Buyout Proposed to End Cunliffe’s Service With City

Los Angeles General Services Department head Sylvia Cunliffe would remain on a paid leave of absence until her 55th birthday in March and then resign from city service under a proposal to be considered today by the City Council, The Times has learned.

The proposal is essentially identical to one suggested last month by Councilman Hal Bernson during a stormy, closed-door session. Hammered out between Cunliffe’s attorneys and city negotiators, the proposal would also include some unused sick-leave benefits. The total package, based on Cunliffe’s $90,243 annual salary, would work out to about $35,000 in pay and benefits between now and March 4, sources familiar with the proposal said.

After that, Cunliffe would collect the pension benefits--about 65% of her current pay--that she has earned during 30 years of city service.

Neither attorneys for Cunliffe nor the city were available to comment on the terms of the proposal.

A majority of the council members--including several Cunliffe supporters--have argued that firing her could trigger a major legal fight that would not only be divisive, but costly to the city. Buying Cunliffe out would end the controversy once and for all, while at the same time saving taxpayers potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal costs, pro-Cunliffe council members have argued.

Cunliffe has been on a paid leave of absence since last June pending an investigation Mayor Tom Bradley ordered after charging her with nepotism in the hiring of relatives, favoritism in the granting of contracts to friends and improper use of police records to discredit an intra-departmental critic. On Oct. 27, Bradley recommended that Cunliffe, who has denied the charges, be fired.

The council will decide whether to accept the proposal at a closed-door debate scheduled for today.

The main terms of the proposal differ only slightly from those suggested by Councilman Bernson on Nov. 13, when the council decided to explore buying Cunliffe out as an alternative to firing her, the sources said.

Bernson had proposed that Cunliffe receive unused sick pay and her full salary until March 4, her 55th birthday, when she would formally resign as general manager. She would then be entitled to begin receiving her pension benefits.

Council members Zev Yaroslavsky and Gloria Molina have opposed settling with Cunliffe, arguing during the Nov. 13 council session that a buyout would send the wrong message to other city employees and especially to so-called “whistle-blowers” who expose government abuses. It was one such whistle-blower, Robert O’Neill, who disclosed that Cunliffe had agreed to rent city-owned property to friends at below market prices.

Negotiators representing both the council and Cunliffe have met repeatedly over the last several weeks to reach an accord.

If the proposal leads to a settlement, a lawsuit Cunliffe filed to prevent the city attorney, who has advised her over the years, from representing the city in the case against her would likely be dismissed.

Presumably, Bradley would have to concur in order for any settlement to go forward.

Cunliffe still faces possible criminal charges from an investigation into her possession of sensitive criminal records about O’Neill, a departmental real estate agent critical of Cunliffe. The district attorney has been considering whether to prosecute Cunliffe and possibly others for the use of the records.

If Cunliffe and the city come to terms, it would represent the second time in less than a week that a city general manager has agreed to resign under a cloud. Last Friday, former Cultural Affairs Department General Manager Fred Croton, 53, quit his post after Bradley’s allegations that he lied on his 1980 job application about his employment history.