High Stakes, Dirty Water, Red Flags: What LCCN Has Reported So Far

By Brian Hews

Publisher | Follow X

December 29, 2025

• X
• Nextdoor
• Pinterest
• Facebook
• Threads
• Bluesky
• LinkedIn
• Mail

Over the past two weeks, Los Cerritos Community News has published three installments of High Stakes, Dirty Water, Red Flags, an investigative series examining governance, transparency, and legal compliance issues involving Central Basin Director Juan Garza, the California Cities for Self-Reliance Joint Powers Authority, and the Central Basin Municipal Water District.

The series began with reporting that Garza has served since March 2020 as executive director of the California Cities for Self-Reliance JPA, a publicly funded agency representing the cardroom cities of Bell Gardens, Commerce, Compton, and Hawaiian Gardens. LCCN documented that for more than four years, the JPA’s operations were conducted through Six Heron, Garza’s privately owned public-relations and government-relations firm.

__________________

High Stakes, Dirty Water, Red Flags: How Central Basin’s Juan Garza Turned a Public JPA Into a One-Man Operation

__________________

Public records and solicitation documents showed that Garza’s personal email address, company cellphone, and Bellflower P.O. Box were listed as the JPA’s primary operational and procurement contacts. That structure, as reported in Part One, effectively placed the day-to-day control of a public agency inside a private business, raising questions about transparency, oversight, and public access.

Part Two of the series examined how that private control intersects with Garza’s elected role at Central Basin, where he votes on water rates, infrastructure spending, and long-term policies affecting the very cities that fund his JPA executive-director salary. That overlap is especially pronounced in Hawaiian Gardens, a JPA member city that lies within Garza’s own Central Basin division and is heavily dependent on cardroom-generated revenue.

________________

High Stakes, Dirty Water, Red Flags Part Two: Central Basin Director Juan Garza’s Overlapping Roles, and the Law He May Have Already Violated

________________

LCCN’s reporting showed that Garza receives $6,744 in monthly compensation from the JPA while also collecting thousands in stipends as a Central Basin director, placing him in simultaneous roles as both an advocate for member cities through the JPA and a regulator responsible for independent oversight at the water district. Part Two detailed how those dual responsibilities raise concerns about divided loyalty, overlapping authority, and whether meaningful separation between the two roles exists in practice.

Part Three shifted the focus from conflicts to consequences, examining the legal framework governing incompatible public offices under California law. That installment laid out how Government Code 1099 operates automatically when a public official assumes or renews a second public office that is incompatible with the first. The statute does not require proof of misconduct or intent; it turns solely on whether the duties of the two positions could conflict as a matter of law.

_________________

High Stakes, Dirty Water, Red Flags, Part Three: How Garza’s JPA Contract Renewal Vacated His Central Basin Water Seat Under G.C. 1099

_________________

LCCN reported that Garza was already serving as the JPA’s executive director when he took the oath at Central Basin in December 2020, and that he has renewed his paid JPA contract multiple times while serving as a water director and as Central Basin’s delegate to the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California. 

The series reviewed Attorney General guidance holding that public officials who manage public funds, oversee operations, execute contracts, and direct advocacy are typically considered holders of public office—not exempt employees—under incompatible-office analysis.

The reporting also examined Garza’s public responses, in which he asserted that his JPA role is exempt under statutory provisions for employment and advisory bodies. 

LCCN contrasted those claims with Attorney General precedent emphasizing that incompatibility is evaluated based on real-world duties and authority, not titles or labels, and that statutory authorization to serve in one dual role does not immunize an official from conflicts created by a separate, unrelated office.

Taken together, the first three installments have outlined a factual record, a legal framework, and a timeline that raise unresolved questions about governance, compliance, and the legal status of actions taken by Garza during the period in question.

Because of the holiday week, Los Cerritos Community News is pausing publication of new investigative installments. The series will resume after the New Year with its concluding chapters, which will examine enforcement mechanisms under California law, including the role of the Attorney General and the quo warranto process, and what options exist for addressing potential violations.