved the right to compel further testimony on the subject.