Did They, or Didn’t They?

The City of Irvine has once again apparently contradicted itself. The latest example is the City’s response below to a letter from attorney Kevin Shenkman demanding that the Irvine adopt district elections or face a potential California Voting Rights Act (CVRA) lawsuit.

In the city’s response, the City Attorney wrote that the city has “…already retained Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP to serve as its litigation counsel…”

This writer submitted a public records request for all documents and electronic correspondence including any fee schedules or cost estimates related to retaining the law firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP for possible litigation services in this matter.

In the record request response below, the city writes that, “Per the City Attorney’s Office, the City Manger’s office and the Financial Management & Strategic Planning Department, there are no responsive records to provide.”

So, did the city in fact, retain Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and if so, how did they do that without any documentation? If they have not retained the law firm, how does that square with the written assertion of the City Attorney that they had?