A consultant at the center of a district attorney’s probe into backroom dealings at Huntington Park City Hall has ties to companies and clients that have been paid more than $16.5 million since July 2022, according to analysis by the Southern California News Group.
Nearly $6 million of the total went to a company owned by consultant Efren Martinez — Express Transportation, the city’s shuttle service provider — while the rest went to clients of his consulting firm. Those clients included the city’s IT provider, its street sweeper, a construction company paid millions for an aquatics center that was never built and the city attorney who reviewed many of the agreements with the companies on the city’s behalf.
City officials would only provide limited responses to questions because the contracts, particularly with Express Transportation and JT Construction — the contractor hired for the aquatics center — are now the subject of internal and external investigations.
“The City of Huntington Park remains firmly committed to transparency and public accountability,” a city spokesperson said. “At the same time, we must protect the integrity of ongoing investigations and audits involving JT Construction and Express Transportation. These matters are still under active review, and, as such, audit-related materials and findings are not available for release at this time.”
Huntington Park, a city with 54,000 residents and a median household income of $56,952, has an annual budget of about $93 million.
Though the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office announced its investigation, dubbed “Operation Dirty Pond,” is focused on the $14 million spent on the missing aquatics center, investigators listed “Efren Martinez” as the case name on a search warrant executed at City Hall in February. The seized files included at least four of Martinez’s clients.
The District Attorney’s Office simultaneously raided Martinez’s home, the office of his consulting company, the city-owned property leased to Express Transportation and the home of JT Construction’s owners, as well as the homes of City Manager Ricardo Reyes, former Councilmembers Graciela Ortiz and Marilyn Sanabria, and current Councilmembers Karina Macias and Eddie Martinez. Search warrants for those locations have not been made public.
In a letter, Senior Investigator Matthew Dillier told city officials prosecutors are looking into alleged bribery, misappropriation of public funds, conflict of interest, money laundering and conspiracy.
Martinez declined to be interviewed, instead providing a statement via text message. He did not respond to a series of questions about his clients and companies, saying the questions “lack both merit and legitimacy.”
“The allegations that prompted an investigation on me are clearly a politically motivated attack, led by a council member I’ve supported a recall effort against, and a city administrator that’s been publicly known to be facing scrutiny and termination by the immediate past city council majority due to longstanding incompetence,” he wrote.
“It’s an unfortunate reflection of ongoing political infighting within City of Huntington Park’s leadership. As I have done nothing wrong, I will work with authorities to set the record straight and I’m confident that once the facts are reviewed, the truth will come to light and justice will prevail.”
While the City Council is now distancing itself from Martinez, the city’s administration has known about many of these allegations for years.
A lawsuit filed by former Huntington Park employees in 2020 alleged the city had gone on a “spending spree” that included entering into a “no-bid contract to build an unnecessary public pool that will cost a staggering $40,000,000.” The lawsuit alleges city officials colluded with Martinez to use the “coffers of Huntington Park as their own personal piggy bank.”
City employees alleged in the lawsuit and in a separate complaint to the Public Employment Relations Board that the city retaliated against them, either by placing them on leave or firing them, for testifying to PERB in a related case and for expressing concerns about the city’s fiscal management. One employee was arrested for “unauthorized computer access,” though she claimed she was backing up evidence of potential malfeasance. Charges were never formally filed.
The city paid out hundreds of thousands of dollars in settlements as a result, according to Oshea Orchid, an attorney who represented some of the employees in the PERB case and is now representing one in a pending lawsuit accusing the city of retaliation.
The idea that city officials are now surprised by these contracts is “ridiculous,” Orchid said.
“Our clients have known for a long time that there was a problem, that’s why there was so much litigation over the last few years,” Orchid said. “Many of them are members of the community and really care about what is happening there and how the community’s taxes are being spent.”
JT Construction
The Los Angeles-based JT Construction is at the forefront of the district attorney’s investigation. Though the aquatic center project has made little progress in the last six years and remains a fenced-in dirt lot today, the company continued to collect payments from the city as recently as 2024.
The Huntington Park City Council originally selected JT Construction in August 2019 for a no-bid contract to design and build a $24 million, 30,000-square-foot, “two-story state-of-the-art aquatic center” with an Olympic-size pool, locker rooms, showers, saunas, a gym, public restrooms, a new football field and a new playground at Salt Lake Park.
JT Construction was one of 16 clients that paid Martinez’s firm, Unified Consulting Services, at least $10,000 in 2019, according to financial disclosures filed for Martinez’s run for state Assembly. More than half of the clients disclosed at the time had or would soon have business before the Huntington Park City Council.
Many of those same clients donated generously to city councilmembers. Roughly 20% of all campaign contributions flowing to Huntington Park politicians during that time period came from Martinez or his clients, according to a a review by KCET in 2021.
Huntington Park staff members reported they had met with contractors “known to specialize in the aquatic construction field,” yet JT Construction had no such experience.
The company’s proposal — the only option brought forward by city staff — states it had been established in 2015 to “provide remodeling of commercial buildings, healthcare facilities, medical offices as well as ground-up construction.” A work history attached to the agenda matched that description. There wasn’t a single swimming pool listed.
The city’s no-bid selection of JT Construction was quickly challenged by the Construction Industry Force Account Council, a nonprofit that represents contractors and labor unions by ensuring state and local governments comply with public contracting codes.
The project hit another roadblock at the same time. Salt Lake Park, built atop a former landfill, required millions of dollars in soil remediation before the project could proceed.
The city, facing a potential lawsuit and setbacks, opted to restart the project and put it out to bid in December 2020.
Records show the city had already paid JT Construction $8.6 million — 35% of the total project’s cost — as of September 2020. A clause in the contract required an upfront payment of 30% of total cost. A public contracting expert who spoke on the condition of anonymity described such a large advance as “unusual” in government contracts and as a huge risk for the city.
Invoices submitted by JT Construction later described this as a “progress payment” and listed partial charges for materials and structures — $841,000 for masonry walls, $892,800 for a swimming pool and $108,810 for an elevator, among other items — that ultimately never made it to the site.
The staff report for the December 2020 meeting where the project was put out to bid made no mention of those expended funds. Nor were the spent millions mentioned in August 2021, when the City Council voted to award the full $24 million contract to JT Construction again.
The project, however, did not make any significant progress after that, though the city continued to make payments to JT Construction.
Records show Huntington Park has paid $800,000 to JT Construction since May 2023. An invoice submitted by the company included charges of $204,262 for “supervision” and another $129,685 for security. The company claimed three employees spent 1,047 hours — 26 full-time workweeks — supervising the stalled project at a rate of $195 per hour.
The city was unable to explain what was being supervised at the time, given that the site is a fenced-in dirt lot today.
“In response to concerns over progress payments and invoicing practices, the City had initiated a thorough review process and begun implementing enhanced oversight measures to ensure greater accountability moving forward,” the city said in a statement.
CIFAC, the nonprofit that challenged the original contract, was not satisfied with the city’s handling of the bidding process, but, facing legal delays and exorbitant costs, opted not to pursue additional litigation. Instead, it forwarded all of the information it had collected to the District Attorney’s Office and has been working with prosecutors on the case since the criminal investigation formally began in 2022.
JT Construction did not respond to requests for comment.
Express Transportation
Express Transportation, the shuttle service provider, is one of the largest contractors in the city and has the most direct connection to Martinez.
The company has run the city’s fixed-route shuttle service and dial-a-ride programs since 2017. Martinez listed himself as an owner of the company on his financial disclosures in 2024. However, his name was removed from the company’s business filings in May 2025, according to the secretary of state’s website.
Express operates out of the city’s public works yard on Bissell Street and pays $2,000 per month for the lease, records showed.
Huntington Park could not provide the annual ridership for either service, though the number of fares collected suggest the service costs more and is used less than a similar service in the neighboring city of South Gate.
The city’s 2024-25 budget indicates the city spent $1.5 million in 2024 on its fixed-route shuttles and received $29,900 back from fares, which would equate to fewer than 40,000 paid riders at 75 cents per ride. The dial-a-ride program, which costs $1 per ride, brought in just $1,200 and cost the city $877,431.
While vying for a five-year extension in 2023, Express claimed its annual ridership in the city is nearly 300,000.
By comparison, South Gate, which is nearly twice as populous as Huntington Park, had 83,000 phone-a-ride trips and 96,000 bus passengers that same year. The city pays $1.4 million per year total for both services and receives about $100,000 from fares and bus passes.
In a statement, Huntington Park stated the City Council directed Reyes to “audit all current city contracts” in 2024, including the contract with Express Transportation, and that it had found “significant deficiencies in the services provided and oversight of those services.” It declined to provide copies of the audits.
“Despite multiple formal requests for financial and ridership data from Express Transportation, the company initially failed to provide the necessary information,” the statement reads. “This lack of transparency prevented the City from verifying ridership numbers, fare revenue, or evaluating the overall effectiveness and efficiency of the services. As a result, the City could not confirm whether additional riders used these services without paying fares.”
Express’ lease agreement for city-owned vehicles and yard space expired in January 2024 and the city is now “reviewing the terms of past agreements, including the below-market lease rate” to ensure that such arrangements “reflect fair market value and protect public resources,” according to the statement.
The city issued a “notice of breach and demand to cure” to Express Transportation on May 21. Express is “disputing the City’s breach claims, asserting that they have provided the requested records and complied with contract terms,” according to the city.
“While the City is limited in its ability to comment on pending legal and investigative matters, it remains committed to a thorough review of all contracts, including those involving Mr. Martinez,” the city said in its statement.
Other payouts questioned
The city paid $5.4 million to another of Martinez’s clients, LAN WAN Enterprises, Huntington Park’s information technology provider, in the last two fiscal years, according to records reviewed by the Southern California News Group. The city, however, could not produce any of the invoices for those payments.
The city’s payments to LAN WAN dramatically increased in recent years. KCET’s review found that LAN WAN had collected about $2.2 million from 2018 to 2020.
That company first received a no-bid contract back in 2014 and has extended — and expanded — since then. Payments to the company rose to more than $2 million per year before the city decided to let the contract expire at the end of 2024.
By comparison, South Gate pays about $1.4 million per year for its IT department. Huntington Park’s new provider is expected to charge roughly $600,000 per year.
LAN WAN’s proposal was ranked the lowest among three proposals when the project went out to bid last year. A scoring sheet attached to the Nov. 18, 2024, agenda indicated LAN WAN scored significantly below its competitors in every category.
The City Council decided to review its options after LAN WAN’s agreement expired in April 2024 and a subsequent audit found “deficiencies and irregularities,” according to a statement from Huntington Park.
Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin
The client lists released by Martinez in 2020 and 2024 included a familiar name: Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin, the city’s longtime attorney. The law firm was paid about $2 million during the time period reviewed.
Attorney Arnold Alvarez-Glasman resigned from the post after nearly a decade in the role during a Feb. 28 council meeting, two days after the district attorney’s raids.
In a statement, Huntington Park acknowledged community concerns about potential conflict of interests with Alvarez-Glasman’s handling of contracts with Martinez’s other clients. The law firm, its owners and family members gave nearly $80,000 to Martinez’s political campaigns.
In a statement, Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin stated that all campaign contributions were “lawfully disclosed and reported” and do not “inherently create a conflict of interest.”
The city now says it is “reviewing all contracts negotiated during Mr. Glasman’s tenure to ensure compliance with legal and ethical standards.”
“The City has taken corrective action, including appointment of new legal counsel,” the statement reads. “Given the ongoing nature of legal and investigative reviews, the City must defer comment on specific legal matters, including any conflict of interest waivers, to maintain the integrity of the process.”
Alvarez-Glasman & Colvin denied any impropriety, stating it provided the city with “professional representation in strict compliance with ethical and legal standards” and did not at any time represent Martinez, or his company. It was not aware of the identities of Martinez’s other clients, according to the statement.
Contract negotiations were “managed directly by the Huntington Park City Manager,” the firm stated. Neither Alvarez-Glasman nor his firm met with or negotiated with JT Construction or its representatives regarding the aquatics center contract. The initial drafts “included limited payments in the early phases,” the firm stated.
“Records and communications demonstrate that changes to these terms, including the early-stage significant payment, were directed by City Manager Rick Reyes and were not recommended by AGC or Mr. Alvarez-Glasman as City Attorney,” the statement reads.
The firm utilized Unified Consulting for community and government outreach and relations, but is now reviewing the continuation of those services. All interactions between Alvarez-Glasman and Unified Consulting have been “strictly professional,” according to the statement.
The decision to terminate its contract with Huntington Park was “based solely on differences with city leadership regarding adherence to legal advice and guidance provided by AGC and was not related to any investigation involving Mr. Martinez.”
“The City’s current challenges and controversies are wholly independent of AGC’s prior professional services,” the statement reads. “AGC intends to vigorously defend against any malicious attempts to improperly attribute these challenges to the firm or its representatives.”