OC Political

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

Archive for October, 2012

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

First In A Series Of Interviews With South County Candidates: Laguna Hills City Council Candidates Dr. Raghu Mathur, Bill Hunt, Andrew Blount, And Dore Gilbert, M.D.

Posted by Greg Woodard on October 11, 2012

I never like to let a chance to blog go to waste, particularly in an election year, so I thought I would focus my efforts on where I live – South County.  My goal is to interview candidates for most, or all, South County City Council races and post a blog about each interview.  Since I’m not crazy, and I have a day job, I will be asking each candidate the same few questions that I think will give the voters a quick look at the candidates and their qualifications.  Also, since I am on the Republican Central Committee, and there are far too many candidates for each position to interview all of them, I am limiting my interviews only to those who sought the endorsement of the OCGOP (whether or not they actually received the endorsement).  Without further ado, we start with a city that I have a hard time finding until I’m within the city limits, and even then, I’m not sure – Laguna Hills.  As OC Political noted earlier, the race for two open seats (very rare around here) is hot and heavy between four legitimate candidates: Dr. Raghu Mathur, Bill Hunt, Andrew Blount, and Dore Gilbert, M.D.

Dr. Raghu Mathur

Raghu is running for City Council to ensure fiscal responsibility, be a strong advocate for businesses, and bring transparency, accountability, and ethics to council decisions.

Raghu says that fiscal responsibility is essential in this economy, with a $16 trillion national debt and a broke California, that leaves only the local level.  He wants to prioritize all goals and expenditures and consider public sentiment and input in determining which projects are most important for residents.  He said the city needs to address compensation, particularly city management.  Raghu gave the example of the City Manager whose compensation is over $460,000 per year, including a car for personal and family use.  He wants to move the city to a 401k-style pension with the employees contributing their portion (the city currently contributes both its and the employees’ portion for retirement).  Raghu stressed his experience as President of Irvine Valley College where he says he turned a $500,000 deficit into a $500,000 surplus in one year, as well as his time as Chancellor of the South Orange County Community College District where he managed a budget of approximately $500 million.  Raghu also said that he taught university courses in budget management.  Although he wants to address compensation issues, Raghu want to assure the employees that transparent negotiations are not meant to pressure or threaten them.  He wants the good work of management and staff to be recognized and rewarded.

Raghu also wants to be the strongest advocate for businesses.  He believes in the free enterprise system and would like to have a business-friendly council.  He strongly supports maximum freedom for businesses and minimal regulations.  Raghu wants to develop a business recruitment and economic development plan and create a business and economic development commission comprised of businesses, residents, and a local Chamber of Commerce (since Laguna Hills currently has no Chamber, he wants to create one).  Raghu also wants to hear from local businesses how the council can support them and bring additional businesses to the city.  He believes that successful businesses mean more taxes resulting in funding for necessary public services.  Raghu is opposed to any increase in taxes or fees.  He wants to create more local jobs and internships for local students.

Raghu wants to make the council transparent, accountable, and ethical.  He stated that there is a public employee union being formed in the city which means future contract negotiations.  He wants all negotiations regarding compensation to be conducted in an open setting, sunshined through the public agenda along with the fiscal implications of the proposal.  Raghu wants the same sunshine process for any counter-proposal from the union.  He would consider bringing in an outside negotiator or auditor so there is no potential conflict of interest with management.  Raghu believes the city must operate in an open fashion to earn the trust and respect of the residents.  On accountability, Raghu wants the city to disclose its goals for management and the council and provide progress reports and final reports on whether the goals were met.  On ethics, he said he will make all of his council decisions ethically, with no favoritism.

Raghu believes it is a tough line to walk between protecting the quality of life for existing residents and businesses, but acknowledging the need for additional development in the future.  He will focus on what the residents and existing businesses have to say.  Raghu uses his scientific background to collect data, ask probing questions, and he feels that he can find win-win solutions in that manner.

Raghu is endorsed by, among others, the Orange County Register, the California Republican Assembly, Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckus, Tom Fuentes (before he recently passed),  and Laguna Hills council member Barbara Kogerman.

You can find out more about Raghu at http://www.mathurforlagunahills.com/.

Bill Hunt

Bill noted that, for the first time in the city’s history, there are two openings on the council, and he wants to use his two decades of experience with the Orange County Sheriff’s Department to continue the conservative policies the City Council has put in place, and give back to Laguna Hills, where he raised his family and served for four years on the Parks and Recreation Commission.

Bill stresses fiscal responsiblity and wants to spend the city’s tax dollars wisely.  He said the city has done a good job fiscally – the city is in the black, it supports businesses, and it has a 2% at 60 retirement formula for its employees.  Bill wants to continue that process.

Bill is pro business.  He wants the city to do everything it can to accommodate the business community.  He does not want to subsidize businesses, but support them to ensure more tax dollars for the community.

Bill’s 20+ years with the Sheriff’s Department has led him to the conclusion that public safety is vital to the city.  He believes that local government’s primary responsibilities are to provide safety and good infrastructure for its residents.  Bill said that the current council has done the basics well, and he wants to continue that process.

Bill believes that, overall, compensation for city staff is fair.  He said the proof is in the pudding – Laguna Hills is not facing the unfunded liabilities for employee benefits that other Orange County cities face.  He believes that the City Manager’s compensation is more of a political issue than a fiscal one.  Bill wants there to be an open discussion on the City Manager’s salary with input from the public.  He said that there is not a lot of staff or a large bureaucracy in the city and many staff members are doing multiple jobs.  He feels that the staff is doing a good job managing the city.  However, he said he will propose a 401k-style pension system for future city employees, which he believes will protect against future unfunded liabilities.

Bill said that Laguna Hills is fairly built out and there is not a lot of growth potential, so he would focus on maintaining the existing quality of life for the current residents.  He wants to work with businesses to create a profitable business environment to make Laguna Hills a place people want to come and shop.  He emphasized the importance of public safety on quality of life.

Bill is endorsed by, among others, Congressman John Campbell, Laguna Hills Mayor Melody Carruth, Laguna Hills council member Joel Lautenschleger, the California Republican Assembly, and State Senator Mimi Walters.

You can find out more about Bill at http://billhunt.org/.

Andrew Blount

Andrew believes we live in a country where everyone has the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, and he is running for Laguna Hills City Council because he wants to help the people of the city achieve those rights on a local level; he’s met many of the city’s residents in his involvement in the community and he wants to represent them on the council.

Andrew believes that employee compensation is too high, and he will rectify it.  The top three management positions were paid more than $1 million combined last year.  He said that the City Manager made over $400,000 last year, including $30,000 toward his pension alone.  The city also paid $60,000 for a car for the City Manager that could be used for his personal and family use.  Andrew also said that the city pays for both the employer’s and employee’s share of retirement payments for all management staff.  He noted that the city’s annual budget is approximately $30 million per year, which equates to approximately $1,000 per resident and he does not believe that the residents are getting their bang for their buck.  He questioned why the city pays the City Manager $400,000 while it does not provide the basic services that surrounding cities do, and that the residents deserve.  Andrew wants to focus on after school programs, senior services, and emergency response services, not expensive compensation packages for management.

Andrew also believes the water rates the residents currently pay are too high.  He said that the tiered system currently in place is not working and is too costly, including 700% penalties for some residents.  He thinks that the city can control the water rates, with the consensus of the residents.  He will work with the residents to build that consensus, and then take the fight to the Water Board on their behalf.

Andrew also wants to create a better business environment within the city.  He noted that neighboring cities are actively recruiting businesses, and he does not want to lose existing businesses, or the chance to bring in new businesses.  Andrew said that businesses bring in sales and property tax revenues that are vital to providing necessary public services.  He believes that the current council thinks businesses should consider it a privilege to be in Laguna Hills, while Andrew believes it is a privilege to have the businesses as a part of the city.  Andrew sees the city’s revenues decreasing and he wants jobs to stay local.  He also thinks that businesses provide great places in the city for the residents to shop and eat.  Andrew believes the current council has too tight a regulatory burden on businesses.  Although the city does not have a business license fee, Andrew said it charges several other burdensome fees.  He also noted that there is no standard process available to prospective businesses that will give them an idea of the fees and costs they will incur before they start their project.  He gave the example of H2O Partners – a business that came to the council with an idea for a water park.  The council rejected their project.  Fortunately, as many good businesses do, they came back with a different project (trampoline entertainment center) that ultimately was approved.  However, Andrew does not believe the city should hope that rejected businesses come back, but that the city will welcome them with open arms in the first instance.  Andrew will standardize the permitting process so that businesses will know at the beginning of their project what fees and costs they will face.  Andrew wants businesses to succeed and he will work to provide a successful business environment if elected to the council.

Andrew noted that Laguna Hills is mostly built out.  He said there is a mixed-use project, Oakbrook Village, near the Laguna Hills mall, that he believes will bring younger, more upwardly mobile residents to a city that has shrunk in population over the past 10 years.  He wants to analyze projects on a project-by-project basis to determine if it will benefit the city and protect the existing residents.  He wants to ensure that the same high quality of life that Laguna Hills residents currently enjoy is enjoyed by the residents in the future as well.

Andrew is endorsed by, among others, the Orange County Register, Laguna Hills council member Barbara Kogerman, Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckus, the Lincoln Club, and Laguna Hills Watch Dog – Jean Bland.

You can find out more about Andrew at http://www.blountforlagunahills.com/.

Dore Gilbert, M.D.

Dore is running for City Council because he thinks he can make a difference for the residents of Laguna Hills by restoring civility and intellectual discussion at City Council meetings.

Dore wants to maintain fiscal responsibility in the city.  He wants a strong reserve, employee compensation comparable to similar-sized Orange County cities, and a transparent council that allows the residents to have faith in the decision-making process.

Dore also stresses public safety.  He wants to continue to support the number of Sheriff’s deputies in the city that are necessary for the residents’ safety and to keep the crime rate low.  Dore’s interest in public safety extends to the national level as he enlisted in the Army Reserves at age 60 and his youngest son is a Corporal in the Marine Corps.

Dore believes the city needs to maintain a business-friendly environment that welcomes businesses which he says will produce jobs and revenue for the city.  He said he will continue to streamline the business permitting process and will not burden businesses with taxes and fees.  Dore is opposed to any new taxes or fees.

Dore stated that employee compensation is greater than the norm of similar-sized cities in Orange County.  He said that some compensation issues have been taken care of by the council (for example, the car allowance is gone), but he wants the council to take a look at compensation and, when it is not in conformity with other similar-sized cities, negotiate changes to conform with those compensation packages.

Dore said that Laguna Hills is nearly built out and there is not a lot of open land.  He noted the Oakbrook Village project near the Laguna Hills mall that is slated for re-development, but Dore wants to focus on how the council can maintain a beautiful city.  He wants to update traffic plans, maintain the parks for people of all ages, and properly maintain the streets.  Dore wants to maintain the quality of life that he and his family have enjoyed in their 31 years in Laguna Hills.  He and his wife of 36 years have raised 5 children in the city.  Dore served on the Saddleback Valley Unified School District board for 29 years.  He is very involved in his community – coaching football and baseball and serving on the Community Center Planning Commission.

Dore is endorsed by, among others, State Senator Mimi Walters, Orange County Supervisors Pat Bates and Janet Nguyen, State Assemblyman Don Wagner, and Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckus.

You can find out more about Dore at http://www.doregilbert2012.com/index.html.

Posted in Laguna Hills | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Unions Give Money to All Major Anaheim City Council Candidates; Kring Got Least

Posted by Lassie on October 11, 2012

My blog colleague, OC Insider, wrote this series of posts about Lucille Kring”s $500 contribution from the Anaheim police union (https://ocpolitical.com/2012/10/05/lucille-kring-violated-baugh-manifesto/, https://ocpolitical.com/2012/10/07/oc-gop-should-rescind-kring-endorsement/, and https://ocpolitical.com/2012/10/07/did-kring-fool-the-police-union-too/).  It’s an interesting coincidence that the last two posts were written after the Orange County Register endorsed Kring for Anaheim City Council:

Ms. Kring stands out among the crowd of nine candidates. Having served on the city council previously, she acutely understands the issues facing Anaheim and has a much-needed independent streak on a council in which, we believe, former Mayor Curt Pringle, and other special interests, have far too much influence.

Ms. Kring has a firm grasp on the budgetary challenges of the city and has the right ideas as to how to fix them, including serious pension reform. She also has in-depth knowledge of public safety, and she opposes crony capitalism, sweetheart deals handed out to those with political connections or representation.

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/city-191002-ocprint-council-anaheim.html

OC Insider blasted Kring for inaccurately signing this pledge in the OC GOP questionnaire:

“I WILL NOT ACCEPT CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FROM GOVERNMENT UNIONS.” 

Lodge inaccurately signed the same pledge!  Unlike Kring, Lodge inaccurately told the OC GOP Endorsements Committee that he had not taken any union money:

Lodge says he is endorsed by the Anaheim Police and Fire unions and the Santa Ana Police union but has not taken any money from them.

https://ocpolitical.com/2012/09/05/ocgop-endorsements-committee-meets/

He took $1000 from the Anaheim Police union on 12/28/2011 – almost six months before Kring took $500.

OC Insider neglected to note that every other major candidate for Anaheim City Council took more police union money than Kring did.  The Anaheim police union gave $1800 to Jordan Brandman, $1000 to Steven Albert Chavez Lodge, $1000 to John Leos, and a paltry $500 to Lucille Kring.

Actually, every other major candidate for Anaheim City Council took more union money than Kring did:

Lucille Kring
$500 on 6/20/2012 from the Anaheim Police union

Steven Albert Chavez Lodge
$1000 on 12/28/2011 from the Anaheim Police union

John Leos
$1800 on 2/21/2012 from the Orange County Employees Association (maxed out)
$1800 on 4/6/2012 from the Anaheim Municipal Employees Association (maxed out)
$1800 on 9/30/2012 from the Orange County Labor Federation (maxed out)
$1000 on 9/18/2012 from the Anaheim Police union
TOTAL: $6,400
(I should note OCEA dumped $50,000 into a pro-Leos IE PAC.)

Jordan Brandman
$1800 on 8/30/2012 from the Anaheim Firefighters union (maxed out)
$1800 on 9/14/2012 from OC COPS (maxed out)
$1800 on 8/30/2012 from PORAC (maxed out)
$1300 on 6/8/2012 from the International Union of Operating Engineers (maxed out to $1800)
$1050 on 9/12/7/2012 from Local Union 105 (maxed out to $1800)
$1000 on 11/4/2011 from the UA Plumbers & Steamfitters Local Union 582 (maxed out to $1800)
$1000 on 11/18/2011 from the Southern California Pipe Trades District Council (maxed out to $1800)
$1000 on 12/7/2011 from the Anaheim Police union (maxed out to $1800)
$1000 on 12/31/2011 from the Laborers International Union of North America (maxed out to $1800)
$1000 on 3/8/2012 from the Southwest Regional Council of Carpenters
$1000 on 5/29/2012 from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (grand total: $1500)
$800 on 4/30/2012 from the UA Plumbers & Steamfitters Local Union 582 (maxed out to $1800)
$800 on 5/7/2012 from the Southern California Pipe Trades District Council (maxed out to $1800)
$800 on 9/14/2012 from the Anaheim Police union (maxed out to $1800)
$800 on 9/30/2012 from the Laborers International Union of North America (maxed out to $1800)
$500 on 12/31/2011 from the District Council of Iron Workers
$500 on 12/31/2011 from the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (grand total: $1500)
$500 on 4/16/2012 from the International Union of Operating Engineers (maxed out to $1800)
$500 on 5/7/2012 from Local Union 105 (maxed out to $1800)
$500 on 6/24/2012 from OPCNIA Plasters Local Union 200
$500 on 6/30/2012 from the Sprinkler Fitters Local 109
$250 on 11/4/2011 from the LA/OC Building & Construction Trades Council
$250 on 11/4/2011 from the Sprinkler Fitters Local Number 709
$250 on 12/7/2011 from Local Union 105 (maxed out to $1800)
TOTAL: $20,700

(You can find all campaign finance filings in Anaheim at http://nf4.netfile.com/pub2/Default.aspx?aid=ANA)

Lucille Kring is still the most independent voice for Anaheim City Council, and that’s why the Orange County Register endorsed her.

Posted in Anaheim, Republican Central Committee | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Vote-by-Mail Ballots Mailed to Orange County Voters

Posted by Newsletter Reprint on October 9, 2012

This came over the wire from the Registrar of Voters today…

Vote-by-Mail Ballots Mailed to Orange County Voters

Nearly 630,000 vote-by-mail ballots mailed today

SANTA ANA, CA – October 9, 2012 – The Registrar of Voters mailed a record number of vote-by-mail ballots to voters today. The number of voters receiving a permanent vote-by-mail ballot has doubled in the past four years.

“I believe we are going to see a record number of vote-by-mail ballots cast here in Orange County,” said Neal Kelley, Registrar of Voters. “For the first time we will likely see vote-by-mail voting surpass polling place voting in a Presidential General Election,” he continued.

Statewide data indicates that over 7.4 million ballots will be mailed to voters throughout California, which represents 43% of the registered voters in the state. Voters in Orange County should expect their vote-by-mail ballots to begin arriving in tomorrow’s mail.

The deadline to request a vote-by-mail ballot for the November election is Tuesday, October 30, 2012. Voters can make a one-time request for a vote-by-mail ballot online by visiting ocvote.com/votebymail or by using the application found on the back of their sample ballot. Voters can also track the delivery and return of their vote-by-mail ballot online.

Orange County is the only election jurisdiction in the country to offer extensive real-time data online, which allows users to track data on the mailing and returns of vote-by-mail ballots – from party breakdowns to daily returns. Users can visit the Data Central section of the Registrar of Voters’ website by visiting ocvote.com/datacentral.

# # #

Posted in Orange County | Tagged: | 5 Comments »

What Did Kring Tell The Anaheim Police Union?

Posted by OC Insider on October 7, 2012

The OC GOP Endorsement Committee recommended endorsement of Anaheim council candidate Lucille Kring on August 20. That means Kring had filled out the OC GOP candidate questionnaire earlier, probably in July. As noted, that first thing the questionnaire asks candidates to do is signed a pledge stating:

“I WILL NOT ACCEPT CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FROM GOVERNMENT UNIONS.”

In July, as Kring was working on garnering the OC GOP endorsement, she was also trying to get the endorsement of the Anaheim Police Officers PAC (She had already taken a $500 contribution from them).

Kring interviewed with the police union PAC. She answered their questionnaire. She nearly won the police union PAC endorsement, narrowly missing being endorsed for the second spot in the union endorsement voting (she was edged out by Steve Lodge).  Kring wanted and pursued the police union endorsement (after having already taken their money), while she was simultaneously pursuing the OC GOP endorsement. And Kring never informed the OC GOP.

Since Kring was not forthcoming with the OC GOOP during their endorsement process, you have to wonder if she also what she told the police union while they interviewed her, or when she filled out their questionnaire. Among the questions the union PAC asked candidate was whether they supported or opposed Prop. 32, to which the unions are totally opposed. If Kring had said she supported Prop. 32, is it likely she would have come so close to winning the police union PAC endorsement? Did she tell the police union PAC she was going to take a pledge against taking government union contributions; after she had already taken their money? Again, it’s hard to believe she would have come so close to winning the union PAC endorsement had she done so.

Who was getting played? The police union? The OC GOP? Both?

Posted in Anaheim | Tagged: , | 4 Comments »

OC GOP Should Rescind Kring Endorsement

Posted by OC Insider on October 7, 2012

Word on the street, as they say, is that a request has been made for the Republican Party of Orange County to rescind its endorsement of Anaheim council candidate Lucille Kring, in light of the fact that she solicited and received a contribution from the Anaheim Police Officers PAC in June of this year (first reported on this blog).

News of the OC Political post reached the former councilmember, whose first instinct was to call left-wing blogger Vern Nelson and ask reaction was to call left-wing blogger Vern Nelson, and ask him to convey her response. Here’s what Vern commented on the earlier post:

Lucille called me from out canvassing – I guess I’m the bloggiest guy I know! – someone told her about this story, and she asked me to write:

She had been planning to give back that money since she took that pledge;  her husband is her treasurer and was supposed to do that, but he’s been traveling a lot lately partly because his mother recently died;  but she will return it POSTHASTE!

Kring took the police union contribution on June 20, as she reported on page four of her January 1-June 30 campaign disclosure. She calls a left-wing blogger to explain she had meant to return it, but still had not done so three-and-a-half months later.

This is the first instance of Kring acknowledging getting the police union donation, and only because this blog has made it public. As you can see, on page 1, the very first thing candidates are asked to sign their name to — before even answering whether or not they are Republicans — is a the “Union-Free” pledge. It is spelled out in capital letters:

“I WILL NOT ACCEPT CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS FROM GOVERNMENT UNIONS.”

She admits to blogger Vern Nelson that she was and is aware that this contribution violates the Baugh Manifesto, from which this pledge comes.

It is common knowledge in Anaheim political circles that Lucille Kring actively approached Anaheim police union officers and consultants seeking the union’s support. She did this even as she was cultivating OC GOP Central Committee members for their endorsement.

Kring is not a first-time candidate. She is aware of the Baugh Manifesto and the pledge candidates seeking the party endorsement have to take. She knows taking government union money is incompatible with seeking the OC GOP endorsement, but she still did both.

She withheld from the OC GOP Central Committee the fact that she had sought and received financial support from the Anaheim police union. That $500 contribution was still in her campaign account, three and a half months after accepting it a and almost a month after getting the OC GOP endorsement. Kring is saying she’ll return now that it has been made public, but what if it hadn’t been exposed? After all, Kring didn’t tell the Central Committee about it when she had the chance.

It’s unlikely the OC GOP would have endorsed Kring if it had known about the police union contribution. That contribution sends a message of its own: that Kring was cultivating the police union, and would have gone on cultivating it if the OC GOP endorsement had gone the other way.

The OC GOP can let this go and send the message that the party can be had, that the Central Committee members can be snookered, that you can get both the OC GOP endorsement and government union campaign contributions if you can keep the former in the dark long enough about the latter.

Or it can fix this mistake. Letting this slide would be unfair to candidates who have been refused the endorsement for the same offense. The party should apply the “Union-Free” pledge the same way to every candidate. It should start by rescinding its endorsement of Lucille Kring.

Posted in Anaheim | Tagged: , , | 4 Comments »

Lucille Kring Violated Baugh Manifesto

Posted by OC Insider on October 5, 2012

On September 17, the Republican Party of Orange County Central Committee voted to endorse Lucille Kring for Anaheim City Council.

Three months earlier, on June 20, Kring accepted a $500 contribution to her council campaign from the Anaheim Police Officers PAC.  It can be seen on page 4 of her January 1-June 30 campaign disclosure.

This is a violation of the “Baugh Manifesto” that has governed OC GOP endorsements in non-partisan elections since 2010. This policy stated that, on a going forward basis, the OC GOP shall not endorse any candidate who has taken campaign contributions from a public employee union.

This has been a controversial policy and the subject of much media attention. There is no way Lucille Kring could have been unaware of it. She was planning to seek the OC GOP endorsement, and still took the police union’s money.

So how did the OC GOP miss that? Or did they know and endorse her anyway? The OC GOP has refused to endorse other candidates for the same offense. Two years ago, the party stripped Costa Mesa Councilmember Wendy Leece of her endorsement over a similar union issue.

If the Baugh Manifesto is to have meaning, then the OC GOP needs to rescind its endorsement of Kring, otherwise the lesson for other candidates will be you can play games with the unions and still get the OC GOP nod as long as you can hide it long enough.

Posted in Anaheim | Tagged: , , | 30 Comments »

OC Register Opposes Los Alamitos Measure DD – Blasts Troy Edgar

Posted by OC Insider on October 5, 2012

The OC Register came out in opposition to the Los Alamitos Utility Tax Expansion and blasted Troy Edgar in the Process.

Here are some of the best parts:

Mayor Edgar reportedly answered, “Is it a sales job? We want this to pass; so we put it in terms the common people can understand.”

Measure DD is incredibly overbroad, taking over 300 words to describe all of the technologies subject to its tax power, including text messages, cellphones, private phone networks, voice-over Internet, faxes, paging systems, routers, electronic billing, video conferencing, among many others.

It even taxes technologies not yet invented and prohibits residents from seeking an injunction against those taxes. In the event federal law changes and allows taxation of the Internet, Measure DD allows Los Alamitos to begin taxing it, too, without voter approval. Already the city taxes cell phones.

Read the entire editorial here

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

Pols using legislative resources touting ratings from interest groups

Posted by Allen Wilson on October 3, 2012

Of lately, we have been receiving e-mail and press release communications from California legislators regarding legislative updates and ratings from various interest groups.

Though, these messages are being circulated by using legislative resources and staff time 30 days plus before the primary and general election, which amounts to campaigning on the legislators part.

The California legislators should use the example from the State of Washington Legislature which are restricted from using such communications under State of Washington Law RCW 42.52.185 “Restrictions on Mailing by Legislators”:

(1) During the twelve-month period beginning on December 1st of the year before a general election for a state legislator’s election to office and continuing through November 30th immediately after the general election, the legislator may not mail, either by regular mail or electronic mail, to a constituent at public expense a letter, newsletter, brochure, or other piece of literature, except as follows:

(a) The legislator may mail two mailings of newsletters to constituents. All newsletters within each mailing of newsletters must be identical as to their content but not as to the constituent name or address. One such mailing may be mailed no later than thirty days after the start of a regular legislative session, except that a legislator appointed during a regular legislative session to fill a vacant seat may have up to thirty days from the date of appointment to send out the first mailing. The other mailing may be mailed no later than sixty days after the end of a regular legislative session.

     (b) The legislator may mail an individual letter to (i) an individual constituent who has contacted the legislator regarding the subject matter of the letter during the legislator’s current term of office; (ii) an individual constituent who holds a governmental office with jurisdiction over the subject matter of the letter; or (iii) an individual constituent who has received an award or honor of extraordinary distinction of a type that is sufficiently infrequent to be noteworthy to a reasonable person, including, but not limited to: (A) An international or national award such as the Nobel prize or the Pulitzer prize; (B) a state award such as Washington scholar; (C) an Eagle Scout award; and (D) a Medal of Honor.

     (c) In those cases where constituents have specifically indicated that they would like to be contacted to receive regular or periodic updates on legislative matters, legislators may provide such updates by electronic mail throughout the legislative session and up until thirty days from the conclusion of a legislative session.

     (2) For purposes of subsection (1) of this section, “legislator” means a legislator who is a “candidate,” as defined by RCW 42.17A.005, for any public office.

     (3) A violation of this section constitutes use of the facilities of a public office for the purpose of assisting a campaign under RCW 42.52.180.

     (4) The house of representatives and senate shall specifically limit expenditures per member for the total cost of mailings. Those costs include, but are not limited to, production costs, printing costs, and postage costs. The limits imposed under this subsection apply only to the total expenditures on mailings per member and not to any categorical cost within the total.

     (5) For purposes of this section, persons residing outside the legislative district represented by the legislator are not considered to be constituents, but students, military personnel, or others temporarily employed outside of the district who normally reside in the district are considered to be constituents.

Pols need to keep an open mind on my point, because the general public are already apathetic towards Sacramento when it comes to the use of legislative resources and staff time.

Reforms and ideas comes from the people in turn strengthens our legislative process, because the legislature belongs to the people!

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Lake Forest City Council Candidate Dwight Robinson Holds Fundraiser

Posted by Greg Woodard on October 2, 2012

Dwight Robinson, running for Lake Forest City Council in November, held a local fundraiser on September 30, 2012.  In attendance were California State Assemblyman Don Wagner, Lake Forest Mayor Pro Tem Scott Voigts, Orange City Councilman Fred Whitaker, Fountain Valley Councilman Michael Vo, and many other supporters.

Dwight stated that he was running for his family and other Lake Forest residents.  If he wins a seat, he wants to leave the city better off than when he takes office.  Robinson, a successful businessman who runs a commodities exporting business, said that he wanted to provide the Council with the business experience that it currently lacks.

Scott Voigts introduced Dwight as a true conservative who will be a valuable addition to the Council.  Fred Whitaker noted that Dwight is a true small government conservative, and that, as a fellow businessman, he believed Dwight’s business experience will benefit the Council.  Michael Vo stressed the need for volunteers to help make sure Dwight gets elected to the Council.

Don Wagner echoed Dwight’s emphasis on families, and expressed his support for Dwight’s Council run.

In addition to Wagner and Voigts, Dwight also is endorsed by Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, the Orange County Republican Party, the Orange County Taxpayers Association, and the Lincoln Club.

For more information about Dwight, go to http://robinsonforcitycouncil.com/.

Lake Forest City Council candidate Dwight Robinson is introduced by Lake Forest Mayor Pro Tem Scott Voigts

Posted in Lake Forest | Tagged: , , , , | 1 Comment »

Live from OC GOP Endorsements Committee

Posted by Chris Nguyen on October 1, 2012

Republican Party of Orange County

All of the recommendations of the Endorsements Committee tonight must be ratified by the Central Committee on October 15. (The Central Committee can and does overturn recommendations from the Endorsements Committee.)

The OC GOP Central Committee confirmed a set of early endorsements in August and regular endorsements in September.  Here are those endorsements, so far.

Tonight, the OC GOP Endorsements Committee meets to make recommendations to the OC GOP Central Committee for late endorsements to be made at the October 15 OC GOP Central Committee meeting.

These late endorsements were either because the candidates submitted late applications or the decision was delayed by either the Central Committee or the Endorsements Committee (San Clemente’s Jim Dahl and San Juan Capistrano’s Sam Allevato and Ginny Kerr were delayed while the rest were late applications).

6:27 PM – The committee gains a quorum 27 minutes late.  Thank you, traffic.

San Juan Capistrano City Council

6:29 PM – Candidate Kim McCarthy says she’s 51 after briefly struggling to remember her age.  She states that incumbent Sam Allevato voted for a $30 million bond that increased property taxes and has needlessly borrowed money to pay for city expenses that should have come from reserves.  She worked at the Pontiac Motor Plant to work her way through Wayne State University.  After Wayne State, she worked on commission basis.  McCarthy says she wants respect for constituents’ money.  She says she will not vote for bonds nor for any grants, matching or non-matching.  She says she wants to help raise property values.

6:32 PM – Candidate Roy L. Byrnes is a physician by training has lived in Orange County since 1959 and was elected to the San Juan Capistrano City Council in 1972 and voluntarily retired in 1976 to spend more time teaching at UCI and on his medical practice.  He expresses his concern about the leftward shift of City Councils in San Juan Capistrano, most recently led by Sam Allevato.  Byrnes urges the committee to not “take the easy way out” by refusing to endorse.  He says the city’s residents are 40% Democrats, and the Democrats do not bother to field a candidate because they’re happy with Allevato.  (OC Political fact check: 26.6% of San Juan Capistrano’s registered voters are Democrats.)  He says if the OC GOP fails to endorse, the Democrats will win.

6:35 PM – Central Committee Member Norm Dickinson says McCarthy supported and contributed to Democrat Laura Freeze.

6:37 PM – A resident says there is hostility to religion on the City Council with the effort to tax religious schools and requiring these religious schools offer scholarships and build trails, which is an intrusion of government upon the school.  He cites the City Council’s requirement that only councilmembers can give the invocation, which “sounds like a state religion.”

6:39 PM – San Juan Capistrano Planning Commissioner Rob Williams speaks in opposition to Kim McCarthy because he says she only says negative things about the city even when he says the facts contradict her.  He says McCarthy not only contributed money but also walked precincts for Democrat Laura Freeze, who unseated Joe Soto, the CRA/OCGOP-endorsed candidate.

6:41 PM – A resident speaks of the high water rates in San Juan Capistrano.  He says there’s a $100 million debt, including a water department with a now-$6 million debt (previously $8 million).  He says he voted for Democrat Freeze because her supporters hoodwinked him into thinking she was a fiscal conservative and that Freeze fooled many others.

6:43 PM – McCarthy states she gave two $250 checks to Freeze, who had told her she was a fiscal conservative with a financial background.  McCarthy notes she’s endorsed by SOCRA and Family Action PAC, as is Byrnes.  She says she would never support or vote for Freeze again.

6:45 PM – Byrnes says he and McCarthy are not politicians, just Republicans trying to do the best they can.  He says that “evil triumphs” when the good do nothing, and that’s the reason the OC GOP should endorse in this race to prevent the Democrats from capturing one of the Council seats.

6:47 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Mary Young expresses her concern about candidates who simply attack their opponents but do not explain what they will do as Councilmembers.  Young expresses her concern that McCarthy failed to disclose her support for Freeze on the endorsements questionnaire in the section that asked about support of Democrats.

McCarthy accused Young of making her mind up before the meeting.

Endorsements Committee Chair Mark Bucher cuts off both McCarthy and Young.

6:48 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Thomas Gordon asks how Planning Commissioner Williams had voted on the religious school taxation issue.

After dodging the question for a while, Williams says he voted for the tax.

6:49 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Mary Young speaks and Candidate Kim McCarthy starts shouting over her, with each demanding that the other show respect.  Young states and McCarthy shouts about how hard they work on the Central Committee and as a candidate, respectively.  (OC Political wishes we had a camera going.)  McCarthy rises out of her seat as the male Endorsements Committee members have facial expressions of concern about a potential physical confrontation.

6:50 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Mary Young makes a motion to endorse nobody.  It dies for lack of a second.

6:51 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Thomas Gordon expresses his disappointment in the fighting.  He says he received numerous phone calls from legislators and other elected officials, and that he is insulted that Allevato couldn’t show up for the meeting when he requested the endorsement while Gordon drove 60 miles from his office to be here.

6:53 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Chandra Chell says a first-time candidate does not have a voting record, so we can only take a candidate at their word.

6:54 PM – Discussion ensues as the committee notes several people who gave money to Democrats were endorsed by the OC GOP Central Committee.

6:55 PM – Endorsements Committee Chair Mark Bucher expresses his disappointment at the way McCarthy conducted herself toward Endorsements Committee Member Mary Young.  However, Bucher says he is completely unimpressed with McCarthy’s opponents who were absent despite saying they would be present.  Bucher also expresses his concern about the need for elected officials to show restraint.  Bucher expresses concern about Allevato’s support of the impact fee imposed on religious schools, which Bucher says is simply a tax by another name.

6:56 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Thomas Gordon echoes Bucher’s disappointment about McCarthy’s treatment of Young, but he still plans to vote to recommend McCarthy for endorsement and hopes she wins the election.  He says if she gets the endorsement, she represents the Republican Party, and she hopes to represent the people of San Juan Capistrano.  If she reacts like that to Young, she may do the same to constituents, which will reflect badly upon both the Republican Party and the City of San Juan Capistrano.

6:58 PM – The vote is 2-1-1 (Gordon and Chell in favor, Young against, and Bucher abstaining) to recommend the endorsements of McCarthy and Byrnes.

I don’t know what they said, but McCarthy and Young spoke and shook hands after the vote.

Laguna Niguel City Council

6:59 PM – At the urging of Endorsements Committee Member Chandra Chell and Central Committee Member Norm Dickinson, the committee unanimously recommends Jerry McCloskey for endorsement, noting McCloskey’s endorsements by myriad conservatives, including Laguna Niguel Councilman Robert Ming.   (McCloskey isn’t here, as he has a scheduling conflict with a city commission.)

San Clemente City Council

7:00 PM – Jim Dahl notes he is a 16-year City Councilman and speaks of his family, including his son in the USMC and granddaughter who is on the TV show Parks & Recreation.  He speaks of his roles on the OC Vector Control District Board, OC Fire Authority, and Transportation Corridor Agencies.  He says he is endorsed by Assemblywoman Diane Harkey, Supervisor Pat Bates, Supervisor Bill Campbell, and the Lincoln Club of Orange County.  He notes his city’s AAA bond rating, parks and beaches.  He closes, “We wish San Juan would give us more sand.”

7:02 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Mary Young asks about how many people are running for how many seats.

7:02 PM – Dahl says there are two slots with five candidates.

7:03 PM – Central Committee Alternate Jennifer Beall notes Dahl endorsed John Alpay in the 2010 Capistrano Unified School District recall and again in this 2012 general election.  Beall notes Alpay is an official endorsement against Prop 32.  She says Dahl has “spit in the face” of the party for twice backing Alpay against OC GOP-endorsed candidates.

7:05 PM – Central Committee Member Norm Dickinson speaks in favor of Dahl, citing his property rights record as the only council member backing the CA GOP position on a San Clemente ballot measure.

7:06 PM – Dahl says he considers Alpay a friend and considers it a matter of honor and will not withdraw his endorsement of Alpay.

7:07 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Chandra Chell asks how can Dahl reconcile being a fiscal conservative with endorsing Alpay (the only candidate running for his trustee area in the 2010 CUSD recall).

7:08 PM – Endorsements Committee Chair Mark Bucher says the target of the 2010 CUSD recall was the OC GOP-endorsed candidate.

7:09 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Mary Young speaks of Beall being the top Republican activist in the CUSD.

7:10 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Thomas Gordon expresses concern about Dahl endorsing Alpay against the OC GOP-endorsed candidate in both 2012 and 2010 (and implicitly for the 2010 recall).

7:11 PM – Endorsements Committee Chair Mark Bucher says a 2012 endorsement of Alpay might be forgivable, but a 2010 endorsement is not.

7:11 PM – No one makes any motion regarding Dahl, so the Committee moves on.

Mesa Consolidated Water District, Division 1

7:12 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Chandra Chell speaks in favor of Eric Bever based on his record as a Costa Mesa Councilman and his role as part of Righeimer’s team.  The committee votes unanimously to recommend Bever for endorsement.

Municipal Water District of Orange County, Division 6

7:13 PM – Incumbent Jeffrey Thomas praises the work of the Endorsements Committee and of OC GOP Executive Director Scott Loenhorst.  He says they should never be yelled at.  Thomas was appointed to the seat three years ago when his predecessor had been flown to a board meeting on a Metropolitan Water District of Southern California plane from his La Quinta home (far outside MWDOC).  Thomas was appointed to replace the carpetbagger.  Thomas won a two-year term in 2010 and is up for re-election this year.  He fought the state’s $13 billion water bond and will fight the 2013 water bond that will likely be $14 billion.

7:15 PM – The Endorsements Committee votes unanimously to recommend Thomas for endorsement.  Thomas pledges not to stay an argue.

Huntington Beach Union High School District, Full Term

7:16 PM – Candidate John Briscoe speaks against a $250 million bond in the Ocean View School District, a $27 million technology bond in Fountain Valley School District, and a $927 million bond in the Coast Community College District that doesn’t build any schools.  He says the incumbents are “tiny-R” Republicans who brag about their endorsements by the unions, and the unions will spend $100,000 to buy those two seats.

7:19 PM – Endorsements Committee Member Thomas Gordon asks if Briscoe is endorsed by Huntington Beach City Councilman (and former Huntington Beach Union High School District Board Member) Matt Harper.

7:20 PM – Briscoe says Harper would have endorsed him had he run for the short-term two-year seat instead of one of the two full-term four-year seats.  He says he is endorsed by Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, Assemblyman Jim Silva, and former Assemblymen Van Tran and Chuck DeVore.

7:20 PM – The Endorsements Committee votes unanimously to recommend Briscoe for endorsement.

Irvine City Council

7:20 PM – In response to an inquiry from Central Committee Alternate Scott Peotter, Endorsements Committee Chair Mark Bucher notes that because Christina Shea and Lynn Schott are already endorsed for the two Council seats in Irvine, so the Endorsements Committee has no ability to take action on Evan Chemers.  Bucher says there is also inadequate notice.  He says a Chemers endorsement can be considered by the whole Central Committee who can endorse more candidates than spots and who would have adequate notice.

7:22 PM – The Endorsements Committee adjourns.

Posted in Huntington Beach Union High School District, Laguna Niguel, Mesa Consolidated Water District, Municipal Water District of Orange County, Republican Central Committee, San Clemente, San Juan Capistrano | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »