OC Political

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

Archive for September, 2014

Protest Underway at Stanton GOP HQ Over Measure GG Sales Tax Increase

Posted by Chris Nguyen on September 20, 2014

A small protest is underway at the OC GOP Headquarters in Stanton against the Measure GG Sales Tax Increase on the November ballot.  While the OC GOP has officially endorsed against Measure GG, the headquarters is being run by Stanton Councilman David Shawver, who has vocally advocated the Measure GG Sales Tax Increase.

Shawver is hosting a meeting for some delegates of the California Republican Party, as the state party convention is underway this weekend.

The protesters are objecting to an atmosphere of tax-and-spend by Republicans, led by Shawver.  The protesters are also objecting to Measure GG’s sales tax increase that is 12.5% higher than the existing sales tax.

Additionally, the protesters have raised concerns that City resources are being used to promote the ballot measure, as can be seen on this page on the City of Stanton web site (in case the page gets taken down, OC Political has taken the liberty of archiving the page here) or this City press release.

The City of Stanton has argued that it has been cutting its budget to the bone since 2011, cutting $9 million from its general fund since then.  The protesters have raised concerns about the adequacy of these cuts, citing the levels of salaries of City employees and citing pay raises granted during since 2011, when the City is asking the voters to increase the sales tax:

  • $162,504: City Manager (15% pay raise in 2012)
  • $141,312: Community Development Director (5% pay raises in 2011 and 2012)
  • $134,580: Public Works Director/City Engineer
  • $128,172: Administrative Services Director
  • $122,076: Community Services Director (5% pay raise on August 12, 2014, just six months after becoming Community Services Director)
  • $97,572: Accounting Manager
  • $78,132: Code Enforcement/Parking Control Supervisor
  • $78,132: Facilities Maintenance Supervisor (5% pay raise on April 22, 2014)
  • $78,132: Associate Planner (5% pay raises in 2011, 2012, and 2013)

The full text of Measure GG is available from the Registrar of Voters (it’s the first 3.5 pages of the PDF).  The City Attorney’s impartial analysis is on page 4.  While the proponents of the Measure GG sales tax increase have dubbed it the “9-1-1/Public Safety and Essential City Services Protection Measure,” the impartial analysis notes, “The City would not be required to use the revenues raised by Measure GG for any special purpose or for any particular program or service.”

Pages 5-6 of the PDF from the Registrar has the argument in favor of GG, argument against GG, and the rebuttals to those two arguments.

Posted in Stanton | Tagged: , | 13 Comments »

Puppets and Puppeteers in local politics

Posted by Brenda Higgins on September 19, 2014

Much has already been written about the Orange County Sheriff and the contract they won a short time ago to take over policing the city of Yorba Linda. While I opposed this effort, the world seems not to have ended. As a conservative, I believe that if things are not broken, you don’t fix them. Although there have been no serious issues with the department change and the transition, and the OCSD is really pleasant to deal with, there is no credible argument that citizens “saved” money. Accounting tricks are not savings, and all the new stuff that came with the sheriff moving into town, was paid for by someone, even if it did not get reflected in a line item in the contract.

The lingering question is though, was it really pay to play, and were the politicians acting on behalf of a Union who “scratched” their back?

The IE’s (Indepedent Expenditures) in the 2012 Yorba Linda City Council election, made it the most expensive in our city’s history. Our telephones and our mailboxes were bombarded with propaganda about what bad guys Gene Hernandez and Craig Young were.  In 2010, John Anderson’s words (Which I will never forget) related to the hit piece on Jan Horton, “I did not write that piece”, were just the beginning of a very ugly trend. Those hit pieces were paid for (and apparently authored by) the YLRRR. Of Course they were tremendously helpful to Tom Lindsey and John Anderson. Fast Forward to 2012, THEN we have the Police contract in play, the YLRRR hit pieces looked like child’s play compared to the big budget union coming into our town and our political process. In addition to the big budget slick mail campaign on behalf of their friends,  the union president and his wife, showed up to council meetings, repeatedly singing the praises of their favorite candidates, and never once disclosing their conflict of interest.

Those 2012 hit pieces, against newcomer Gene Hernandez, were for the specific purpose of returning to office the incumbents, Mark Schwing, and ….you guessed it, Nancy Rikel, Queen apparent of the current recall effort.

The issue of policing aside, is being in bed with the Union, something we should all be concerned about? Yeah, ya think?!? Additionally, I thought it interesting that Ms. Rikel did not seek the endorsement of the OCGOP in her current bid to return to office. The OCGOP, has been clear that candidates taking money from Unions will not receive an endorsement from the party. The additional problem that neither Ms. Rikel or Schwing have answered is the implication of their own legislative baby, Measure Y. The Yorba Linda ETHICS ordinance which PROHIBITS any candidate from taking any more that $250 from anY CONTRACTOR with the city. Hello? Anyone besides me bothered by this? The largest contract in the history of the city was awarded to the entity that employs the UNION who provided more financial support to the Schwing/Rikel campaign, as to make it the costliest election in the cities history.

“Well, what does that have to do with 2014?”, you say.

The Union President’s wife is a chiropractor. Yes, this is the same couple, with different last names, who appeared at the city council meetings related to the policing contract, and encouraged the council to approve the OCSD contract, signing the praises of John Anderson as “one of the good guys”. As it turns out, there has been a really nifty relationship with her and the union in her receipt of direct referrals of deputies injured on the job. You’ll be hearing about it soon enough and thankfully one of our supervisors are courageous enough to be undertaking an investigation. I am certain he will be issuing a press release sometime soon. It’s probably a safe bet, that it is not Sp. Spitzer. The point being, Yorba Lindans, wake up. Density is not, nor has it ever been the issue. The pandering and exchanging of favors in this organization seems to run far and wide.  Nancy Rikel and Mark Schwing  are eager to get their life time bene’s and keep making sure that contracts for things like policing the city and legal representation, get awarded to their buddies. You have fallen for the smoke screen. They knew you would. In the YL we so easily fall for their repeated carrot and the stick of the evil developers. Who really has their hand in your pockets, citizen? The time has come to wake up and look around.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments »

Live from the Costa Mesa City Council Feet to the Fire Candidate Forum

Posted by Chris Nguyen on September 18, 2014

We’re live from the Costa Mesa City Council candidate forum sponsored by the Feet to the Fire Forum, a lively debate sponsored by the Daily Pilot and Voice of OC.

Your intrepid blogger walked in late due to having never been on the Orange Coast College campus before, and having to search for the right building.

All the candidates are present except for Katrina Foley.

Daily Pilot Editor John Canalis asks about density. Two loud women scream from the audience.

Jim Righeimer says no changes have been made to any zoning. No variance has allowed people to place more units than permitted under zoning. The two loud women object again when Righeimer points out Foley voted for variances that allow more units than zoning allowed for certain areas.

Jay Humphrey complains about density in an unincorporated area that Costa Mesa is about to annex (Colleen island).

Rita Simpson says each project needs to be mitigated but she supports the annexation of the expensive apartments in the Colleen island.

Alicia Perez of the Daily Pilot asks about lot sizes. Barbara Venezia of the Daily Pilot asks about LAFCO processes and maintaining prior zoning like in Santa Ana Heights.

Tony Capitelli suggests adding bike loans and public transportation.

Norberto Santana of the Voice of OC asks Righeimer about the Costa Mesa City birthday party and a legal settlement involving Dan Joyce, who oversaw the party.

Jim Righeimer says he is not allowed to answer personnel issues, but he does note that some people involved violated city procurement policies.

Jay Humphrey called it a mismanagement of the process.

An obnoxious group of about 20 people out of an audience of 100 keep cheering for every word that Humphrey says and booing everything Righeimer says, sometimes before he even finish his sentence.

Al Melone expresses concern about debating a personnel issue in public.

Lee Ramos says this is beating a dead horse. He says the party was done irresponsibly, but the Council by a 5-0 vote has resolved the issue.

Barbara Venezia of the Daily Pilot asks about a sports park at Fairview Park.

Lee Ramos says he reveres Fairview Park the way it is. He calls for a study. He has spoken with Parks Commissioners and the school district. He speaks about asking community members and stakeholders for their perspectives.

Alicia Lopez of the Daily Pilot asks about community input.

Jim Righeimer says listening is not trying to be all things to all people and doing what each public commenter says.

Tony Capitelli says perception is reality in politics. He says Righeimer is unable to build consensus on important issues like homelessness. He wishes to revert to the old public comment policy. He says the Council has executive, legislative, and judicial functions.

John Canalis of the Daily Pilot asks about the old public comment system where all public commenters spoke at the beginning of Council meetings while the new policy has part of public comment at the beginning of the meeting and the remainder at the end.

Chris Bunyan blasts the new policy stating that Righeimer implemented it because he didn’t like being criticized.

Jay Humphrey says they didn’t have this problem in the past.

Chris Bunyan interjects that Righeimer caused public uproar about the Council.

Barbara Venezia of the Daily Pilot asks about why Costa Mesa didn’t join Newport Beach on group homes.

Jim Righeimer points out that a judge ruled against Newport Beach. He states it is important to follow state and federal law.

Chris Bunyan criticizes the structure of a task force on rehabilitation homes. He says no data is being collected. He points to an ordinance in the City of Orange that limits distances between rehabilitation homes. Bunyan blames the rehabilitation homes and the bed count for increasing crime on the east side.

Al Melone says the city is on the right track. He says the City cannot endure multimillion lawsuits for violating state law.

Rits Simpson expresses her agreement with Melone.

Barbara Venezia of the Daily Pilot asks about campaign contributions from rehabilitation homes.

Jim Righeimer says he returned the sole contribution he received from rehabilitation homes while the other candidates indicated that they did not receive any.

Jay Humphrey says Wendy Leece introduced the city’s rehabilitation home ordinance.

Lee Ramos expresses concern about the city’s political fracturing. He says Costa Mesa has to work together. He points to a local community group who is working on the rehabilitation home issue. He says it doesn’t matter who gets credit as long as the right thing is done (pointing to Humphrey crediting Leece on an ordinance).

John Canalis of the Daily Pilot asks about the Costa Mesa Police Department’s staffing levels.

Jim Righeimer notes crime rates dropped in 2013. (I’ve never heard audience members boo dropping crime rates until I came to this candidate forum.) He says all cities cut police during the 2008-09 financial crisis, which he notes was a decision the Costa Mesa Council made before Righeimer was elected. He notes changes to city HR policies to more efficiently hire additional personnel to restore former police staffing levels.

Norberto Santana of the Voice of OC questions if Righeimer is consistent with his prior statements about changing policing methods.

Jim Righeimer says it makes sense to utilize police helicopters in partnership with neighboring cities rather than having one helicopter for a single city.

Jay Humphrey expresses concern about having new police officers instead of lateral transfers. He says Costa Mesa is not getting the top quality people applying for police jobs, just the bottom people.

Chris Bunyan says code enforcement is part of public safety, not just police and fire. He again refers to group homes. He says police have no reason to come to Righeimer’s city.

Tony Capitelli speaks about good friends who left the Costa Mesa Police Department for other cities. He says the City needs to come together.

Lee Ramos says he met with the City Manager. He says the new police chief came in and had a decrease in staffing levels. Ramos would like to increase police staffing levels over 18 months.

Al Melone wants to recruit police officers from cold states using the weather to attract top quality experienced police officers rather than local rookies.

Chris Bunyan points to vice squads and K9 units needing experienced police.

John Canalis of the Daily Pilot asks about Righeimer dropping his lawsuit against the police union.

Jim Righeimer says he would be willing to drop the suit if the union, its law firm, and its private investigator would come clean. He expresses concern about the law firm extorting city councils on behalf of police unions.

Jay Humphrey says the suit needs to be dropped to bring calm to the city, which would attract lateral transfers to the police department.

Norberto Santana of the Voice of OC asks Righeimer if he’s really going after the police system.

Jim Righeimer says the police union and the police department are separate entities. He says there are a lot of police officers who didn’t like what the police union did. He says unions have done this in other cities.

Alicia Perez of the Daily Pilot suggests that Righeimer’s attitude has been anti-union and that’s a non-local issue that gives the perception of not caring about the city. She asks if he’s interested in higher office.

Jim Righeimer says he has young children and doesn’t want to go to Sacramento. Righeimer says there is a massive pension liability.

Norberto Santana of the Voice of OV asks if 65% of Costa Mesa’s budget is the appropriate amount to spend on police and fire. He asks if it’s sustainable.

Jay Humphrey says the level is correct and has been the level for years. He calls public safety the app

Tony Capitelli says 65% is sustainable but not with 19% for pensions.

Lee Ramos says 80% is more appropriate for sustainability.

Al Melone is fine with 65%-80% but calls for increasing the retirement age for pensions.

Rita Simpson says CalPERS is demanding greater payments for unsustainable pensions.

John Canalis of the Daily Pilot asks Bunyan about how he would deal with unfunded pension liabilities.

Chris Bunyan says CalPERS hasn’t followed all of Jerry Brown’s recommendations for pension reform. He says fat pensions are gone. He says Costa Mesa needs to tighten its belts.

Jim Righeimer says there is no silver bullet. He says cities will go bankrupt which will force change. He criticizes the structure of the CalPERS board. He says Costa Mesa will be fine because they monitor their budget but other cities will go bankrupt.

Jay Humphrey says the City pension committee has called for increased contributions from both employer and employees to deal with the pension liability. Humphrey cites a single year’s returns as proof that investments are reducing the pension liability.

Tony Capitelli says employees need to pay the entire employee pension contribution and should replicate the federal pension plan. He expresses concern that new employees and his generation are forced to pay for the largesse of older generations.

Jim Righeimer says the State prevents cities and employees from contributing more to the pension. He wants to establish a balance where police are not paying 25% of their salaries to pensions.

Lee Ramos is concerned that the only ways to fix the liability problem is via sales tax, Sacramento changes, bonds, or property taxes.

Al Melone calls for placing money in the bank from higher contributions as insurance against future liabilities rather than paying CalPERS more.

Alicia Perez of the Daily Pilot asks about building supportive housing.

Tony Capitelli says Civic Center Park was thr wrong location, and that Mercy House had applied for a number of other locations, some of which are in industrial/commercial areas rather than residential areas.

Jay Humphrey says Costa Mesa should provide housing for the homeless. He wants to convert motels into SROs. He says the City did this in the 1990s and was a model for the County.

Lee Ramos questions where these places were.

Jay Humphrey gives locations.

Several people shout that these are affordable homes for seniors not the homeless.

Tony Capitelli says there needs to be more collaboration with the community.

Chris Bunyan says hotels should start to take on more homeless as the hotels age. He calls Righeimer anti-hotel.

Al Melone asks where will the funding for all of this come from. He says Santa Monica and LA have much worse homeless problems.

Jim Righeimer says Costa Mesa has attracted homeless by providing numerous services. He says all cities need to provide these services so every city has its fair share. He says some hotel slumlords are overcharging the homeless for tiny spaces, like five people on 180 square feet.

Tony Capitelli says nonprofits, state, and federal funding pays for these. He says they should encourage community development rather than shelters.

Lee Ramos asks where the money is that Capitelli is referring to.

Tony Capitelli points to one grant the City Council voted against.

Barbara Venezia of the Daily Pilot asks yes or no on medical marijuana:
Jay Humphrey says Yes.
Tony Capitelli says Yes.
Lee Ramos says Yes.
Al Melone says No.
Rita Simpson says No.
Jim Righeimer says No if not medical.
Chris Bunyan says Yes.

Barbara Venezia of the Daily Pilot asks Yes or No on messages on toilet seats:
Jay Humphrey says Yes.
Tony Capitelli says Yes.
Lee Ramos says No.
Al Melone says No.
Rita Simpson says No.
Jim Righeimer says No.
Chris Bunyan says Yes.

Norberto Santana of the Voice of OC asks about taking four years with all of Righeimer’s promises and only outsourcing trash.

Jim Righeimer says they can’t outsource the city. He says general employee average total compensation is $105,000. He says the City worked with city employees to cap cash outs of employee vacation pay when they separate from employment.

John Canalis of the Daily Pilot asks about Banning Ranch.

Chris Bunyan says he has fought developing Banning Ranch. He criticizes Righeimer.

Jim Righeimer says it’s Newport Beach’s decision.

Rita Simpson says it’s the Coastal Commission’s decision.

Lee Ramos says there needs to be tighter control of the project.

Tony Capitelli calls for mitigation.

Jay Humphrey opposes the project.

Your blogger missed the final Yes or No question, but here are the answers (if someone recalls the answer please comment below or click on contact us above):
Jay Humphrey says No.
Tony Capitelli says says Yes.
Lee Ramos says Yes.
Al Melone says Yes.
Rita Simpson says Yes.
Jim Righeimer says Yes.
Chris Bunyan says No.

This blogger apologizes for any errors and omissions. Feet to the Fire debates are always the most difficult events to live blog due to their quick and lively pace.  Additionally, tonight’s extremely disruptive audience made it difficult to hear the candidates and panelists at times.

Posted in Costa Mesa | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Live from OC GOP Central Committee: Endorsements Round 2

Posted by Chris Nguyen on September 15, 2014

We’re live from OC GOP Central Committee for the second round of endorsements to decide on the recommendations of the Endorsements Committee, which we covered here and here. Please recall that the OC GOP Central Committee already made official early endorsements in August.

As is usual for an endorsements meeting, several new alternates are sworn in.

There are too many candidates and elected officials here to list them all.

The party is honoring Scott Loenhorst, who flew down from Silicon Valley tonight for the Central Committee meeting. Loenhorst left his position as OC GOP Executive Director three weeks ago to join Google.

On the docket tonight are:

Recommended for Endorsement
Angie Cano – Santa Ana Unified School District
Tim Surridge – Orange Unified School District, Trustee Area 5
Jim Cunneen – Fountain Valley School District
Sandra Crandall – Fountain Valley School District
Rick Ledesma – Orange Unified School District, Trustee Area 7   
John Briscoe – Ocean View School District
Andrew Hamilton – Lake Forest City Council
Elaine Gennawey – Laguna Niguel City Council
John Jennings – Laguna Niguel City Council
Shawn Dewane – Orange County Water District, Division 7
Chuck Perry – Costa Mesa Sanitary District
Ron Amburgey – Mesa Water District, Division 4
Duffy Duffield – Newport Beach City Council, District 3
Scott Peotter – Newport Beach City Council, District 6
Kevin Muldoon – Newport Beach City Council, District 4
MJ Noor – Fullerton Joint Union High School District
Tracy Pellman – Ocean View School District
Ed Sachs – Mission Viejo City Council
Rhonda Reardon – Mission Viejo City Council
Wendy Bucknum – Mission Viejo City Council
Kerry Ferguson – San Juan Capistrano City Council
Greg Sebourn – Fullerton City Council
Steve Vargas – Brea City Council
Cecilia Hupp – Brea City Council
John Tomlinson – Dana Point City Council
David Yang – Tustin Unified School District
Baron Night – Buena Park City Council

Recommended Endorsement Against
Measure I – Fullerton Joint Union High School District Bond
Measure H – Anaheim Union High School District Bond
Measure J – North Orange County Community College District Bond
Measure K – Orange Unified School District Bond

Recommended Neutral/Not Endorsed
Measure Z – Rancho Santa Margarita
Brad McGirr – Rancho Santa Margarita City Council
Michael Vaughn – Rancho Santa Margarita City Council
Jesse Petrilla – Rancho Santa Margarita City Council
Laurie Biehl – Rancho Santa Margarita City Council
Don Chadd – Rancho Santa Margarita City Council
Jerry Holloway – Rancho Santa Margarita City Council
Sean Paden – Fullerton City Council
Larry Bennett – Fullerton City Council
Michael Vo – Fountain Valley City Council
Barbara Delgleize – Huntington Beach City Council

No Vote
Tony Capitelli – Costa Mesa City Council
Leslie Daigle – Orange County Water District, Division 5

Tim Brown – San Clemente City Council

No Longer Being Considered
Doug Pettibone – Anaheim City Council
James Vanderbilt – Anaheim City Council
Kris Murray – Anaheim City Council
Gail Eastman – Anaheim City Council

Fred Whitaker moves and Brett Barbre seconds the above list in their entirety.

Newport Beach City Council is pulled for further discussion.

Tim Brown will be considered for San Clemente City Council on the floor of Central Committee.

Tracy Pellman and John Briscoe in Ocean View School District are pulled for discussion.

Tim Surridge and Rick Ledesma in Orange Unified School District are pulled for discussion.

Sean Paden running for Fullerton City Council is pulled for discussion.

Michael Vo running for Fountain Valley City Council is pulled for discussion.

Fred Whitaker moves and Denis Bilodeau seconds to endorse Tim Surridge and Rick Ledesma for Orange Unified School District.

Whitaker says that Surridge and Ledesma are both good Republicans. He speaks about their conservative voting records. Whitaker warns that Surridge’s opponent is Florice Hoffman, a liberal union lawyer who ran against Ed Royce. Ledesma’s opponent is also a liberal Democrat, Tim Perez.

Deborah Pauly speaks about Surridge and Ledesma voting for the bond. She said they both promised her they would not vote for a bond.

The vote sounds like 50/50, thereby falling short of the 2/3 vote needed.


Kermit Marsh moves to endorse both Tracy Pellman and John Briscoe for Ocean View School District. Scott Voigts seconds.

Marsh states that the two have slung mud at each other, and he is moving them together to force them to be considered together. Marsh lives in the district and his children attend Ocean View schools. He says the teachers union supported Pellman and opposed Briscoe in 2010. He says the teachers unions now oppose Pellman and quietly support Briscoe in 2014; he has had five teachers confirm this.


Steve Baric moves and Brett Barbre seconds the endorsement of Duffy Duffield.

Baric says these three candidates took the time to apply. He calls them reformers who oppose the dock tax. He says their principles are consistent with Republican Party principles.

Mary Young wants all candidates considered, including Duffield’s opponent, Rush Hill.


Brett Barbre moves and John Warner seconds the endorsement of Scott Peotter.


Lee Lowery moves and Zonya Townsend seconds the endorsement of Kevin Muldoon.


Brett Barbre moves and Mary Young seconds the endorsement of Wendy Bucknum.

Barbre speaks of Bucknum’s volunteerism on behalf of Republicans and her conservative principles.

Steve Sarkis asks about the he-said-she-said emails in Mission Viejo. Sarkis asks Bucher if the Endorsements Committee reviewed the issues raised. Bucher confirms they did.


Mary Young moves and Steve Nagel seconds the endorsement of Rhonda Reardon.


Mark McCurdy speaks about Sean Paden’s city service and conservative principles.

Fred Whitaker states that the Endorsements Committee made a decision to not recommend Sean Paden or Larry Bennett since there are more Republicans than seats.

Thomas Gordon says the Republican team of Bruce Whitaker and Greg Sebourn have endorsed Sean Paden and that the Republican Party needs to send Whitaker and Sebourn a teammate in Paden.

Shawn Nelson says he agrees with Fred Whitaker. He says he has not endorsed either candidate. He says neither have been in the trenches.

TJ Fuentes moves and John W. Briscoe seconds to endorse no one (other than Greg Sebourn who was endorsed on the consent calendar).


Steve Nagel moves and Peggy Huang seconds the endorsement of Michael Vo for Fountain Valley City Council. He notes that the OC GOP endorsed McCurdy, Vo, and John Collins four years ago.

Scott Peotter notes that Vo supported evergreen contracts and likes various Democrats on his Facebook page.


Amazingly, endorsements completed less than one hour after it began.

Scott Baugh speaks about the various Republican headquarters.

Meeting Adjourned.

Posted in Republican Central Committee | 6 Comments »

Recall fever and NIMBYs

Posted by Brenda Higgins on September 13, 2014

“Not In My Backyard” is such a common phenomenon and driving force in local politics, that, in case you weren’t aware, they’ve come to be known collectively as NIMBYs.  It has become the scourge of Yorba Linda.

There is a recall election taking place.  If you live in the city, the absentee ballot is in your mailbox now.  If you do not vote by mail, the date is October 7.

If you really haven’t been paying attention, the other election, the REAL election, in which you vote for city council, congressman and other important stuff, is November 4.  Yep, you got it, less than 30 days apart.  There must be something super important and horrendously awful going on in the YL to justify the CITY footing the bill for this SPECIAL election for only Yorba Linda.  Yeah. Not so much.  In general, a bunch of local histrionic activists having a temper tantrum melt down again.  Yes, again.  And, you resident, regardless of whether you vote or care or not, are picking up the tab, for self proclaimed “fiscal conservatives” to have mega hissy fit and wear out their soap boxes.

There must be a payoff though right? A derivative benefit, a good sound outcome and consequence in the end?  No. IT changes nothing except the names on the dais.  That’s it.  Truly.  The rest is just rhetoric.  Really.  The same thing was at stake in the last recall effort.  Yes, this is a bi-annual event.  Oh, except that one was justified, right?  No.  It was as silly as this one. It was and remains about who is friends with whom, who in on whom’s “team” and who likes whom and on and on with the personal vendettas.

There is no ethical violations or illegal activity at the heart of this recall, NOR IS ANY ALLEGED.  Yes, you read that right.  No one is alleging that the council member subject to the recall have violated any ethics ordinance or any law at all.  There was an allegation floating around that they broke “campaign promises’, but that is not actually true either and even if it was, really? Who cares and lets’ talk to Hillary Clinton about promises and blue dresses again.

It goes something like this, apartments. Well.  They are not welcome in Yorba Linda.  Apparently neither are the apartment dwellers who come with them, (the racism behind the recall drivers is something that is the subject of much speculation and rumor but not actually documented, you’ll have to derive your own opinion about it) Yorba Linda is subject to certain mandates from the state of California.  We must build housing, in general multi tenant housing, suitable for persons in lower income brackets.  For those of you following along at home it is important to note, the city of Yorba Linda was cited not all that long ago as having the one of the highest per capita income in the nation at about $120,000 per year, per household.  That’s not a lot of diversity, and clearly there aren’t a lot of options then, for people not in that income bracket to reside in the city.

Also, in case you haven’t noticed, in this blue of blue states of ours, there is no tolerance for that kind of affluence and forced inclusion is the rule of law. In the state where we open the border and host welcoming committees for those who cross illegally, how could you really expect anything different.

So, apartments will be built, or Sacramento will be moving into Main Street, regardless of what Yorba Lindans want.  Sacramento is going to make it happen.

Although this is news to most of the residents who are trying to figure out how to vote, this is NOT a new issue.  In anticipation of this issue, the city, meaning the VOTERS of the city, passed Measure B years ago.  Measure B, takes the issue of zoning changes AWAY from the electeds on the city council and places that power in the hands of the people. So, if any land owner in Yorba Linda wishes to change the zoning on their property, so that they may cash in on current building trends and the need to keep in step with this State mandate for multi family housing, that land owner must have the approval of the voters of Yorba Linda.

Heres the REAL NEWS FLASH, the projects that are pending right now, the ones that are the alleged basis for the RECALL, have been so approved.  The voters, the residents, the citizens of Yorba Linda, voted for and approved the properties that are now being prepared to construct apartments.  This is happening, you voted or ignored it and didn’t vote, but these city council members, who are being targeted for recall DID NOT APPROVE these apartments to be built in Yorba Linda.

I have said it before, there is NO SANTA CLAUS.  Especially in politics.

The only correct vote on the October ballot is a NO vote on the recall.

Noteworthy as well, is that Tom Lindsey is up for reelection in November.  So even if he is recalled in October, he is on the November ballot.  Yep.  These are the geniuses who want to replace him.  They want us the citizens to spend upward of $300,000.00 for their personal vendettas, while they flush our money literally down the toilet.  How much mitigation could that money have accomplished on the projects in question, in traffic issues, walls and barriers, landscaping.  There are things that could have been done to deal with the NIMBYs but we’re spending this money just whining about it.

It accomplishes nothing. Shame on Nancy Rikel and her band of political thugs for doing this. Shame on all of you who have whined about the apartments being build in your backyard and your recent interest and involvement in local politics.  Where were you in 2008, in 2010, and even before when solutions to these issues were being debated and resolved?  Now that there are bulldozers in the neighborhood you’re all full of interest and determination.  There is truly nothing that can be done about this now, nothing that can be changed, and these efforts are in vain and much to the detriment of the city overall.

Everyone needs to do themselves a favor and get informed.  If we do not become a city of informed voters we will continue to be victimized and have our cities coffers raided systematically by these warring factions.  When are we going to say enough and end this? Change is the only norm in life and in society.  Whining about what we don’t like does not bring back the past.  These recall supporters have promised things that they have no ability to deliver and Yorba Linda, please wake up, they have their hands in your pockets.  Again.

Posted in Uncategorized | 30 Comments »

Bush Address on September 11 Attacks; Obama Address on Navy SEAL Operation Killing Bin Laden

Posted by Newsletter Reprint on September 11, 2014

President George W. Bush addressed the nation on Tuesday, September 11, 2001:

Good evening. Today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts. The victims were in airplanes, or in their offices; secretaries, businessmen and women, military and federal workers; moms and dads, friends and neighbors. Thousands of lives were suddenly ended by evil, despicable acts of terror.

The pictures of airplanes flying into buildings, fires burning, huge structures collapsing, have filled us with disbelief, terrible sadness, and a quiet, unyielding anger. These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed; our country is strong.

A great people has been moved to defend a great nation. Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shattered steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve.

America was targeted for attack because we’re the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world. And no one will keep that light from shining.

Today, our nation saw evil, the very worst of human nature. And we responded with the best of America — with the daring of our rescue workers, with the caring for strangers and neighbors who came to give blood and help in any way they could.

Immediately following the first attack, I implemented our government’s emergency response plans. Our military is powerful, and it’s prepared. Our emergency teams are working in New York City and Washington, D.C. to help with local rescue efforts.

Our first priority is to get help to those who have been injured, and to take every precaution to protect our citizens at home and around the world from further attacks.

The functions of our government continue without interruption. Federal agencies in Washington which had to be evacuated today are reopening for essential personnel tonight, and will be open for business tomorrow. Our financial institutions remain strong, and the American economy will be open for business, as well.

The search is underway for those who are behind these evil acts. I’ve directed the full resources of our intelligence and law enforcement communities to find those responsible and to bring them to justice. We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them.

I appreciate so very much the members of Congress who have joined me in strongly condemning these attacks. And on behalf of the American people, I thank the many world leaders who have called to offer their condolences and assistance.

America and our friends and allies join with all those who want peace and security in the world, and we stand together to win the war against terrorism. Tonight, I ask for your prayers for all those who grieve, for the children whose worlds have been shattered, for all whose sense of safety and security has been threatened. And I pray they will be comforted by a power greater than any of us, spoken through the ages in Psalm 23: “Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me.”

This is a day when all Americans from every walk of life unite in our resolve for justice and peace. America has stood down enemies before, and we will do so this time. None of us will ever forget this day. Yet, we go forward to defend freedom and all that is good and just in our world.

Thank you. Good night, and God bless America.

President Barack Obama addressed the nation on Sunday, May 1, 2011:

Good evening.  Tonight, I can report to the American people and to the world that the United States has conducted an operation that killed Osama bin Laden, the leader of al Qaeda, and a terrorist who’s responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women, and children.

It was nearly 10 years ago that a bright September day was darkened by the worst attack on the American people in our history.  The images of 9/11 are seared into our national memory — hijacked planes cutting through a cloudless September sky; the Twin Towers collapsing to the ground; black smoke billowing up from the Pentagon; the wreckage of Flight 93 in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, where the actions of heroic citizens saved even more heartbreak and destruction.

And yet we know that the worst images are those that were unseen to the world.  The empty seat at the dinner table.  Children who were forced to grow up without their mother or their father.  Parents who would never know the feeling of their child’s embrace.  Nearly 3,000 citizens taken from us, leaving a gaping hole in our hearts.

On September 11, 2001, in our time of grief, the American people came together.  We offered our neighbors a hand, and we offered the wounded our blood.  We reaffirmed our ties to each other, and our love of community and country.  On that day, no matter where we came from, what God we prayed to, or what race or ethnicity we were, we were united as one American family.

We were also united in our resolve to protect our nation and to bring those who committed this vicious attack to justice.  We quickly learned that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by al Qaeda — an organization headed by Osama bin Laden, which had openly declared war on the United States and was committed to killing innocents in our country and around the globe.  And so we went to war against al Qaeda to protect our citizens, our friends, and our allies.

Over the last 10 years, thanks to the tireless and heroic work of our military and our counterterrorism professionals, we’ve made great strides in that effort.  We’ve disrupted terrorist attacks and strengthened our homeland defense.  In Afghanistan, we removed the Taliban government, which had given bin Laden and al Qaeda safe haven and support.  And around the globe, we worked with our friends and allies to capture or kill scores of al Qaeda terrorists, including several who were a part of the 9/11 plot.

Yet Osama bin Laden avoided capture and escaped across the Afghan border into Pakistan.  Meanwhile, al Qaeda continued to operate from along that border and operate through its affiliates across the world.

And so shortly after taking office, I directed Leon Panetta, the director of the CIA, to make the killing or capture of bin Laden the top priority of our war against al Qaeda, even as we continued our broader efforts to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat his network.

Then, last August, after years of painstaking work by our intelligence community, I was briefed on a possible lead to bin Laden.  It was far from certain, and it took many months to run this thread to ground.  I met repeatedly with my national security team as we developed more information about the possibility that we had located bin Laden hiding within a compound deep inside of Pakistan.  And finally, last week, I determined that we had enough intelligence to take action, and authorized an operation to get Osama bin Laden and bring him to justice.

Today, at my direction, the United States launched a targeted operation against that compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.  A small team of Americans carried out the operation with extraordinary courage and capability.  No Americans were harmed.  They took care to avoid civilian casualties.  After a firefight, they killed Osama bin Laden and took custody of his body.

For over two decades, bin Laden has been al Qaeda’s leader and symbol, and has continued to plot attacks against our country and our friends and allies.  The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat al Qaeda.

Yet his death does not mark the end of our effort.  There’s no doubt that al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us.  We must –- and we will — remain vigilant at home and abroad.

As we do, we must also reaffirm that the United States is not –- and never will be -– at war with Islam.  I’ve made clear, just as President Bush did shortly after 9/11, that our war is not against Islam.  Bin Laden was not a Muslim leader; he was a mass murderer of Muslims.  Indeed, al Qaeda has slaughtered scores of Muslims in many countries, including our own.  So his demise should be welcomed by all who believe in peace and human dignity.

Over the years, I’ve repeatedly made clear that we would take action within Pakistan if we knew where bin Laden was.  That is what we’ve done.  But it’s important to note that our counterterrorism cooperation with Pakistan helped lead us to bin Laden and the compound where he was hiding.  Indeed, bin Laden had declared war against Pakistan as well, and ordered attacks against the Pakistani people.

Tonight, I called President Zardari, and my team has also spoken with their Pakistani counterparts.  They agree that this is a good and historic day for both of our nations.  And going forward, it is essential that Pakistan continue to join us in the fight against al Qaeda and its affiliates.

The American people did not choose this fight.  It came to our shores, and started with the senseless slaughter of our citizens.  After nearly 10 years of service, struggle, and sacrifice, we know well the costs of war.  These efforts weigh on me every time I, as Commander-in-Chief, have to sign a letter to a family that has lost a loved one, or look into the eyes of a service member who’s been gravely wounded.

So Americans understand the costs of war.  Yet as a country, we will never tolerate our security being threatened, nor stand idly by when our people have been killed.  We will be relentless in defense of our citizens and our friends and allies.  We will be true to the values that make us who we are. And on nights like this one, we can say to those families who have lost loved ones to al Qaeda’s terror:  Justice has been done.

Tonight, we give thanks to the countless intelligence and counterterrorism professionals who’ve worked tirelessly to achieve this outcome.  The American people do not see their work, nor know their names.  But tonight, they feel the satisfaction of their work and the result of their pursuit of justice.

We give thanks for the men who carried out this operation, for they exemplify the professionalism, patriotism, and unparalleled courage of those who serve our country.  And they are part of a generation that has borne the heaviest share of the burden since that September day.

Finally, let me say to the families who lost loved ones on 9/11 that we have never forgotten your loss, nor wavered in our commitment to see that we do whatever it takes to prevent another attack on our shores.

And tonight, let us think back to the sense of unity that prevailed on 9/11.  I know that it has, at times, frayed.  Yet today’s achievement is a testament to the greatness of our country and the determination of the American people.

The cause of securing our country is not complete.  But tonight, we are once again reminded that America can do whatever we set our mind to.  That is the story of our history, whether it’s the pursuit of prosperity for our people, or the struggle for equality for all our citizens; our commitment to stand up for our values abroad, and our sacrifices to make the world a safer place.

Let us remember that we can do these things not just because of wealth or power, but because of who we are:  one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you.  May God bless you.  And may God bless the United States of America.

Posted in International, National | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

BREAKING NEWS: Assessor Webster Guillory Charged with Three Felonies

Posted by Newsletter Reprint on September 9, 2014

This just came over the wire from the District Attorney’s office. Assessor Webster Guillory faces a tough re-election battle against former Board of Equalization Member Claude Parrish in November. To call this a game changer would definitely be an understatement…



SANTA ANA – The Orange County District Attorney has charged Orange County Assessor Webster Guillory with filing false nomination papers in a re-election bid for County Assessor in the March 2014 Orange County primary election. Webster James Guillory, 70, Newport Beach, is charged with three felony counts of filing false nomination papers and faces a possible sentence ranging from probation up to four years and four months in jail if convicted. He is expected to be released on his own recognizance and arraigned Friday, Sept. 12, 2014, at 9:00 a.m. at the Central Justice Center, Santa Ana. The Department is to be determined.  


At the time of the incident, Guillory was the four-term elected County Assessor for the Orange County Office of the Assessor.


Background Information

To appear as an Assessor candidate on the ballot for a primary election, a person must file required paperwork, including nomination papers, with the Registrar of Voters by 5:00 p.m. on the filing deadline date.  A nomination paper is a petition that can be signed by Orange County registered voters to support the candidacy of/nominate the candidate.  Each petition page has space for 10 voter signatures.  For the Office of Assessor, a candidate must submit 20 valid signatures of registered voters on nomination papers to qualify as a candidate and appear on the ballot. 


Nomination papers cannot legally be accepted by the Registrar of Voters unless an affidavit is signed at the end of each page by the signature collector stating that he/she personally circulated the nomination paper and witnessed the signatures being written. The signature collector does not need to be the candidate, but the actual signature collector must be the person to sign each affidavit.


Circumstances of the Case

The filing deadline for the 2014 Orange County primary election was March 7, 2014, at 5:00 p.m.


On the afternoon of March 7, 2014, Guillory collected signatures on two petitions, nine on the first and two on the second. Guillory is accused of also receiving petitions circulated by his associate, who gathered and collected three full pages of 10 signatures each.


Knowing that he had not personally collected the signatures or witnessed them being written, Guillory is accused of signing his name on two of the 10-signature petitions collected by his associate under the affidavit that reads, “I circulated the petition and witnessed the signatures on this section of the nomination paper being written.” He is accused of requesting another colleague to falsely sign the third petition.


Shortly before the end-of-day filing deadline, Guillory is accused of fraudulently filing the three nomination papers at the Registrar of Voters, knowing the information each contained about who had personally circulated the petitions and collected the signatures was untrue.


The Orange County District Attorney’s Bureau of Investigation received a confidential complaint and investigated this case.


Senior Deputy District Attorney Brock Zimmon of the Special Prosecutions Unit is prosecuting this case.



Posted in Orange County Assessor | Tagged: | 2 Comments »

OC GOP Endorsements: Who Has Them? Who Doesn’t?

Posted by Chris Nguyen on September 8, 2014

Republican Party of Orange CountyThere’s been some confusion as to what OC GOP has and has not endorsed so far.  For an OC GOP endorsement to be official, it must be approved by the Central Committee.

A number of early endorsements were approved by the Central Committee on August 18 (which I dubbed Round 1 in my live blog.) I should note there were also two endorsements made during the primary that carried over to the general election (Claude Parrish for Orange County Assessor and Kevin Haskins for Superior Court Judge) and one really early endorsement made during the primary for the general election (Michael Gates for Huntington Beach City Attorney).

The Endorsements Committee met on September 2 and September 3 (which I dubbed Round 2A and Round 2B respectively in my live blogs).  The Endorsements Committee votes are only recommendations for the Central Committee to consider at its meeting next week on September 15.  The Central Committee must ratify the recommendations of the Endorsements Committee before any endorsement can be official.

For our readers’ edification, I’m going to consolidate the lists of endorsements and recommendations here, so people don’t need to scroll through each live blog to figure out what the status is for each endorsement or proposed endorsement.

All of these have been approved by Central Committee, so these (so far) are the official endorsements of the Republican Party of Orange County:

  • Orange County Supervisor, 5th District: Robert Ming
  • Orange County Assessor: Claude Parrish
  • Superior Court Judge, Office No. 14: Kevin Haskins
  • Aliso Viejo City Council: Dave Harrington
  • Anaheim Mayor: Tom Tait
  • Costa Mesa City Council: Jim Righeimer, Lee Ramos
  • Fountain Valley City Council: Mark McCurdy
  • Huntington Beach City Council: Erik Peterson, Mike Posey, Lynn Semeta
  • Huntington Beach City Attorney: Michael Gates
  • Irvine Mayor: Steven Choi
  • Irvine City Council: Jeff Lalloway, Lynn Schott
  • Lake Forest City Council: Scott Voigts
  • Newport Beach City Council, District 1: Diane Dixon
  • Orange City Council: Ray Grangoff, Fred Whitaker
  • San Juan Capistrano City Council: Pam Patterson, Derek Reeve
  • Westminster City Council: Tyler Diep
  • Yorba Linda City Council (November): Peggy Huang, Tom Lindsey
  • No on the Yorba Linda Recall (October)
  • Rancho Santiago Community College District, Trustee Area 6: Phil Yarbrough
  • Capistrano Unified School District, Trustee Area 4: Craig Alexander
  • Capistrano Unified School District, Trustee Area 6: Ellen Addonizio
  • Capistrano Unified School District, Trustee Area 7: Julie Collier
  • Lowell Joint School District: William Hinz
  • Municipal Water District of Orange County, Division 1: Brett Barbre
  • Municipal Water District of Orange County, Division 5: Dave Ellis
  • Orange County Water District, Division 5: Steve Sheldon
  • Yes on Measure E – County Contracting with FPPC
  • Yes on Measure G – County Supervisorial Vacancy
  • Yes on Measure O – Costa Mesa Charter
  • Yes on Measure W – Irvine Great Park Transparency
  • Yes on Measure V – Irvine Term Limits
  • Yes on Measure Y – Newport Beach General Plan Update
  • No on Measure AA – Santa Ana Utility Tax
  • No on Measure GG – Stanton Sales Tax Increase
  • Yes on Measure JJ – Yorba Linda City Council Pension & Healthcare Elimination

The following have been recommended by the Endorsements Committee, but all of the recommendations of the Endorsements Committee below must be ratified by the Central Committee on September 15 (the Central Committee can and does overturn recommendations from the Endorsements Committee):

  • Brea City Council: Steve Vargas, Cecilia Hupp
  • Buena Park City Council: Baron Night
  • Dana Point City Council: John Tomlinson
  • Fullerton City Council: Greg Sebourn
  • Lake Forest City Council: Andrew Hamilton
  • Laguna Niguel City Council: Elaine Gennawey, John Jennings
  • Mission Viejo City Council: Wendy Bucknum, Rhonda Reardon, Ed Sachs
  • Newport Beach City Council, District 3: Duffy Duffield
  • Newport Beach City Council, District 4: Kevin Muldoon
  • Newport Beach City Council, District 6: Scott Peotter
  • San Juan Capistrano City Council: Kerry Ferguson
  • Fountain Valley School District: Jim Cunneen, Sandra Crandall
  • Fullerton Joint Union High School District: M.J. Noor
  • Ocean View School District: John Briscoe, Tracy Pellman
  • Orange Unified School District, Trustee Area 5: Timothy Surridge
  • Orange Unified School District, Trustee Area 7: Rick Ledesma
  • Santa Ana Unified School District: Angie Cano
  • Tustin Unified School District: David Yang
  • Orange County Water District, Division 7: Shawn Dewane
  • Mesa Water District, Division 4: Ron Amburgey
  • Costa Mesa Sanitary District: Chuck Perry
  • No on Measure H – Anaheim Union High School District Bond
  • No on Measure I – Fullerton Joint Union High School District Bond
  • No on Measure J – North Orange County Community College District Bond
  • No on Measure K – Orange Unified School District Bond

The Endorsements Committee recommended neutrality on the following (however, the Central Committee could overturn the Endorsements Committee and vote to endorse any of them):

  • Anaheim City Council: Gail Eastman, Kris Murray, Douglas Pettibone, James Vanderbilt
  • Fountain Valley City Council: Michael Vo
  • Fullerton City Council: Sean Paden (Endorsement Motion for Paden Failed 3-3), Larry Bennett
  • Huntington Beach City Council: Barbara Delgleize (Endorsement Motion for Delgleize Failed 3-3)
  • Rancho Santa Margarita City Council: Laurie Biehl, Don Chadd, Jerry Holloway, Brad McGirr, Jesse Petrilla, Michael Vaughn
  • Measure Z – Rancho Santa Margarita Zoning

The Endorsements Committee was prohibited from considering the following applicants because the Central Committee had already endorsed the number of seats available (however, these candidates can appeal to the full Central Committee, who can choose to dual-endorse by adding these candidates to the existing endorsements or they can undo a prior endorsement in favor of one of these candidates):

  • Costa Mesa City Council: Tony Capitelli (Jim Righeimer and Lee Ramos already endorsed for the two seats)
  • Orange County Water District, Division 5: Leslie Daigle (Steve Sheldon already endorsed for the seat)

The Endorsements Committee did not consider the application of one candidate, who somehow missed the Endorsements Committee meeting:

  • San Clemente City Council: Tim Brown

There are a handful of late endorsement applications that are still floating out there, having missed the August deadline to submit an application, so these will be considered in Round 3, with Central Committee voting on October 20, just 15 days before the election.  These would most definitely be considered late endorsements.  Because it’s endorsements, there’s one more caveat: a late applicant could appeal to the full Central Committee at its September 15 meeting to try to get a September endorsement, but that’d be tough to pull off.

Posted in Republican Central Committee | 1 Comment »

Live from OC GOP Endorsements Committee: Round 2B

Posted by Chris Nguyen on September 3, 2014

We’re live from OC GOP Endorsements Committee for the second night of recommendations to be made to the Central Committee for its September meeting.  (Late endorsements will be considered at the October Central Committee meeting.)

On tonight’s docket are:
Tracy Pellman – Ocean View School District
Rhonda Reardon – Mission Viejo City Council
Ed Sachs – Mission Viejo City Council
Wendy Bucknum – Mission Viejo City Council
Kerry Ferguson – San Juan Capistrano City Council
Sean Paden – Fullerton City Council
Greg Sebourn – Fullerton City Council
Larry Bennett – Fullerton City Council
Steve Vargas – Brea City Council
Cecilia Hupp- Brea City Council
John Tomlinson – Dana Point City Council
Tim Brown – San Clemente City Council
Michael Vo – Fountain Valley City Council
David Yang – Tustin Unified School District
Baron Night – Buena Park City Council
Barbara Delgleize – Huntington Beach City Council
Leslie Daigle – Orange County Water District Div 5

6:10 PM: OVSD Trustee Tracy Pellman notes OVSD is Republican-controlled and that the union is trying to take over the Board. She says she has a broad base of support.

OVSD Trustee Debbie Cotton speaks in support of Pellman. She says there’s a 2-2-1 Board. She says Pellman and Cotton are conservatives. She says OVSD Trustee John Briscoe is locked in with the union (last night, Briscoe accused Pellman of being union backed).

Mark McCurdy expresses the crowd’s confusion about who is actually the union candidate. He cites an email from Briscoe that the campaign finance reports show Ocean View Teachers Association paid for Pellman’s 2010 campaign and that they’re just not supporting her in 2014.

Pellman says she never asked for union support.

Cotton says the union doesn’t interview candidates. She says they’ve endorsed two other candidates publicly. She says the teachers union has had its teachers distribute flyers supporting Briscoe.

Jeff Matthews asks a follow up question.

Pellman answers that she has not sought union suport. She says the voting records prove Briscoe is with the union.

Bucher moves to recommend Pellman for endorsement (for discussion purposes). Peggy Huang seconds.

Bucher urges people to come out with evidence of the Briscoe and Pellman allegations, respectively, before the Central Committee meeting.

Thomas Gordon says he’s seen Briscoe at numerous events.

Pellman responds that she has walked precincts for Congressman Dana Rohrabacher and for Huntington Beach City Attorney candidate (and Central Committee Member) Michael Gates.

Cotton says that while Briscoe may give good conservative rhetoric and show up at Republican events, he does not vote like a Republican.

Peggy Huang says there’s a lot of mudslinging, but there are two endorsements available, so both Briscoe and Pellman should be recommended to Central Committee,  who can then sort out any evidence received by the next Central Committee meeting.

Gordon asks if Pellman supported Ocean View’s bond.

Pellman says she did. She says she also supported a ballot measure to bring Wal-Mart to generate revenue.

Jerry Jackson asks her position on Common Core.

Pellman says she has serious concerns about Common Core.

PELLMAN RECOMMENDED FOR ENDORSEMENT 5-1 (GORDON DISSENTING). (Note: Briscoe was recommended last night.)

6:29 PM: Mission Viejo City Council Candidate Ed Sachs speaks about his business career, his volunteerism for Republican candidates, and his service on a City Commission. He speaks about about pension liabilities, size of government, city manager compensation, transparency, COIN, and public notice of items being voted upon.

Mission Viejo incumbent Rhonda Reardon speaks of working together. She says she follows Reagan’s adage of being conservative in principle and moderate in style. She says they’ve implemented pension reform, enhanced public safety, and improved roads. She meets with all constituents who ask and attends numerous community events.

Mission Viejo candidate Wendy Bucknum speaks of her longtime community involvement. She speaks of helping get people elected. She volunteered for Jack Kemp for Congress as a New York child. She moved to California as a young adult. She cites helping Mimi Walters, Pat Bates, and other Republican candidates.  She believes in faith based initiatives.  She has served on a city commission.  She has no aspirations for higher office. She says she is a fiscal conservative who will work collaboratively. She wants to run a positive campaign.

Robert Ming speaks in support of Ed Sachs.

Mission Viejo Community Service Commissioner Steve Madgziak speaks against Wendy Bucknum for voting on that commission for high spending, regulating families, cell phones for the homeless, and abortion.

Larry Gilbert expresses concern that Reardon showed up with code enforcement at an e-cigarette vendor. He says Reardon has supported increased spending.

Some person who speaks too fast to be easily understood speaks about his involvement in aviation and public safety. He says Reardon properly voted for street lights for public safety. He says there is a balanced budget.

Another person who mumbled his name said Wendy Bucknum supported then-Democrat Dave Leckness. He says she had union signs in her yard. He says she turned a blind eye to a sexual abuse scandal in a swim team she was involved in.

Mission Viejo Councilwoman Cathy Schlict accuses Reardon of fiscally irresponsible spending, funding abortion, and fighting against anti-toll lane resolutions.

Bucknum says Mimi Walters, Pat Bates, and Mike Munzing are supporting her. She says Schlict previously ran against her. She says she is opposed to this mudslinging. She points to Republican awards she has received. She says she has worked with Mary Young.

Reardon says the e-cigarette vendor demonstrated in a subsequent meeting that they exceeded legal standards, so she supported them. She said she voted for increased spending at a park that had not been renovated in quite some time.

Sachs speaks about his longtime business experience, experience that is lacking on the Council. He doesn’t want to focus on want-to-have things instead of need-to-have things.

McCurdy asks why Sachs didn’t sign the Taxpayer Protection Pledge. Sachs signs McCurdy’s copy.  It is discovered that different committee members have different copies for some reason. Huang and Gordon have signed copies yet Bucher and McCurdy do not.

McCurdy asks about Bucknum campaigning for a Democrat and union sign. Bucknum says he was a pro-business Democrat who is now a Republican. She says the union sign was an anti-recall sign for a recall held just a few months before the general election.

Gordon moves and McCurdy seconds recommending Sachs.


Bucher questions whether there are half-truths and spin in the newspaper handed out by Larry Gilbert.

Bucher moves and Matthews seconds to recommend endorsement for Reardon and Bucknum.

Matthews doesn’t want policy issues brought up. He then inconsistently states he just wants to know if people are good conservatives.

Gordon asks about cell phones for the homeless.

Reardon says she gave Community Development Block Grants to a charity that provided limited-minute cell phones to allow people seeking jobs to list the phone number on their resumes.

Gordon asks about taxpayer funding for abortions.

Reardon says she never supported such a thing and is pro-life.


6:58 PM: San Juan Capistrano City Council candidate Kerry Ferguson speaks about rising water rates in her city. She wants to lower water rates by finding cheaper sources of water. She expresses her desire to improve roads and traffic.

Capistrano Unified School District Trustee Jim Reardon speaks about Ferguson’s conservative activism in San Juan Capistrano.

Connie Lee of the RWF says Ferguson leads her group smoothly despite lots of feisty members.

Bucher asks her about redevelopment.

She says she opposes eminent domain. She supports private redevelopment, not redevelopment agencies.


7:05 PM: Three Fullerton candidates for two seats.

Fullerton candidate Sean Paden says the General Fund needs to be treated as taxpayer money, not City money. He is an attorney and supports an adversarial but not hostile relationship with labor unions. He opposes a $140 million Fullerton trolley that the Council passed 3-1. He supports pension reform via 401(k) plans. He says changing pension formulas is rearranging deck chairs.

Fullerton Mayor Pro Tem Greg Sebourn says he has consistently voted against pay hikes and rate hikes. He voted to refund money to taxpayers but that vote amount was reduced when Democrat Jan Flory defeated Republican Travis Kiger in the 2012 election by a tiny number of votes. Sebourn supports pension reform.

Larry Bennett speaks of his business experience, his Chamber of Commerce experience, his Rotary experience, and his leadership in the Boy Scouts. He speaks of conservative principles. He is endorsed by Congressman Ed Royce, Senator Bob Huff, Senator Dick Ackerman, Councilwoman Jennifer Fitzgerald, and numerous former Fullerton mayors. He supports pension reform, public safety, and economies of scale by working with other agencies.

Councilwoman Jennifer Fitzgerald speaks in favor of Larry Bennett having worked with him in church and city commissions. She says he will work on pension reform and often better understands pensions than some former Councils.

Councilman Bruce Whitaker says there has usually been a Republican controlled Fullerton Council, except for the last two years. He notes that there has been a 3-2 split with one Republican voting with Democrats Jan Flory and Doug Chaffee. He says he met with Bennett for 4.5 hours to discuss issues and believes Bennett would vote with Flory and Chaffee

Huang asks Sebourn about a 1% PERS rebate.

Sebourn says the rebate is an employee pay rebate. He says it was 3-2, and he was part of the two who opposed the rebate.

Matthews wishes they could endorse all three but only two seats are on the ballot. He moves to go neutral.

Bucher says he agrees but offers a substitute motion because Sebourn is an incumbent who by all accounts is doing a good job. He suggests endorsing Sebourn only.

Matthews withdraws his motion.

Bucher moves and Huang seconds to recommend endorsing Sebourn.


McCurdy moves to endorse Paden. Gordon seconds.

McCurdy says Paden’s resume and endorsements are strong.

Gordon asks Sebourn who he endorsed.

Sebourn has endorsed Paden.

Gordon says there’s a race in AD-65, so there needs to be a Republican team in Fullerton.

Matthews opposes the motion because Bennett and Paden are both Republicans in good standing.

Bucher agrees with Matthews on this race and opposes the motion.

Motion to endorse Paden fails 3-3 (Jackson, McCurdy, and Gordon in favor with Bucher, Matthews, and Huang against).

7:27 PM: Brett Barbre says Brea Council Candidate Steve Vargas is out of the country to fulfill a promised vacation for his wife who has supported Vargas in his military deployments, including a recent 15-month one.

Brea Council Candidate Cecilia Hupp speaks of her community involvement and business experience. She calls for a less hostile atmosphere on the Council.

Bucher notes there are three seats on the ballot while only Vargas and Hupp are seeking the OC GOP endorsement.


7:30 PM: Dana Point Council Candidate John Tomlinson speaks of his community and church involvement. He speaks of his skills helping the city.

Bill Brough speaks in favor of Tomlinson. He speaks of Tomlinson’s longtime residence in Dana Point and his volunteerism.

McCurdy asks Tomlinson about Dana Point revitalization.

Tomlinson says he supports approving the city pieces for this County agency.

Gordon moves and McCurdy seconds.


7:33 PM: This blogger took a restroom break. Sorry.

7:37 PM: McCurdy (both a committee member and a Fountain Valley Councilman) asks his Council colleague Michael Vo about his votes on redevelopment.

Vo says McCurdy voted for benefits for himself while Vo opposed it.

McCurdy says Vo has supported redevelopment.

Vo says he would not bring it back.

McCurdy says he must have changed his mind.

McCurdy says Vo had voted for evergreen contracts and garbage rate increases.

Vo says he has voted in the best interests of the City.

McCurdy asks about his opinion on red light cameras.

Vo says there is a misconception that license plates are used for tracking citizens.

McCurdy expresses concern that the information is stored by a private company.

Huang expresses concern about Vo voting for an evergreen contract for Rainbow Disposal three years ago.

Vo says he would not vote for it again. He says at the time it was necessary to secure low interest rates.

McCurdy says Vo voted for it again just a few months ago.

McCurdy moves for neutrality with Matthews seconding.

Resident David Pruyne says Vo is a nice man but has voted for higher water rates and regulation. He says Vo supported increased home cottage food regulations in Fountain Valley when the State was decreasing these regulations.

Gordon says Vo is okay but not enough to get recommended for endorsement. He expresses concern about the evergreen contract.

Bucher expresses concern that Vo’s voting record does not match his rhetoric.


7:48 PM: Tustin Unified School District candidate David Yang speaks about his extensive experience in education. He speaks about his volunteerism for Republican candidates. He speaks about his endorsements from Ken Williams, Robert Hammond, Linda Lindholm, and Jim Palmer.


Longtime Central Committee Member Baron Night says he’s running for Buena Park City Council.

The committee interrupts him to make a motion:

7:51 PM: Huntington Beach Candidate Barbara Delgleize speaks about being a consensus builder. She speaks of her service on city commissions and her business experience. She opposes plastic bag bans and rent control. She is endorsed by Travis Allen and Matt Harper.

Matthews asks Delgleize about her pro-choice position and her support of taxpayer-funded abortions.

She says abortions will not come up on the City Council.

McCurdy asks what if Planned Parenthood wants to set up a location in Huntington Beach.

She states that Planned Parenthood is already in Orange County.

Bucher asks about her support for taxpayer-funded abortions.

She says she wants women to have access to abortion, but she doesn’t want tax dollars spent on abortions. It appears she meant an individual taxpayer could fund it, not taxpayers collectively.

Huang moves and Matthews seconds recommending her endorsement.

Gordon asks about safe and sane fireworks and beach fire rings.

Delgleize supports both.

Huang is concerned about Huntington Beach’s rent control and plastic bag ban. That is why she is moving the recommendation for the endorsement.

McCurdy is concerned about her pro-choice stance.

Gordon says he is generally libertarian but is pro-life. He expresses concern about Planned Parenthood getting involved in local races. He asks if she is an active advocate for abortions or if she is simply pro-choice.

Delgleize is not an active advocate but is unwilling to ban abortions. She says she made an active decision to be a single mother.

Huang says there are many Republican women who are pro-choice. Huang says she is pro-life and talked numerous teenagers out of abortions with her work on foster care, but many Republican women are pro-choice like Delgleize.

Gordon says abortion is a woman’s decision imposing on the life of the baby. He says drugs, fiscal, etc. are personal decisions.

MOTION FAILS 3-3 (Huang, Matthews, and Gordon in favor. Bucher, Jackson, and McCurdy against.)

8:09 PM: Orange County Water District Division 5 challenger Leslie Daigle speaks about her outsourcing efforts on the Newport Beach City Council. She says outsourcing is the truest pension reform. She got employees to contribute more to their pensions by hiring an outside negotiator, Richard Kreisler, who Costa Mesa would later higher. She has helped move the city from single-year salary pension calculations to three-year calculations to reduce pension spiking.

Matthews says OCWD incumbent Steve Sheldon was already endorsed by Central Committee. Matthews says he used Sheldon’s company for his own campaign in the past, in the interest of full disclosure.

McCurdy starts to question Daigle’s non-answers on the questionnaire but then realizes his copy is just hard to read.

Bucher is informed by OC GOP staff that there is only one seat, and Sheldon is already endorsed for this seat. The endorsement was done at the full Central Committee in August, and the Endorsements Committee is unable to act, as Sheldon’s endorsement bypassed the Endorsements Committee when it went up in August. He suggests Daigle find a Central Committee member to move to dual endorse in OCWD 5 or to unendorse Sheldon if she wishes to pursue it.

8:18 PM: Committee adjourns.

Posted in Republican Central Committee | 7 Comments »

Lisa Bartlett Continues Her Loose Use Of The “Facts” In Recent Press Release

Posted by Greg Woodard on September 3, 2014

Lisa Bartlett’s September 2, 2014 press release follows in the footsteps of her first edition of the so-called “Ming’s Dings,” and not in a good way (again, I am a supporter of Robert Ming).  As I wrote regarding the false facts in her “Mings Dings,” Bartlett erroneously stated the median home price in Laguna Niguel in an attempt to attack the city’s home loan to its City Manager, and also neglected to mention that her city’s (Dana Point) City Manager makes more in salary and benefits than Laguna Niguel’s City Manager.

Bartlett continues her assault on the facts by now claiming that her fundraising was at a 2-1 clip better than Ming from June 15th through August 29, 2014.  Again, Bartlett has to make up and manipulate the facts to get to this erroneous conclusion.  A review of Ming’s and Bartlett’s campaign disclosure forms for the period from June 15th through August 29, 2014 shows that Ming raised $28,325 during that time (Bartlett’s release shorted Ming $1,000 – yet another sloppy fact check failure), while Bartlett raised $37,304 (not including $400 in rainbow sandals her campaign received).  Even the mathematically challenged can tell that a difference of approximately $9,000 does not equal the 2-1 “advantage” that Bartlett claims in her release.  Moreover, if you add contributions that Bartlett received on September 1 and Ming received on September 2, the difference closes to only approximately $7,000.

How does she get to this mythical 2-1 number?  It may be by adding in a $17,000 loan that she made to herself during the reporting period.  I have not been active in politics as long as many readers on here have, but I think anyone would be hard-pressed to claim that a loan to yourself constitutes “fundraising.”  Sadly, it appears as though Bartlett did not learn from her earlier lies, and has once again stretched the truth for a sound bite, rather than acknowledge that both candidates were actively fundraising and relatively close in actual raising of funds during the period.

I had hoped after her first false release, Bartlett would be more careful in her fact-checking.  Unfortunately, it appears that Bartlett is so focused on smearing Ming, that she does not care about facts.  I leave it to the readers to determine what that says about her character and her qualifications to lead our county.

Posted in 5th Supervisorial District, Orange County Board of Supervisors | Tagged: , , | 5 Comments »

%d bloggers like this: