OC Political

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

Author Archive

Next Entries »

More Bad Behaivor by the Majority of the Capistrano Unified School District Board of Trustees

Posted by Craig P. Alexander on July 1, 2012

It appears that for the Board majority at CUSD they have no tolerance for any opinion but their own. During the last Board meeting at which several vital budget items were being voted on (including the secretly negotiated contract with the teacher’s union) – Trustee John Alpay moved and was successful in ending debate right as Trustee Ellen Addonizio was about the make her comments on why the union contract and budget were bad for the students and the District.

I guess Trustees John Alpay and Gary Pitchard do not like Democracy in that they don’t wish for a duly elected Trustee to speak from the dias about issues before the Board. One shout out: Trustee Anna Bryson, who has been voting with the majority of late – broke ranks with them and voted against the bad contract and budget and she voted no on closing debate.

Below is an e-mail from Julie Collier of the Parents Advocate League. She has a link to a Patch article on the meeting. It includes an audio clip of Mr. Alpay’s undemocratic and insulting motion and Trustee Gary Pritchard’s “justification” of Mr. Alpay’s bad behavior. Mr. Pritchard even laughs at Trustee Addonizio while he is discussing Alpay’s motion. These two Trustees need to go back to private life!

Here is Ms. Collier’s e-mail and the link to the Patch article:

Dear PALs,

I have been to many public meetings over the last five years; however, I have NEVER witnessed such a dysfunctional and offensive public meeting as I did on June 27th at the CUSD school board meeting. This meeting was truly an insult to constituents as well as students in CUSD.

Every year I have watched CUSD make financial decisions to ease budget concerns at the risk of negatively impacting student learning. Class sizes are increased and furlough days are added with little to no regard for student success. Not to mention, LIFO (Last-In; First Out) laying off teachers because they are the newest to be hired (regardless of whether or not they have the proven ability to teach) continues to be the go to solution for CUSD. Last Wednesday was no exception.

The budget was passed 4-3 (Bryson, Addonizio, and Palazzo dissenting) with $51 million in cuts. The district administration negotiated a deal with CUEA that includes 5-15 furlough days and 1.2% salary decrease. By the way, teachers will get a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA = salary increase)

*3.2% increase for the 12-13 school year
*2.5% increase for the 13-14 school year
*2.7% increase for the 14-15 school year

District official, Jodee Brentlinger, proudly stated the negotiations with CUEA went from “. . . us vs. them and resolved into we.” Unfortunately for students in CUSD, the “we” only included CUEA and CUSD district officials that negotiated behind closed doors.

The most despicable part of the board meeting happened when the teachers’ contract and the budget of over $50 million in cuts were passed with little to no discussion. Trustees Alpay and Pritchard (both up for re-election this November) collectively and deliberately stopped any discussion twice by Trustee Addonizio a long-time student-focused school board member. Please read the article below from the MV Patch. It also includes the actual audio of the controversial shut down for discussion. You can even hear Trustee Pritchard laughing at Trustee Addonizio as he is trying to defend his actions.

Expert: CUSD Goofed in Snuffing Budget Debate  http://missionviejo.patch.com/articles/expert-cusd-trustees-did-not-follow-proper-procedure

I would like to take this opportunity to thank Trustees Addonizio, Palazzo, and Bryson for recognizing the need for discussion regarding the impact these severe budget cuts will have on students. Parents and constituents are actually entitled to hear comments from their elected officials, especially regarding cuts to student centered programs and instructional days. Trustees Pritchard and Alpay should have taken more time to consider students as opposed to what appears to be setting themselves up for a union sponsored re-election campaigning.

I cannot implore to parents enough that you must stay informed and active in your child’s education. Attending PTA meetings and volunteering in the classroom is truly wonderful, but it is still not enough. Vital decisions were made for your child and his/her education last Wednesday at the board meeting. These decisions will not only affect your student’s ability to learn next year and for years to come, but it will affect how your child will compete for college admission compared to other students across the nation.

Where were you Wednesday night? Your presence at the board meeting could have made a difference. Teachers have their union. Students have their parents. YOU are your child’s voice. It is time for YOU to stand up and use it.

Julie Collier
Parents Advocate League
http://www.facebook.com/ParentsAdvocateLeaguePALs

Posted in Capistrano Unified School District | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 8 Comments »

Why I Did Not Vote to Endorse John Campbell for Re-Election

Posted by Craig P. Alexander on May 14, 2012

In February of this year the Orange County Republican Party (“OCGOP”) voted to endorse several incumbent Congressmen for re-election. One of the incumbents seeking that endorsement was Congressman John Campbell. As an elected member of the OCGOP I was entitled to a vote and to voice my opinion on the subject. I spoke out against that endorsement and voted No.

This was the first time the OCGOP was doing endorsements for partisan offices since the passage of the terrible “Top Two Primary” of Proposition 14. Prior to passage of Prop. 14, the official party did not endorse in partisan races such as Congress. But Prop. 14 has forced the Republican Party to do so and the OCGOP is the official arm of the Party in Orange County.

The tipping point for me regarding Congressman Campbell was the December 2010 lame duck Congress’ vote to repeal the military’s policy of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” (“DADT”) regarding active homosexuals serving in the military. Prior to this vote I was becoming troubled with Congressman Campbell’s vote in favor of TARP and Cash for Clunkers and his abstaining on the vote to bailout the auto industry. When Congressman Campbell 1st ran for Congress in a special election, I was one of those who supported him by helping him obtain the endorsement of the California Republican Assembly and walking precincts for him. Until the most recent re-districting, I lived inside Mr. Campbell’s congressional district. Seeing him vote with the lame duck Democrats for the repeal of DADT was a shock and disappointment.

As a former U.S. Marine (1975 – 1978), I understand something about serving in the military including what I consider very severe challenges to service members’ 1st amendment rights of freedom of religion and free speech due to this change in policy. Almost immediately I wrote a letter to Congressman Campbell advising him that I did not agree with his vote, that as a former member of the military I felt I had some legitimate concerns over the implications of the repeal of DADT for those serving our country in the armed forces and I asked to meet with him to discuss this.

For over one year Congressman Campbell knew of my request (according to his District Director) but never would meet with me. At the OCGOP meeting in February I asked him to explain his vote to repeal DADT and why he would not meet with me, one of his supporters and constituents. Congressman Campbell stated to the members and guests of the OCGOP that he felt his vote was right partially due to information he, as a Congressman, had that we constituents did not have (can we spell arrogance!). He then went on to state several other things he has done as a Congressman that he was proud of – without once explaining why he would not meet with me (in his oral response to my questions he did not even acknowledge me or my letter to him on the DADT subject).

Almost immediately following this, Bill Dunlap (an OCGOP alternate) rose and asked Congressman Campbell why he is never in the District to meet with constituents or hold town hall meetings (bravo Bill!). The Congressman’s only response was that he feels his mass e-mails to his e-mail list is sufficient. I guess that means to the Congressman that face-to-face contact with voters in his District is not only not important but also not needed.

I am not important in this matter. What is important is a person who is supposed to be a representative in Congress who refuses to meet with a constituent on an important public policy issue. In my opinion that is not a proper attitude for a Congressman. Congressman Campbell did not lose my vote for endorsement – he did not earn it.  Congressman Campbell fell short of the two thirds votes necessary for him to receive the OCGOP endorsement (He was later able to obtain the endorsement of the CRP when the executive board met privately).

For those who live in the new 45th Congressional District, as you consider who to vote for in the June 5, 2012 election, I offer you this information for your consideration. If I lived in the 45th District I would cast my vote for Republican John Webb.

Posted in 45th Congressional District | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Special Report From Craig Alexander On The Stop Special Interest Money Now

Posted by Craig P. Alexander on March 14, 2012

 Greetings fellow Californians!  As you know, 2012 is an important election year.  Of course the Presidential primary and general election are important.  But in California we have an opportunity to end the union and corporate dominance over California politics from Sacramento to our own counties, cities and school districts. I would like to give you information about the initiative so you can see why I believe passing it is vital to our State.  Mark Bucher is Chairman of the campaign to pass this initiative. Mark advised that the initiative qualified for the ballot on December 6, 2011.

Let me begin by asking you some questions.  1. Who do you believe is the largest contributor to politics in California? 2. Are corporations always contributing to conservative politicians and causes? 3. In the last 10 years how much money has been spent by “Special Interests” in California?  4. Finally, doesn’t a proposed law by an individual constituent have as much chance of being enacted as those sponsored by Union Bosses and Corporate Executives?

Answers:

1. The largest contributor to politics in California over the last 10 years is the California Teachers Association closely followed by another government employee union and the Pharmaceutical Manufacturers of America.

2.  No – corporations contribute to their own interests as evidenced by their cooperation in the raising of taxes on all Californians in 2009.

3. Between 2000 and approximately 2009 the top 10 contributors to politics contributed just over 1 Billion dollars to state and local elections.

4.  No – laws sponsored by special interests have a passage rate far greater than that of non-special interests (i.e. you and I).  In fact 40% of all legislation in Sacramento is written by Special Interests or their lobbyists.

What will the passage of the Stop Special Interest Money Now Act do?  Right now employee unions and corporations are allowed to involuntarily take money from their union members / corporate employees and place it directly into their Political Action Committee.  Plus they can contribute directly to politicians’ campaigns.  The passage of the Stop Special Interest initiative will change all that and level the playing field.

Specifically, the Stop Special Interest Money Now Act will:

1) ban both corporate and labor union contributions directly to state and local candidates.

2) prohibit government contractors from contributing to state and local officials who can award them contracts.

3) bar corporations, government employers, and labor unions from collecting funds from employees by payroll deduction and using that money for politics.

4) Preserve every employee’s right to contribute to campaigns by means other than payroll deduction (for example, by check or by monthly debit from an account or credit card), but it ensures that those contributions are voluntarily authorized by the employee in writing annually.

Given the amount of money coming into politics from Unions and Corporations, and since this initiative will to a large extent limit the amount of money they can collect via involuntary payroll deductions, you can see how the passage of this initiative will break the control of unions and corporate special interests in Sacramento and in our cities, counties and school districts.

The politicians will be forced to pay attention to and receive contributions another group of people: their constituents the voters!  You and I!

For today this is all I will write to you on this subject.  I encourage you to find out more about this initiative before the unions and corporations begin their disinformation campaign about the initiative.  You can obtain more information at

http://stopspecialinterestmoney.org/

This initiative is so important that I have volunteered to be a guest speaker for the Stop Special Interest Money Now Act’s Speaker’s Bureau.  So if you have a group you would like to have someone speak about this important initiative, please contact me at cpalexander@cox.net or you may contact the Speaker’s Bureau’s manager Elizabeth Hansell at lizhansell@gmail.com or 310-446-4800.

Posted in California | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

Dana Point Takes 1st Step to Ban Plastic Bags! Nanny Government Goes Small Town!

Posted by Craig P. Alexander on February 7, 2012

Tonight, by a 4 to 1 vote, the Dana Point City Council voted to implement a plastic bag ban. Of the four Republicans on the council, only Bill Brough voted no on this latest “Green” initiative that is an indirect tax on the citizens via the higher cost of purchasing from retail stores in and around Dana Point. From Lara Anderson, who always wears with pride her endorsements from the Sierra Club, I did not expect a no vote. She is a consistent RINO.

But is was very disappointing to see Lisa Bartlett and Scott Schoeffel vote yes on this extension of big government in our city. But then again they have both voted yes consistently for the Dana Point Hotel Tax so I should not be surprised. They were both endorsed for election (Lisa in 2010 and Scott in 2008) by the conservative South Orange County Republican Assembly. I doubt they will find that group as supportive the next time around with votes like these!

Posted in Dana Point | Tagged: , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Next Entries »