The law firm that represented Building a Better Redondo in its successful lawsuit against the City of Redondo Beach has filed a motion seeking $355,000 in legal fees from the city.
Angel Law on Sept. 24 filed a motion for attorney fees in the amount of $354,978 relating to the Superior Court case in which BBR successfully forced harbor zoning onto the upcoming November ballot as Measure G.
Councilman Pat Aust expressed outrage. He noted the lawsuit was filed in late May and decided in late July. And he said that BBR’s own website showed a lawsuit fundraising drive with a goal of $70,000.
“It is utterly flabbergasting it could cost that much for such a short period of time,” Aust said. “I mean, it’s a few weeks worth of work.”
Councilman Steve Aspel called the fees “obscene” took aim at attorney Frank Angel and BBR chair Jim Light, and Councilman Bill Brand, a BBR supporter.
“Jim Light and his attorney are trying to rape the city,” Aspel said. “It’s legalized rape…And if Bill Brand wants to help destroy the city financially to prove a point, that is his business. But that is what he is doing.”
Light said the city should have seen this coming. He said BBR’s fundraising goal was only to provide the “cap fee” for Angel, and that every law firm they approached said the lawsuit would cost more than $300,000.
“I am surprised they are surprised, actually,” Light said. “I don’t think they realize how much research our attorney had to do….I think it’s crocodile tears. They had to know this was coming. Now they are posturing because of the Measure G vote.”
Angel defended his fees.
“All I can say is they have spent money on two outside law firms and they have a city attorney who has continued to fight to disenfranchise the voters, and now they are complaining they have to pay for work whereby we have enfranchised the voters,” Angel said. “They complain about everything…They never take responsibility for their own actions.”
Brand said he warned the council a lawsuit would be costly and urged the approval of a public vote.
“I made the motion to put this big zoning up for a public vote a year ago,” Brand said. “We could have already voted it down and had a public process moving along with resident support, without incurring legal fees to keep it off the ballot.” ER
