Huntington Park Corruption Probe: The Unbuilt Aquatic Center and Operation Dirty Pond

Wren Crowe

1 week ago

The city of Huntington Park, California, currently finds itself at the center of a major corruption investigation as authorities seek to determine what happened to millions of dollars allocated for an aquatic center that was never built. On February 26, 2025, the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office executed multiple search warrants at various locations including Huntington Park City Hall and several residences of current and former city officials. This investigation, dubbed “Operation Dirty Pond,” has revealed troubling questions about the management of public funds and potential corruption within the city government. While the search warrants targeted several locations, the available information does not specifically confirm warrants being served at the Police or Fire Departments.

However, six years after the initial announcement, the promised aquatics center at Salt Lake Park remains unbuilt, prompting serious questions about where the allocated funds have gone

In 2019, Huntington Park officials announced plans for a $24-million aquatics center featuring an Olympic-size pool that would serve residents of the working-class community. City leaders proudly declared that the aquatic programs would “allow the community to unite for play, competition, fitness, and learning at all ages” while creating “a stronger relationship with the community, increasing access, public engagement, and recruitment into higher education opportunities”1. The project was presented as a significant improvement for local residents and was met with considerable enthusiasm.

However, six years after the initial announcement, the promised aquatics center at Salt Lake Park remains unbuilt, prompting serious questions about where the allocated funds have gone. The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office began investigating this matter in November 2022, focusing specifically on the potential misuse of millions of dollars in public funds that had been earmarked for the construction of the aquatics facility5. The fact that such a substantial public works project announced with significant fanfare has failed to materialize after several years naturally raised red flags for investigators.

The situation becomes more concerning when considering the query information that the $24 million contract for the aquatic center was reportedly awarded to JT Construction Group, Inc. without a competitive bidding process. While the search results do not specifically confirm this detail, this type of non-competitive award would represent a significant deviation from standard government contracting procedures designed to ensure transparency and value for taxpayer money.

“My office is committed to ensuring that public officials uphold the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and transparency”
District Attorney Hochman

The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s investigation, codenamed “Operation Dirty Pond” in a direct reference to the missing aquatics center, became public knowledge on February 26, 2025, when search warrants were executed at multiple locations throughout Huntington Park5. District Attorney Nathan J. Hochman announced that members of his Bureau of Investigation had served warrants at 11 different locations in connection with the ongoing public corruption probe5.

“My office is committed to ensuring that public officials uphold the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and transparency,” District Attorney Hochman stated. “When concerns arise about the use of public funds or the actions of those in office, it is our duty to investigate thoroughly and protect the public’s trust”5. This strong statement underscores the seriousness with which the District Attorney’s Office is approaching potential corruption within the Huntington Park city government.

The investigation appears to be comprehensive in scope, with investigators seizing numerous items from each searched location, including public records maintained by the city of Huntington Park, financial paperwork, computers, tablets, cellphones, and various forms of electronic equipment2. These seizures suggest that authorities are gathering extensive evidence regarding the financial transactions and communications surrounding the failed aquatics center project.

Salt Lake Park itself, located at 3401 E. Florence Avenue, which was the proposed site for the never-built aquatic center

According to available information, search warrants were executed at several key locations, including:

Huntington Park City Hall, located at 6550 Miles Avenue, which serves as the administrative center of the city government5. Photos posted on social media showed police tape blocking the entrance to City Hall and a white van in the parking lot during the execution of the warrants1.

The City of Huntington Park Public Works facility (City Yard), located east of Salt Lake Park at 6900 Bissell Street5. This department would likely have been closely involved in planning and oversight of the proposed aquatics center project.

Salt Lake Park itself, located at 3401 E. Florence Avenue, which was the proposed site for the never-built aquatic center5. Examining this location could provide investigators with valuable information about any preliminary work that may or may not have been performed at the site.

The warrants were also served at the residences of several current and former Huntington Park officials, including:

Mayor Karina Macias, who currently serves as the city’s highest elected official1 2. As mayor, Macias would have had significant oversight of major city projects including the proposed aquatics center.
Councilmember Eduardo “Eddie” Martinez, a current member of the Huntington Park City Council1. City council members typically vote on approval of major contracts and expenditures.
Former council members Graciela Ortiz and Marilyn Sanabria (the sister of a current council member), who may have been involved in the initial approval of the aquatics center project1.

Additionally, Huntington Park City Manager Ricardo Reyes was served with a warrant1. As city manager, Reyes would have had direct administrative oversight of city operations and major projects, including the proposed aquatics center.

Exceptions to competitive bidding requirements do exist in certain circumstances, but they generally require strong justification and are subject to additional scrutiny

While the specific details about the contract award process are not fully outlined in the search results, the query suggests that the $24 million contract for the aquatic center was awarded to JT Construction Group, Inc. without a competitive bidding process. This bypassing of standard competitive bidding procedures raises significant concerns about potential favoritism, conflicts of interest, or other improprieties in the procurement process.

Government contracts, particularly those involving substantial public funds, typically require competitive bidding to ensure transparency, fairness, and the best value for taxpayers. Exceptions to competitive bidding requirements do exist in certain circumstances, but they generally require strong justification and are subject to additional scrutiny.

The alleged non-competitive award of such a large contract would naturally draw attention from investigators concerned with potential corruption. Questions would likely focus on why standard procurement procedures were not followed, who made those decisions, whether there were any relationships between city officials and the construction company, and whether any improper influence or benefits were involved in the contract award.

The execution of multiple search warrants across numerous locations, including city facilities and officials’ homes, indicates that investigators had gathered significant preliminary evidence to convince a judge that these searches were legally justified

Although the available information doesn’t specifically mention search warrants being served at police or fire departments, it’s worth understanding the legal framework governing search warrants in this context. While search result4 relates to Texas law rather than California law, it outlines general principles that apply to search warrants.

Search warrants can only be issued when there is probable cause to believe evidence of a crime will be found at the location to be searched. For a warrant to be issued in a public corruption case like this, investigators would need to present sufficient evidence to a judge suggesting that documents, electronic records, or other materials related to potential criminal activity might be located at the specified locations4.

The execution of multiple search warrants across numerous locations, including city facilities and officials’ homes, indicates that investigators had gathered significant preliminary evidence to convince a judge that these searches were legally justified. This suggests the investigation had already developed substantial information about potential wrongdoing before the public learned of the probe.

Current Status and Next Steps

As of the date of the search warrants (February 26, 2025), the investigation appears to be ongoing, with no public announcements of arrests or charges. District Attorney Hochman specifically commended “our dedicated prosecutors and investigators for their diligent work on this complex case” and emphasized that “their unwavering commitment to justice ensures that no one — regardless of their position or title — is above the law”5.

The seizure of extensive electronic and paper records suggests that investigators are now in a phase of carefully reviewing evidence to determine whether there is sufficient basis for criminal charges. Public corruption cases often involve complex financial transactions and documentation, requiring careful analysis to establish potential criminal conduct.

The residents of Huntington Park, who were promised a state-of-the-art aquatics center that never materialized, will likely be watching closely as this investigation unfolds. The $24 million in question represents a significant investment of public funds for a working-class community, and the accountability for those resources is a matter of substantial public interest.

As “Operation Dirty Pond” continues, the ultimate resolution will likely have significant implications for governance in Huntington Park

The corruption probe in Huntington Park focused on the missing aquatics center funds presents a troubling case study in questions of public accountability and transparency. Six years after the announcement of a major community improvement project, residents still lack the promised facility, while investigators seek to determine what happened to the millions allocated for its construction.

The execution of search warrants at multiple locations, including City Hall and the homes of current and former officials, signifies the seriousness with which authorities are approaching potential corruption within the city government. While the specific involvement of police or fire departments in the warrant service is not confirmed by the available information, the investigation clearly encompasses numerous city facilities and officials.

As “Operation Dirty Pond” continues, the ultimate resolution will likely have significant implications for governance in Huntington Park and potentially serve as a reminder of the importance of proper oversight, transparent procurement processes, and accountability in the management of public funds. The working-class residents of Huntington Park, who stood to benefit from the promised aquatics center, deserve clear answers about what happened to the resources allocated for this community improvement project.

Citations: