OC Political

A right-of-center blog covering local, statewide, and national politics

Archive for April, 2012

Norby Notes 9 – Huge Savings in Prison Reform & Local Mega Millions Winners

Posted by Newsletter Reprint on April 28, 2012

This came over the wire from Assemblyman Chris Norby’s office on Thursday…

Image
NORBY NOTES

APRIL, 2012 | ISSUE 09

Posted in 65th Assembly District | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Lemon Law Derailed by Legislature

Posted by Newsletter Reprint on April 28, 2012

This came across the wire from the office of Assemblywoman Diane Harkey:

Lemon Law Derailed by Legislature

Budget Crisis and Popular Opinion Do Not Sway Committee Members, Spending Binge Continues Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in 73rd Assembly District | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Influential Family Action PAC Endorses Orange County Financial Expert Jerry Hayden’s Campaign for Congressional District 46

Posted by Newsletter Reprint on April 28, 2012

This just came across the wire from the Hayden for Congress campaign:

Influential Family Action PAC Endorses

Orange County Financial Expert Jerry Hayden’s Campaign for Congressional District 46

(Santa Ana,CA) – Today, the Hayden for Congress campaign announced the endorsement of Family Action PAC. This endorsements adds a formidable presence to the already momentous campaign finance team, and brings a wealth of relationships with Orange County’s donor base. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in 46th Congressional District | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Anaheim Union High School Fireworks

Posted by Chris Nguyen on April 27, 2012

(UPDATED at 6:31 with recap.)

Wow. The Anaheim Union trustees are in a rather contentious battle to appoint their fifth member to succeed the late Jan Harp Domene.

It takes three votes to appoint.

Jordan Brandman (D-Anaheim) nominated Greg Domene (D-Anaheim), with Anna Piercy (R-Cypress) voting for the nomination. Brian O’Neal (R-La Palma) and Katherine Smith (R-Anaheim) voted against. The Domene nomination fails on a 2-2 vote.

Brian O’Neal nominated John Alvis (R-Buena Park), with Katherine Smith voting for the nomination. Anna Piercy voted against. Jordan Brandman abstained. The Alvis nomination gets a 2-1-1 vote.

Anna Piercy nominated Annemarie Randle-Trejo (D-Anaheim), with Jordan Brandman and Brian O’Neal voting for the nomination. Katherine Smith voted against. The Randle-Trejo nomination gets a 3-1 vote.

Annemarie Randle-Trejo is appointed.

Recap: Brandman nominated Domene before any discussion. O’Neal and Smith are livid that a nomination has been made. Piercy finally seconds the motion.

Smith says she resented that Brandman made a nomination before there was any chance for discussion. She complained about misspelled applications and about an applicant who couldn’t distinguish between “there,” “their,” and “they’re” as well as “to,” “too,” and “two.”

O’Neal says there isn’t time to train someone because they need to know Robert’s Rules, the Brown Act, and No Child Left Behind. He says someone with experience is needed in these tough budget times.

Piercy implies there needs to be geographic diversity. She also says that there are many intelligent people, like engineers, who can’t spell.

Smith says she’s glad they’re able to debate in this discussion. She apologizes to Domene but argues that his qualifications did not match those of many other candidates; O’Neal concurs.

Brandman talks about his late mother and says his father carried on her legacy.

Smith and O’Neal emphasize experience over sentiment.

Posted in Anaheim Union High School District | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Lake Forest Sizzler Controversy

Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on April 27, 2012

If ever an issue existed that I never thought that I would have to post, this is the one. Apparently a Sizzler has caused a huge controversy in the City of Lake Forest.

Lake Forest Councilmember Scott Voigts has been on the right side of a lot of issues in Lake Forest and the Sizzler debacle is another one. Apparently Sizzler wanted to use an American theme to highlight the renovations of a restaurant along with an outdoor grilling area. Based on the sign ordinance on the books in Lake Forest the Planning Commission did not allow these specific requests.

Take a look at the article in the Lake Forest Patch here.

It appears that Councilmembers Scott Voigts and Marcia Rudolph joined with Sizzler in appealing the decision by the Planning Commission. According to this article in the Orange County Register here Councilmember Marcia Rudolph joined the other 2 Councilmembers in overturning this decision by the Planning Commission.

Sadly, Republican Councilmembers Peter Herzog and Mark Tettemer did not join their colleagues in overturning the decision. The Lake Forest Patch also provided a recap of the decision that you can read here.

Two letters representing different sides of this issue were submitted to the Lake Forest Patch on different sides of this issue:

Terry Anderson Lake Forest Planning Commissioner submitted this letter.
Scott Peotter Irvine Planning Commissioner submitted this letter.

The 3-2 decision by the council was a win for business friendly principles. Kudos go out to Republican Councilmembers Scott Voigts and Marcia Rudolph as well as Democrat Kathryn McCullough.

Posted in Lake Forest | Tagged: , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Anaheim Union High School District to Fill Vacancy Tonight

Posted by Chris Nguyen on April 27, 2012

Anaheim Union High School DistrictThe Anaheim Union High School District is set to fill the vacancy from the untimely passing of Jan Harp Domene.  The board is set to meet tonight at 5 PM to select which of the 13 applicants they will select to fill the seat.

It will take 3 votes to fill the seat, as the four AUHSD trustees need a majority vote to fill the fifth seat.  The four AUHSD trustees are Board President Anna Piercy (R-Cypress) and Board Members Jordan Brandman (D-Anaheim), Brian O’Neal (R-La Palma), Katherine Smith (R-Anaheim).  If the trustees fail to appoint anyone to the vacancy tonight, then that triggers the legal deadline that will force the seat to remain vacant until the November election, leaving the voters to decide who will fill the vacancy.

On Wednesday, in a five-hour meeting, the AUHSD trustees interviewed the 13 applicants.  Each applicant was asked five questions:

  • What motivated you to apply for this provisional appointment?  How does your background, training, and experience prepare you for this post?
  • What is the primary role of a member of the Anaheim Union High School District board?
  • What are the characteristics of an outstanding board member?
  • What previous involvement do you have in AUHSD, and for how many years?
  • Do you have anything else you would like to share?

From experienced volunteers to playng the race card to people who just know what’s going on when they walk into a building to people who couldn’t remember their own experiences to people who thought education was not the primary responsibility of the school district, the interviews had it all.  Here are my summaries of what each candidate said:

  • Jackie Filbeck (R-Anaheim): She noted her working relationships with each of the elementary school boards that feed into AUHSD, her experience on education committees, her roots in Anaheim, and her professional background in accounting and contracts.  She believes the board “manage[s] the district collaboratively” to ensure student success, sets policies and negotiates contracts, and serves as a community representative.  She states outstanding board members “do their homework;” investigate issues; stay informed; are each a people person who interacts with the community, staff, and students; represent the district to the community; and need to be nice people.  Her involvement in Anaheim schools included three years as a PTA President, work with school board members, service on numerous committees, art programs, school carnivals, reading programs, growing a PTA board from 4 people to 50 people, sports leagues like NJB and JUSA, directing girls’ softball; she stated she gained knowledge of parliamentary procedure from her group involvement; she has been a real estate agent, managed trust funds, been a notary, been a certified signing agent, a businesswoman, a Field Representative for Assemblyman Chris Norby, and a 12-year St. Jude volunteer.  She stated she would be honored to serve, was motivated to apply on her own and by herself alone, is a good learner, wants to expand mentoring and tutoring programs, and would like to serve as a community resource.
  • Annemarie Randle-Trejo (D-Anaheim): She noted her body of work from volunteering and being inclusive of diversity, her goal of collaborating with feeder districts, and her career as a behavior intervention specialist. She believes the board makes policy, everything goes through the board, and board members should show the public an understanding of the classroom and of parents.  She believes board members should understand students, should understand that those students are diverse and not carbon copies, should encourage the “staff team” in handling the school district during the state budget crisis, should provide more career technical education pathways, and should be “expanding our 21st century education for those who will go to college.”  Her AUHSD experience includes school site council, the accreditation committee, PTA, being president of Oxford Academy, the District Advisory Council, the “education coalition,” and the CAHSEE Advisory Council; she claimed her PTA experience helped her understand parents, teachers, and administrators. Inexplicably, she then had to reach for her notes (!) because she couldn’t remember everything she had done and found that she had been part of the John F. Kennedy High School Arts Foundation and band boosters.  She stated she was nervous because of the post’s importance, wanted the board to appoint the best fit, and then stated the board should appoint “someone who looks like 65% of our students” and that the board needed to appoint her as she would be the “missing voice of parents” on the board.
  • Greg Domene (D-Anaheim): He stated he was motivated to carry on Jan Domene’s work, his family was always involved with AUHSD, he was in PTA whenever Jan was, he was Little League President, he worked closely with Jan, he has technical expertise.  He stated the board sets policy, sets the tone, represents students and parents to administrators, and serves as “architects” of the district with the staff as the “general contractor.”  His involvement in AUHSD includes attending those schools for six years, having children who attended those schools, being involved in his kids’ sports and student government experience, providing on-campus help, and attending the national PTA board with his late wife, Jan Domene.  He stated he wanted to “carry forth my wife’s works” and “ensure that kids have a good education.”
  • Art Montez (D-Buena Park): He stated that there was racially segregated housing and segregated education in the 1960s, and today the problem is institutionalized.  He noted AUHSD is 70% minority.  He stated he had worked for 40 years in education, worked on the census, spent 12 years as a Centralia School District board member, and is the father of AUHSD graduates.  He stated the school board controls a small percentage of the budget, and half of students do not speak English.  He made reference to immigration issues and the controversial appointment of Harald Martin to the AUHSD board the last time there was a vacancy (due to the untimely passing of Denise Mansfield-Reinking in 2007).  He stated health and safety of children is the primary responsibility of the school district and “education is secondary.”  He said board members should be patient, good listenters, able to ask hard questions, understand what the community faces, and work with strained staff and the board.  His previous involvement included his kids being at Savanna High School, setting up Americorps under Bill Clinton at Savanna, and serving on SELPA at Centralia.  He noted his passion and experience, knowledge of how the Education Code and school financing works, his familiarity with the political and legislative processes, and his work on redistricting.
  • Forrest Turpen (R-Anaheim): He stated he applied for the board in a “weak moment,” has been involved in education his entire life, and wants to invest in the lives of boys and girls to build young men and women for the future of Anaheim and America.  He believes a board member should represent the community while working wih superintendent and administration.  He stated a good board members should be good at bringing consensus to staff and board members and should go to community events to represent the board.  He stated his involvement in AUHSD is that he has lived in the community for 7.5 years, lives near Savanna High School, and has driven by the district headquarters.  He stated he understands school ssytems, is sensitive to needs of different parts of the school district, was involved in the Illinois Principals’ Association, and when he walks into a building or classroom, he knows what’s going on.
  • Dominic Daddario (R-Anaheim): He stated he was a product of Catholic schools and “what I learned has done me real well.”  He believes board members should make sure each student has the opportunity to learn because people learn different ways.  He stated board members should be listeners, as listening is the top priority.  His AUHSD involvement was that his kids went through AUHSD, one son was a two-sport athlete while the other was involved in music, he supported his sons’ activities, and he joined the Santa Ana Elks Lodge (huh?).  He believes the board has a “great opportunity” to open alternative education paths, and AUHSD needs to train plumbers, electricians, carpenters, auto mechanics, and “photo printers, who will be in greater demand in our increasingly digital world.”
  • Ken Jenks (R-Buena Park): He stated he was not sure of the role of a board member, and “guess it’s policymaking,” but should include advocating for kids.  He stated board members should communicate well and work on a team.  His involvement in AUHSD included being a 20-year resident; all five of his children graduated from Cypress High School, including two ASB Presidents, music, and sports; he was involved in Boy Scouts, was a PTA PResident, and volunteered with grad night, boosters, and bingo.  He believes a “feeling of belonginess” is important and that funding programs and clubs like arts, music, and ASB ensures the “feeling of belonginess.”

The applicants include 7 Republicans, 4 Democrats, and 2 people registered as No Party Preference (known as Decline-to-State in pre-Prop 14 parlance).

They include 8 Anaheimers, 4 Buena Parkers, and 1 La Palman.

AUHSD includes the entirety of the City of Cypress, along with portions of Anaheim, Buena Park, La Palma and Stanton.  AUHSD includes grades 7-12, with K-6 education provided by the Anaheim City School District, Centralia School District, Cypress School District, Magnolia School District, and Savanna School District.

(In the interest of full disclosure, I should note my day job is working in the Fullerton office of Assemblyman Chris Norby.  Consequently, one of my co-workers is Jackie Filbeck, who is one of the candidates for the AUHSD seat.)

Posted in Anaheim Union High School District, Centralia School District, Cypress School District, Magnolia School District, Savanna School District | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

AT&T wields enormous power in Sacramento

Posted by Newsletter Reprint on April 26, 2012

This just came across the wire from the Stop Special Interest Now campaign. (Full Disclosure: Custom Campaigns is doing consulting work for Stop Special Interest Money): Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in California | 8 Comments »

Broader Implication of the Supreme Court’s Ruling on Arizona’s Immigration Law

Posted by Peggy Huang on April 25, 2012

Today, the Supreme Court heard oral argument regarding the constitutionality of the Arizona’s immigration law.  The central issue is whether preemption could prevent states from promulgating laws and regulations in the sphere traditionally considered under the federal jurisdiction.  Judging from Justices Anthony Kennedy and Sonia Sotomayors’ comments, it appears that the Supreme Court is not persuaded by the Obama Administration’s argument that because immigration is under the federal jurisdiction, the states cannot enact laws to protect themselves even if the federal government had failed to enforce its own laws.  Justice Sotomayor found the Solicitor General’s argument confusing and that his argument was not going well before the Court.

While the Supreme Court’s decision affects whether states could enact and enforce its own immigration law, I believe that the broader implication of the Court’s decision will be on the issue of what legal recourse could be pursued when government officials fail to fulfill their constitutional duties to enforce the laws that they disagree with.  What comes to my mind is the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision to send the Proposition 8 case back to the California Supreme Court on the issue of whether the proponents of Proposition 8 has standing to argue the constitutionality of Proposition 8 in federal courts when government officials (i.e. former Governor Arnold Schwartzenegger and Attorney General Jerry Brown) refused to defend Proposition 8 in federal courts.  While the California Supreme Court’s decision to give standing to the proponents of Proposition 8 was based on the idea that if government officials could decide not to enforce voters-passed laws because the government officials disagree with the law, then the populist idea of referendums and propositions would be rendered meaningless.

Here, if the Supreme Court finds that Arizona could enact immigration laws to protect its border, the legal door is ajar to permit states to enact laws in areas where the federal government refuses to enforce, or in states where ordinary citizens could pass laws via propositions, citizens could pass laws without fearing that they have no legal recourse if their elected officials refuse to uphold the laws.

Posted in National | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

Bay Area Council Endorses Comprehensive Campaign Finance Reform Supports Stop Special Interest Money Now Initiative

Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on April 25, 2012

I just heard from the Stop Special Interest Money Now Campaign on some big news (Full Disclosure: Custom Campaigns is doing consulting work on the campaign). Apparently the campaign received the endorsement from the Bay Area Council.

This is a sign of some serious momentum from the campaign and it will be exciting to see the campaign unfold over the next few months.

Here is the press release:

Let’s Start Taking Back California

Bay Area Council Endorses Comprehensive Campaign Finance Reform Supports Stop Special Interest Money Now Initiative

(SACRAMENTO, CA)—Today, the Stop Special Interest Money Now campaign welcomed the endorsement of the Bay Area Council, a reform minded public-policy advocacy organization representing businesses from the Bay Area. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in California | Leave a Comment »

The Story of High Speed Rail Lobbyist Troy Edgar

Posted by OC Insider on April 25, 2012

As we’re still getting to know the candidates for Assembly in the 72nd District, one question I keep hearing people ask over and over again is: Does Troy Edgar still support wasting taxpayer dollars on fanciful high speed rail?

Just as importantly he should come clean about how much taxpayer money he spent traveling around the country lobbying for high speed rail.

Everyone knows that Troy Edgar was a lifelong Democrat and only switched parties when he decided to run for office.   Unfortunately for Orange County, despite the ‘R’ next to his name he has governed like a Chicago Democrat.  Edgar’s push for an illegal trash contract and constant desire to raise taxes and fees are well known.

What is a little less known is that, for a brief period of time, Los Alamitos paid a large sum in order to join the Orangeline Development Authority (OLDA).  At the time, the mission of OLDA was promoting a high speed maglev rail line that would run from Irvine to Palmdale.

Troy Edgar was named Vice Chairman of OLDA and quickly became one of the most active proponents of this high speed rail boondoggle.

He quickly started lobbying Orange County cities and agencies.  He frivolously worked on getting the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) on to support the project.  Before presenting to OCTA, he bragged about “his previous lobbying efforts toward the OCTA to prepare for this event.”

Fortunately for Orange County and California, OCTA turned Troy Edgar and his levitating high speed train down.  No doubt, by saying no to Troy Edgar, OCTA saved taxpayers billions.

Here are just a few of the problems that OCTA found with Troy’s Train.

From OCTA July 26, 2007 Staff Report:

“OCTA has not committed right of way”

“Financial plan appears extremely optimistic”

“$18 average fare is assumed for 20-mile trip”

From OCTA CEO Arthur Leahy, August 9, 2007 Memo:

“The Orangeline financial plan appears extremely optimistic.”

“Investors expressed concern about the Orangeline’s ability to secure right-of-way for the project and to receive the necessary environmental approvals.”

“Only one of the Orangeline’s 14 member cities, Los Alamitos, is located in Orange County, and none of the seven the seven Orange County cities directly bordering the PE Railroad right-of-way has joined the Orangeline.” (OLDA Minutes May 9, 2007)

“In March 2007, the La Palma City Council adopted a resolution explicitly opposing the use of the PE Railroad right-of-way for any future transit project, including the Orangeline.”

Furthermore, in true Chicago Democrat style, Troy Edgar could not take no for an answer and wanted OCTA to bully Orange County cities that did not want this project going through their town.

La Palma city councilman, Ralph Rodriguez spoke in opposition to the project.

“The City of La Palma opposes this particular project since it would be disruptive to the residential properties that are adjacent to the subject right-of-way” (OCTA Transit Planning and Operations Committee Meeting May 10, 2007)

How did Troy Edgar react?  He urged OCTA to ignore the city of La Palma.

“Troy Edgar, Councilman, City of Los Alamitos, stated this is an opportunity to provide clean technology and asked staff to keep the Orangeline project as an option and append the Long-Range Transportation Plan to include this project. (OCTA Transit Planning and Operations Committee Meeting May 10, 2007)

Not being able to take a hint and realize that he is lobbying for a tax dollar black hole that is not wanted by either the impacted cities or the taxpayers who would have to foot the bill, Troy Edgar decided it was a good idea travel to New York and lobby private investors for this project.  He even brags about it in the OC Register.

“He will talk later this month to potential investors in New York”

I wonder just how much this trip cost.  In fact, I would like to know how much all of Edgar’s lobbying efforts cost.  He traveled all over the state on behalf of this project. In addition to his OLDA per meeting stipend of $100 (yes, he took a stipend for his OLDA meetings), how much did taxpayers have to pay for all of his travel?

Can we trust Troy Edgar to oppose High Speed Rail if we send him to Sacramento? I would have to say, absolutely not! If this entire saga makes one thing clear, it is that Troy Edgar cannot be trusted with taxpayer funds.

Posted in 72nd Assembly District, Los Alamitos, Uncategorized | Tagged: , | 5 Comments »