Mailbag: Readers sound off on local elections
Costa Mesa is safer than candidate implies
I voted for Katrina Foley the last time she ran for Costa Mesa City Council, before she quit halfway through her second term. I won’t be voting for her again on Tuesday.
As a liberal Democrat, she’s been a champion of public-employee unions, which are among her largest source of campaign contributions. The unions’ financial support, which also includes independent expenditures, combined with the manpower to litter the city with her campaign signs and the funds to rent a polluting airplane to pull a campaign banner over a community event, has been a good investment for them.
As a council member, Foley was among those who approved massive, unsustainable retroactive pension increases that helped put the city more than $250 million in debt while crippling our general fund with ever-increasing pension payments.
This campaign, Foley and her running mate have a new source of campaign funds: motel operators. I guarantee you that if Mayor Jim Righeimer ever received a dime for these folks, he’d return it immediately.
Led by Righeimer, this City Council passed a tough-on-crime ordinance in January that has reduced police calls to motels by nearly 70% and has resulted in the city’s most problematic motel, the Costa Mesa Motor Inn, wanting to demolish the motel and put up quality homes adjacent to the Costa Mesa Country Club. This is real leadership.
Desperate to not run on her record, Foley recently wrote a wildly misleading, “sky is falling” commentary about how crime-ridden Costa Mesa has become (“Commentary: Righeimer, council let city down on public safety,” Oct. 28). Silly season at its silliest. Costa Mesa is a safe place to live and work.
Serious crime has dropped dramatically over the last few years, and the City Council — led by Righeimer — has poured in serious resources to take a holistic approach to public safety by reducing crime at problem motels, replacing rundown apartments and a junkyard with brand-new, owner-occupied homes, tackling the nuisance behaviors associated with bad-neighbor group homes, and fixing rundown infrastructure that had been neglected by previous city councils.
Foley’s scare tactics aren’t scary for anyone with common sense and the ability to look around at our beautiful city and see the improvements, large and small, happening all around them.
Our city deserves better than retread politicians who want to go back to the old days when public employee unions ran our town into financial ruin and motels operators used our police department as their own private security force. Vote for Righeimer and Lee Ramos.
Steve Mensinger
Costa Mesa
The writer is Costa Mesa’s mayor pro-tem.
*
Costa Mesa political mail misleads
I began to pay attention to city politics in 1998 because of an issue in my neighborhood. In all this time I have not seen the level or amount of dishonest campaign mailers that I see this year.
My challenge as the leader of a grassroots community group with members of every political party has been competing with an opponent who has not cared about the veracity of his campaign material, and, when including loans, boasts a $149,000 war chest, more than half of it financed from out-of-towners.
Costa Mesans from all political parties comprise the group I represent. We are nonpartisan regarding party affiliation. City Council races should remain nonpartisan.
Since I am a Republican I get daily mail pieces from Mayor Jim Righeimer’s campaign, the tightly controlled Republican Central Committee, and political action committees (PACs) representing out-of-towners, all claiming the same “accomplishments.” These mailers consistently repeat simple phrases that will resonate with voters but are a cynical attempt to mislead us. They are what people want to hear, but are not always reflective of reality. If enough people found out the truth, my belief is they would not return this person to office.
Budget deficit and surplus claims, no. He does not appear to understand the city financial reports. He never voted for a balanced budget. The gross error of these claims has been debunked on the La Femme Wonkita blog written by Councilwoman Sandy Genis with links to actual city documents.
He lowered crime, no. Stats for some categories, such as drunk driving, are down because there are fewer officers available to keep drunks off our streets, therefore they don’t get caught and don’t get reported. Crimes, such as burglary, rose dramatically over the last four years, and many Costa Mesans realize that with a diminished police force, we are not as safe in our homes as we were.
Infrastructure claims, no. Most decisions were made way before he got on the council. Credit for Broadway and Harbor Boulevard improvements in his campaign mailers is (largely) not his to take. Broadway: the Safe Routes to School project was initiated by former Councilwoman Katrina Foley and Councilwoman Wendy Leece way before his time.
Harbor Boulevard: Mandated mitigation for removing Gisler Bridge from master plan of highways in 2008. Mesa Verde, Eastside, College Park and Westside improvements were decided by previous councils. What does it say about his character for him to take credit for what he did not do?
And Righeimer is credited in a mailing that he did all this stuff without raising taxes! The truth is that City Council has no ability or authority whatsoever to increase taxes — none. Zero. Zip. Only the voters can increase taxes.
We need a new City Council. The only ones with a realistic shot to defeat Righeimer are Katrina Foley and Jay Humphrey. Not only are they positioned to win, they have the experience necessary to bring balance back to Costa Mesa.
Robin Leffler
Costa Mesa
The writer is president of Costa Mesans for Responsible Government.
*
Costa Mesa needs a charter
The charter is a short beginning document that allows Costa Mesa voters to give the city direction, set priorities and avoid major mistakes — like the big, closed-door pension increases of the past. Although most provisions in the charter are about city finances and checks and balances, voters could later add other provisions about protecting Fairview Park, open space, lighted sports fields, etc. The proposed charter will protect the city and help save money. California general law protects employee unions and blocks the city from operating efficiently.
Under general law, Costa Mesa city councils in years 2000 through 2010 gave in to union pressure and approved four big increases in employee pensions. These votes caused the city to now have a $228 million unfunded pension liability. The city must soon start paying off this liability over 30 years at $20 million each year, or almost 20% of Costa Mesa’s annual budget. The charter takes away the council’s power to approve pension increases and gives that power to voters, substantially reducing the city’s future risk of new unfunded liabilities. Vote yes on Measure O.
Gene Hutchins
Costa Mesa
The writer is a member of the city Charter and Pension Oversight committees.
*
Costa Mesa doesn’t need a charter
Re. “Commentary: A vote for Measure O is a vote against union control,” (Oct. 21): Devin Lucas states in his article, “Pro-Union (anti charter) protagonists love to contend that the last charter proposal, in 2012, was defeated by a 60-40 margin but fail to acknowledge that the unions pumped in about $500,000 to scare voters into rejecting it.” I am so weary of this mantra about the union being responsible for everything wrong in the city. Does he believe that the 60% who voted against the first charter were all union members? Mr. Lucas and Mr. Mayor, I am not a union member, have never been a union member and am definitely voting against the charter and against the mayor.
Dolores M. Minerich
Costa Mesa
*
Charter allows for home rule
Re. “Commentary: Costa Mesa would be harmed by a city charter,” (Oct. 29): What would be worse than a charter for Costa Mesa? How about an Ebola outbreak, a 7.2 earthquake, or fanatics marching down Harbor Boulevard, their faces covered with black hoods, waving AK47 assault rifles. Any of these would be worse than a charter.
How about liberals and progressives in the United States getting what they really want, which would be total top-down control of the government without checks, balances or the Constitution — in other words, a leftist dictatorship. No more you, no more me, just a number and a uniform. This would be much worse than a charter.
In the past 20 years, pensions for state and local government workers have grown to where they are unsustainable by the governments, with some retirees receiving more than 100% of their working salary each month for as long as they live. This excess reflects the shortcomings of a general law city and is the reason to change to a charter city, where the people of the city will have a say in future pension negotiations.
What would be worse than a charter for Costa Mesa? How about continuing as a general law city whose laws have allowed us to acquire $200-plus million dollars in unfunded pension liability over the last 20 years.
Just like a divorce, it’s time to change. Vote for the charter, Measure O.
Bob Graham
Costa Mesa
The writer is a city parks commissioner.
*
Jay Humphrey has strong character
I confess to being an “outsider” supporting Jay Humphrey for Costa Mesa City Council, and I’ve got a very good reason — he’s my brother. I’ve known and loved him for a long time, so I admit to being a bit biased.
But the reasons I support Jay go way beyond our relationship, and they are deeply serious, because the choices for Costa Mesa’s council this November are as important as anything facing its residents today.
I know a lot about city government; I served the city of Fresno as a council member and mayor from 1981-93, overlapping Jay’s first term on the Costa Mesa council. During that time, I saw Jay build a track record for really listening to what citizens wanted and needed, learning as much as he could about issues, respecting views that differed from his own, and reaching consensus decisions that led to real solutions. I know his values, and I know that his fairness, knowledge, competence and character make him worthy of my support well beyond sisterly loyalty.
In this race, I’ve followed multiple sources about what’s going on in Costa Mesa. Naturally, I’ve talked with Jay and his supporters, but I’ve read many sources, including the Pilot. I also attended a council meeting this past summer and was appalled by the majority’s disrespect for dissenting views. What I’ve read and witnessed convinces me that Costa Mesa is at a crossroads, and the direction it will go depends on who voters choose to fill the two council seats on the ballot.
This election isn’t about selecting among “diverse viewpoints;” it’s about the very quality of city government. It’s about the direction of a city whose council must protect its quality of life and create opportunities for all residents, not just those for whom private profit is paramount.
There are no easy answers to complex city issues, and it’s important that many views be heard and considered in City Hall. It cannot be “my way or the highway” when “my way” effectively disenfranchises citizens. Costa Mesa urgently needs a council that listens to and works with all its citizens — not just the favored few.
I know Jay will bring Costa Mesa the kind of leadership and representation it needs — not because he’s my kid brother and a special person, but because I’ve seen the quality of his character and his work on behalf of Costa Mesa residents over many years. I urge the voters of Costa Mesa to support him for City Council.
Karen Humphrey
Sacramento
The writer is a retired Fresno mayor and councilwoman.
*
A gift to the ‘City of the Arts’
The recent opening of the new $20 million performing arts center at the Costa Mesa High School complex is another step forward for “The City of the Arts.”
This 355-seat venue, the latest upgrade at this campus, is a new local focal point for music, drama, dance and a signature arts academy: Academy of Creative Expression (ACE). But it’s more than that. It’s another example of how public investment in the arts can benefit a broad community.
One measure is that Costa Mesa High, for the first time, has a net inflow of intra-district transfers, including from Newport Beach, and also inter-district transfers: more students are transferring in than out. This is good news for the district and the city. Good schools equate to higher property values and stronger neighborhoods.
Just as carefully targeted investment can attract and return more families to our local schools, an effective city strategy for attracting more “art tourists” can attract more visitors to Costa Mesa. This in turn benefits city residents in two ways.
A successful visitor promotion program, with support for and promotion of city arts at the heart of it, can generate stronger local sales and hotel bed tax dollars. That means that non-residents will pay a higher effective subsidy in support of resident services, lessening the tax burden on local residents. And perhaps just as important, residents will benefit from living in a more vibrant and interesting community.
What would such a strategy look like? Certainly we should be working more closely with the Segerstrom Center for the Arts, including the concert halls and South Coast Repertory, as well as with the Costa Mesa Visitors & Conference Bureau.
We should also be partnering more effectively with the OC Fairgrounds and Pacific Amphitheater. I’ve no doubt that there are many ideas worth pursuing more aggressively and strategically, ideas that can directly benefit many different areas of our city.
Rather than erect a wall of four-story apartment complexes along Newport Boulevard as proposed by the council majority, let’s build partnerships with the hotels and businesses on Newport Blvd, look at some visitor-attracting and visitor-serving uses: a Fun Zone, family restaurants and family-oriented hotels run by proven and reputable operators.
Let’s support the progressive efforts of private ownership development by The Lab and The Camp to encourage a thriving bohemian arts campus.
Naturally the city must carefully consider, on a case-by-case basis and in concert with the businesses, residents and other stakeholders in each case, the best way — in terms both of vision and value-for-dollar — what makes sense for Costa Mesa.
How best to develop a well conceived program, one inspired by the city’s motto — “City of the Arts” — is worth exploring and, in my judgment, worth supporting.
Katrina Foley
Costa Mesa
The writer is a school board trustee and candidate for City Council.
*
A tale of two cities
There are, apparently, two cities of Newport Beach. One, the “city” (lower case c), is all of us residents and taxpayers. The other city is the “City” (capital C), those few who are either on the City Council and commissions or part of the city administration.
Throughout this pre-election blizzard, we, the residents, have been victims of most of the current City Council members dictates of “Yes on Y,” plus a couple of ex-mayors who still like to tell us how to vote.
The present City Council is preaching “transparency,” yet in the state’s official voting guide, of the three major propositions — County E and G and Newport Beach Y — only Y is not printed in its full text.
Instead, we get an “Impartial Analysis by City Attorney.” Our city attorney is anything but “impartial.” Like most attorneys, he’s a hired gun. In this case, he’s the “City’s,” not ours.
It’s an insult that the “City” doesn’t trust us to read the fine print before we vote. Therefore, why should we trust them when they deluge us with their deceitful arguments in favor of Y?
One would hope this will never again happen in Newport Beach. We, the residents , are due better respect by our “city” than this. Strike a blow for mutual respect, trust and the truth: Vote no on Y!
Gordon Glass
Newport Beach
*
Measure Y ignores residents’ will
The city of Newport Beach council members, with the exception of Councilwoman Nancy Gardner, voted for Measure Y as it currently is listed on the Nov. 4 ballot. These council members, along with Measure Y proponents, including the Irvine Co., are telling residents that Measure Y is good for Newport Beach and will enable a walkable Fashion Island area.
Many residents invested thousands of hours in participating in the General Plan Update, led by Gardner as co-chair of the General Plan Advisory Committee in 2006. It was an excellent example of public process at work and developed a general framework for city planning.
Measure Y, on the other hand, has been presented to residents as a minimal impact, characterized by minimal public review. On the contrary, the city’s promotion of Measure Y violates the principles of Greenlight and good planning, and the city’s related disinformation campaign demonstrates a disconcerting lack of respect for the residents.
Laura Curran
Newport Beach
*
More to Y than meets the eye
Measure Y is extremely misleading and deceptive and, in our opinion, dishonest by making promises that are not even specified in the full body of the measure as filed. The only reason it is on the ballot is because it triggered the limitations of the “Greenlight Initiative” Measure S, relative to increasing traffic, additional building and negative environmental impact. Make no mistake, it is not as simple as Irvine Co. trading one project for another.
Debbie Frederickson
Newport Beach
*
A change of heart on Measure Y
As a 34-year resident of Newport Beach, I’m writing this letter because I love our city yet feel I was deceived by signing on to a “support Measure Y” document some time ago. A yes vote in fact negates the Greenlight Initiative, which allows the citizens of Newport Beach to vote on any large development project within the city. Let’s let the citizens vote up or down whether this new development in Fashion Island is wanted and needed. A vote yes on Measure Y will certainly increase traffic, which I’m not in favor of.
George S. Birdsong, Jr.
Newport Beach
*
Find water-supply solutions
Our county water board has had plans for years to significantly increase the capacity of Prado Dam off the 91 Freeway, but hasn’t had the skill and fortitude to work with the federal Army Corps of Engineers and others to get it done. I figured out to effectively work with the corps on the restoration of Upper Newport Bay and dredging of Newport Harbor.
Instead, OCWD, led by the incumbent water board member I’m challenging, has aggressively pursued the siting of a new power plant near a residential area of Anaheim. What’s that got to do with water?
I’m a well-known conservationist with considerable accomplishments in forging solutions to our area’s water-quality challenges, but rationing scarcity is not a robust water policy on its own. I’m convinced we can honor and address sincere environmental concerns and still make critical progress to secure new water sources.
Leslie Daigle
Newport Beach
The writer is a councilwoman and a candidate for the Orange County Water District.
*
Costa Mesa is unfriendly to pets
As the years go by, Costa Mesa is becoming less pet-friendly, especially for cats and small dogs. While we have the largest dog park in the county, it continues to deteriorate. The small-dog section in particular is overcrowded, undersized and under-protected and is suffering from poor maintenance practices from a sanitary standpoint.
We are one of the few area cities to allow discharge of fireworks on more than just Independence Day, causing much discomfort to many pets, not to mention many citizens.
And when we ask for relief from the growing onslaught of coyotes, we are told they are “protected.” Yet in Seal Beach they are actively trapping coyotes, notwithstanding heavy criticism from well-funded coyote protection groups from outside the county and the state.
But we are told we need to co-exist with them and adapt to a lifestyle where we have to live in a state of fear. Leaving pets or small children in your backyard without an ongoing adult presence is no longer advisable.
Personally, I have nothing against coyotes, wolves, mountain lions, grizzly bears or other animals that may feast on smaller prey. They are all part of nature, and have a rightful place in the wild. They just don’t belong in our city.
Al Melone
Costa Mesa
The writer is a candidate for City Council.
*
Document travel benefits
On Oct 8, the Mesa Verde Community Inc. hosted a forum for school board candidates in the upcoming election. Of the seven candidates available, six showed up.
One issue that arose multiple times was the school district’s budget. As I had done in the past, I mentioned the travel and conference budget as an example of wasteful spending because most conferences now have their content available online for a fee that is far less than the cost of multiple registrations. Plus, by accessing the content online, key people would not be taken away from their important work here.
Conference attendance would not be wasteful, I have argued, if the school board could draw a direct line from conference attendance to improved schools, but so far, they have been unable or unwilling to do so.
I have recommended that each person who travels at taxpayer expense be required to fill out a form explaining the direct benefit to our students.
Steve Smith
Costa Mesa
The writer is a candidate for school board.
*
Republicans calling kettle black
The Irvine City Council majority seems intent on placing election-year politics above the city’s position by asking the city’s legal team to look into ways of strengthening the city’s ethics ordinance. I certainly hope that stronger ethics guidelines will be followed by the Republicans in the council majority.
Councilwoman Christina Shea is up in arms about a “fake newspaper,” which is a slate mailer confusing Irvine voters (“Irvine council gets a civics lesson,” Sept. 25). It appears she is using her council position to place strict controls on political speech, and it represents a chilling effect on the First Amendment.
Since we have so many new residents in Irvine, perhaps it makes sense to review some of the things Mayor Steven Choi and his team have done over the years that don’t pass the smell test. They’ll complain about Councilman Larry Agran’s “fake newspaper,” but leave out the fact they published a newspaper in 2004 that looks almost exactly like the Irvine World News weekly.
Nothing was more divisive than the council majority’s initial reluctance to place a veterans cemetery and memorial at the Great Park. Shea continually cited the city’s relationship with FivePoint Communities, even though land the memorial was targeted for wasn’t tied to the developer in any way. Choi cited feng shui as a reason for initially opposing the memorial, and when a substitute motion to delay the effort failed, he hopped on the bandwagon to vote for the memorial. The veterans will remember this opposition.
So should the city attorney come back with new guidelines on campaign ethics and divisive communications, I sure hope the Republicans on the council realize those rules apply to them.
Dan Chmielewski
Irvine
*