OC Political

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

Dick Ackerman Working With Unions In Fullerton

Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on September 7, 2012

UPDATED 6:35 PM- Friend For Fullertons Future actually did have the robocall in YouTube format. You can read their article on this issue here.

Although I don’t always agree with Tony Bushalas methods, he has backed Bruce Whitaker and Travis Kiger who have proven to be solid votes on the Fullerton City Council. I was disappointed by the vote that Greg Sebourn made on not looking into putting the police contract out to bid and will withhold judgement on him until after a couple of years in office.

I am way behind on this story as the vote on the police contract took place August 7th but with all this talk of unions and who is working with them lately it is disappointing to see that former Senate Republican leader Dick Ackerman chose to work with the Fullerton Police Officers Association and do a robocall on their behalf encouraging residents to come out in support of Fullerton PD.

Friends For Fullertons Future appears to cover this story at length, but I did not see the actual robocall get posted on the website.

On an interesting side not when I was a student at Cal State Fullerton a few years back we had to do a ride-a-long with a local police agency. I not only ended up doing mine with Fullerton PD but actually ended up doing my ride-a-long with Albert Rincon.

The robocall sent out by Ackerman and the Fullerton Police Officers Association was encouraging voters to stand up against Tony Bushala. Apparently it worked because Councilmembers Chaffee, Quirk-Silva, and Sebourn voted together against Whitaker and Kiger on the issue.

A reader earlier today sent me the robocall and I figured why not post the robocall even though it is a bit dated.

Click here to listen to the robocall or read the transcript below:

Hello, this is Dick Ackerman former Fullerton Mayor and Councilmember and State Senate Minority Leader with a very important message.

The Fullerton City Council is being told to outsource our own police department and bring in an outside agency. We need you to attend the City Council meeting this Tuesday the 7th or e-mail or call the City Council to speak out against this terrible idea.

In 1937 George Amerige wrote there is a secret to building a town. It takes a stiff backbone, a spirit of progressiveness, a determination to win out, and a disposition that can stand against all sorts of criticism.

George would know because 50 years earlier he and his brother Edward set the foundations for Fullerton. From the days that oil and oranges dominated the Fullerton landscape until today we’ve been blessed by a pioneering spirit that has moved Fullerton forward together.

Sadly, today one man and his cohorts have threatened to turn back the clock in Fullerton. Millionaire developer Tony Bushala is attempting to bully the City Council and potentially bringing in a new police force.

First he bankrolled the recall election and know he wants a new police force for who knows why. Just last year the Fullerton police, the city employees, and firefighters agreed to a cost savings, pension reform, and cuts of over $1,000,000. That’s over $1,000,000 of savings for Fullerton taxpayers.

Don’t let one person turn back the clock. It’s time to stand up and speak out against Tony Bushala and move our city forward. Fullerton is not for sale and we would like to keep our police department our own.

Local control is the key. Call or e-mail our City Council or attend the August 7th meeting. If you would, please visit our website www.keepfullertonpd.com to sign up and also click the link to like us on Facebook.

Let’s keep our police local and reject Tony Bushalas terrible idea to outsource our police department. And let’s remember what George Amerige revealed many years ago the secret to a successful city is in the strength of its people.

Now is the time to show that strength and stand up for Fullerton. Thank you for listening and thank you for your help.

THIS MESSAGE WAS PAID FOR BY THE FULLERTON POLICE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION.

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

Text of Mission Viejo’s June 2010 Measure D

Posted by Newsletter Reprint on September 7, 2012

There’s been lots of discussion and hate emails regarding the OCGOP Endorsements Committee’s recommendations for Mission Viejo City Council and the battle over Measure D.

Here’s the text of Measure D, which was on the Mission Viejo ballot in June 2010.  Read it for yourself:

SECTION 1. TITLE.

1.1. This initiative measure shall be known as the Mission Viejo Right-to-Vote Amendment.

SECTION 2. PLANNING POLICY DOCUMENTS COVERED.

2.1. After this measure becomes effective, no repeal, amendment or adoption of all or part of the following land use planning policy documents of the City of Mission Viejo may become effective unless and until the requirements of Section 4 are met:

a. The text of the Mission Viejo General Plan’s Land Use Element,
b. The Land Use Policy Map of the Mission Viejo General Plan (also called “Land Use Diagram”),
c. The text of the Mission Viejo Land Use/Zoning/Subdivision Regulations (Title 9 of the Mission Viejo Municipal Code),
d. The Official Zoning Map of the City of Mission Viejo,
e. Any Specific Plan for a geographic area within the City, or
f. Any Development Agreement granting rights to develop private or public land.

2.2. In this initiative measure the above six items are referred to as the “Planning Policy Documents.”

SECTION 3. TYPES OF AMENDMENTS COVERED.

3.1. A “Major Amendment” of any of the Planning Policy Documents means any amendment that results in any of the following changes to the development standards for any parcel of land affected by the proposed amendment:

a. Increases the number of residential units that may be constructed on a parcel designated for residential uses.
b. Increases the number of separate parcels which may be created from an existing parcel.
c. Changes any residential land use to allow any other land use.
d. Changes any non-residential land use to allow any residential land use greater than six and one-half (6.5) net dwelling units per acre.
e. Changes any non-residential land use to allow a mix of commercial and residential uses.
f. Provides for the private development of land owned by a government entity within five years of the date of the approval to develop the land.
g. Repeals any of the Planning Policy Documents.
h. Changes any commercial or industrial land use to allow any other land use, if the aggregate size of all the parcels being changed exceeds 2 acres.
i. Changes any open space land use to allow any other land use.
j. Changes any recreation land use to allow any other land use except open space.

3.2. A “Regular Amendment” of any of the Planning Policy Documents includes any amendment that is not a Major Amendment.

SECTION 4. AMENDMENTS TO MISSION VIEJO GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP.

4.1. No Major Amendment of any of the Planning Policy Documents shall be effective unless and until it is approved by a majority vote of the electorate of the City of Mission Viejo voting “YES” on a ballot measure proposing the Major Amendment at a regular or special election. The entire text of a Major Amendment and an easily readable map of the geographic area affected shall be included in the sample ballot materials that are mailed to registered voters prior to the election. The applicant may choose to have the measure put before the voters at either a special election or a regular election. Any cost of a special election shall be completely paid by the applicant requesting the Major Amendment. If the applicant chooses to wait until the next available regular election, the additional costs of adding the measure approving the Major Amendment to the ballot shall be paid by the applicant, except that the City Council may vote by simple majority to have the city pay all or some of the additional costs of adding the measure to a regular election ballot.

4.2. No Major Amendment and no Regular Amendment of any of the Planning Policy Documents shall be effective unless and until they are approved by an ordinance adopted by the City Council, but no such amendment shall be considered until a public hearing is conducted on the proposed amendment at both the Planning Commission and at the City Council in the manner provided by state law and advance notice is given as required by section 4.3 below.

4.3. No public hearing to consider an amendment of any of the Planning Policy Documents shall be conducted less than 20 days after the date a notice accurately describing the proposed amendment is sent by First-Class mail to the owners of each parcel of land, and a notice is sent by First-Class mail addressed to the occupant of each lawful unit on each parcel of land, located within a radius measured outward 1,500 feet from the boundaries of each parcel of land affected by the proposed amendment. These notices are in addition to any notices required by state law.

4.4. The notice described in Section 4.3 shall include at least all the following information in not less than 14-point type:

a. The name of the applicant proposing the amendment.
b. The total acreage of the area proposed for amendment.
c. An easily readable map of all parcels affected by the amendment, including all street names.
d. The land uses and building density currently allowed for each parcel affected.
e. The land uses and building density proposed to be allowed for each parcel affected.
f. The date, time and place of the upcoming public hearing.
g. A concise history of the land use classifications of the proposed area since January 1, 1989.

SECTION 5. THIS MEASURE AMENDS EXISTING POLICY DOCUMENTS.

5.1. Once adopted by the voters, this measure shall amend and become a new part of the Mission Viejo General Plan’s Land Use Element, and the Mission Viejo Land Use/Zoning/Subdivision Regulations (Title 9 of the Mission Viejo Municipal Code).

5.2. After the date this measure becomes effective, the entire text of this measure shall be printed within all copies of the Mission Viejo General Plan Land Use Element and also within all copies of the Mission Viejo Land Use/Zoning/Subdivision Regulations, and it shall appear immediately following the table of contents of each such document.

SECTION 6. CITY HOUSING OBLIGATIONS.

6.1 Nothing in this ordinance shall be applied to preclude City compliance with housing regulations under State law. In providing required housing, the City shall protect environmental values, enhance the quality of life of affected persons, and comply with this ordinance to the maximum extent feasible.

SECTION 7. EFFECTIVE DATE.

7.1. The provisions of this initiative measure shall become effective after it is approved at an election of the voters of the City of Mission Viejo and 10 days after the result of the election is declared by the Mission Viejo City Council, as specified in Section 9217 of the California Elections Code.

SECTION 8. PRIORITY.

8.1. Once this initiative measure becomes effective, its provision shall prevail over and supersede all provisions of the municipal code, ordinances, resolutions and administrative policies of the City of Mission Viejo which are in conflict with any provisions of this measure.

SECTION 9. SEVERABILITY.

9.1. In the event a final judgment of a court of proper jurisdiction determines that a provision of this initiative measure, or a particular application of a provision, is invalid or unenforceable pursuant to a state or federal law or constitution, the invalid or unenforceable portion or application shall be severed from the remainder of this measure, and the remaining portions of this measure shall remain in effect without the invalid or unenforceable provision or application.

SECTION 10. CONFLICT WITH OTHER BALLOT MEASURES.

10.1. In the event that any other ballot measure is proposed for voter approval on the same election ballot as this initiative measure, and that other measure contains provisions that deal with the same or similar subjects, it is the intent of the voters in adopting this measure that it shall prevail over any such other ballot measure in its entirety to the extent that this measure is approved and receives a greater number of votes for approval of the other measure. In such case, no provision of the other measure shall become effective.

SECTION 11. AMENDMENT OR REPEAL.

11.1. Once this initiative measure becomes effective, no provision of this measure may be amended or repealed except by a majority of the voters of the City of Mission Viejo voting on a ballot measure for that purpose.

SECTION 12. REQUEST FOR SPECIAL ELECTION.

12.1. In the event that the initiative petition is signed by not less than 15 percent of the voters of the city according to the last report of registration by the county elections official to the Secretary of State, a special election to approve this ordinance is hereby requested pursuant to Section 9214 of the California Elections Code.

Posted in Mission Viejo, Republican Central Committee | 6 Comments »

Costa Mesa: Anti-Outsourcing Candidates Genis and Stephens Duck Outsourcing Question

Posted by The Master Cylinder on September 6, 2012

Check this out from Mickadeit’s new column on the Costa Mesa “Feet to the Fire” candidate forum. It’s a passage about how the status-quo candidates reacted to a question on outsourcing:

I asked [Sandy] Genis and [John] Stephens whether they would outsource any jobs and, if so, which jobs or departments. Both said they would have to study it. This was disappointing. The city has been studying this almost two years and has issued reports. Nobody is better read on Costa Mesa than Genis. Stephens says he’s read the charters of at least a half-dozen other cities. Both have had ample time to come up with a plan for any outsourcing they might entertain. Or to simply say that outsourcing is off the table with them. I wrote in my column that I would ask this question. The best they could say, however, is that they wouldn’t outsource public safety, which, when pressed, appeared to mean paramedic service.

Oh my. Talk about duck-and-cover. Is this the same Sandy Genis who gets lionized by characters like Vern Nelson at Orange Juice Blog as some fearless, super-knowledgeable Joan of Arc?

Here’s the translation of the non-response from Genis and Stephens: “Yeah, we KNOW we’ll have to outsource. We KNOW we can’t go back to the way things were and keep everything internal and give the unions what they want. But we just CAN’T SAY IT because we need the union and anti-Riggy forces support, or else we don’t have a prayer.”

Posted in Costa Mesa | Tagged: , , | 4 Comments »

Chutzpah at OC GOP Endorsement Committee

Posted by OC Insider on September 6, 2012

Chris Nguyen’s account of last night OC GOP Endorsement Committee meeting makes it sound like it would have been a fun one to watch, especially the chutzpah of some of those doing to talking.

Here’s an example from Chris’s blogging about the Endorsement Committee’s consideration of Anaheim council candidates Brian Chuchua and Steve Chavez Lodge:

“Tim Whitacre says, “On behalf of Mayor Tom Tait, who previously endorsed Mr. Lodge, has unendorsed Mr. Lodge.”  He asks if Lodge has sought union support in violation of the non-union pledge in the OCGOP questionnaire.”

Whitacre’s concern is ironic considering this spring and summer, he worked for a public employee union PAC. He ran the Take Back Anaheim Initiative, which, according to its campaign filing, is “sponsored by the Orange County Employees Association.”

“Take Back Anaheim” was a ballot-box budgeting initiative under which the City Council would cede to the voters its authority to make a very specific spending decision regarding hotel bed tax money. So very conservative.

It was funded by $66,000 from the OCEA, and led by left-wing Anaheim Councilwoman Lorri Galloway (who last month was trying to ban circus animals from Anaheim).

More accurately, according to left-wing blogger Vern Nelson, Take Back Anaheim was “spearheaded by progressive Democrat Galloway and Tea-Party Republican Tim Whitacre…”

Almost all of the OCEA’s $66,000 went to Whitacre, as you can see on Page 3 of Take Back Anaheim’s mid-year campaign report: note the $61,000 payment for petition circulating, which is Whitacre’s business.

Here’s Mr. Whitacre quoted in the OC Register in May as spokesman for the Galloway/OCEA initiative:

“We were under such a tight timeline that I felt I had to suspend the effort to continue collecting signatures until we could figure out whether it was worth moving forward,” Tim Whitacre, the campaign’s coordinator, said Friday. “Otherwise, it would be just throwing good money after bad.”

Nice that Whitacre’s so concerned about spending the OCEA’s money well.

So until a few weeks ago, Tim Whitacre is working for a left-wing Democratic politician’s initiative and being paid by the county’s biggest public employee union.

And he’s questioning Lodge has an inappropriate relationship with unions?

There’s More

Here’s another one from Chris’s post:

“Lucille Kring, who has already been endorsed by the Central Committee in early endorsements, speaks for Chuchua and against Steve Chavez Lodge for the latter’s contributions to Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez and the allegations that Lodge committed police brutality.”

Kring cites Lodge’s contribution to a Democrat as a reason for opposing him, but supports Brian Chuchua, who donated in 2010 to John Santoianni, a liberal Democrat running for Anaheim City Council (because he was “curious” about Santoianni). That must be an OK reason to give to a Democrat.

Speaking of Brian Chuchua, here he is claiming Lodge is tied to Jordan Brandman, a Democratic candidate for Anaheim City Council:

“Chuchua interjects that there’s pictures of Brandman and Lodge at events together.”

Here’s a recent picture of Brian Chuchua together at an event with fellow Anaheim council candidate John Leos (on the left):

Leos is the union’s anointed candidate. The OCEA spent more than $200,000 for Leos’ 2010 council run, spent almost $100,000 in 2011 on mailers promoting Leos, and will surely pull out the stops for him this year.

According to Chuchua’s reasoning, this picture ties Chuchua to Leos and his union backers, so Chuchua needs to inform OC GOP Central Committee members about his suspect ties to unions at the next meeting.

UPDATE: Here’s an image from the Secretary of State’s campaign finance disclosure website (search “Orange County Employees Association Issues Committee”), showing a direct payment from OCEA to Tim Whitacre:

It looks like OCEA directly hired Whitacre to set up the Take Back Anaheim campaign operation, and Whitacre was subsequently paid through the Take Back Anaheim committee.

Posted in Anaheim, Orange County, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | 37 Comments »

Voice of OC Pledged Feature on DPOC After OCGOP Article: Where Did it Go?

Posted by Chris Nguyen on September 6, 2012

On Thursday, August 16, with great fanfare, the Voice of OC published the OC GOP’s candidate endorsement questionnaire under the headline “Just What is an OC Republican?

The article notes, “While the questions are intended to vet local candidates for local offices, many focus on ideology as well as on national issues.”

It also states:

While party leaders insist the questions are not a “litmus test” for candidates, they are illustrative about what central committee members want to see in elected officials.

“It’s designed to philosophically reveal where a person is coming from,” said local GOP Chairman Scott Baugh. “There’s no litmus answer sheet that has the perfect answer.”

Despite Baugh’s comments, county Democratic Party Chairman Frank Barbaro had his own opinion of the Republican questionnaire. “If it looks like a litmus test, smells like a litmus test and tastes like a litmus test, it is one,” Barbaro said.

Barbaro said county Democrats are issuing their own questionnaire for candidates. Voice of OC will feature that questionnaire Friday.

Let’s look at those last two sentences again: “Barbaro said county Democrats are issuing their own questionnaire for candidates. Voice of OC will feature that questionnaire Friday.”

Friday, August 17 has passed…so has Friday, August 24…and Friday, August 31.  No one has seen the DPOC questionnaire on Voice of OC.  They haven’t published an article on it.  Where is the “feature” they promised?  Why would they promise that and not deliver?

Best-case scenario, they just plain forgot.  Worst-case scenario, the article got spiked.  Either way, an organization that bills itself as “Orange County’s Nonprofit Investigative News Agency” has not exactly acted as a news agency should.

Will Voice of OC ever publish the DPOC’s questionnaire?

Many people have referred to Voice of OC as Voice of OC[EA] in light of its funding by Orange County labor.  Do they really want to add fuel to the fire behind that nickname?

Posted in Democrat Central Committee, Republican Central Committee | Tagged: , , , | 5 Comments »

OCGOP Endorsements Committee Meets

Posted by Chris Nguyen on September 5, 2012

As with yesterday, all Endorsements Committee recommendations must be ratified by the Central Committee on Monday, September 17.

Endorsements Committee Members Present:
Mark Bucher, Chair
Chandra Chell
Thomas Gordon
Ray Grangoff (arrives at 7:39 PM)
Matt Harper
Mary Young

Capistrano Unified School District, Trustee Area 3

6:17 PM – Steven Lang speaks of his family for a very long time.  He voted for Richard Nixon, and his favorite President is Ronald Reagan.  He believes in “equity and opportunity.”

Capistrano Unified School District, Trustee Area 2

6:19 PM – Jim Reardon speaks of his work running a private school.  He speaks of his activism in CUSD, including being listed on the old CUSD Superintendent Fleming’s Enemies list.  Reardon was endorsed by the OCGOP in 2010.  He opposed the recall of Ken Lopez Maddox and Mike Winsten.  He doesn’t think there’s much difference between a furlough day or a strike in terms of effects on students and parents.  He supports school choice, charter schools, and magnet schools.  He is endorsed by OCBE Trustee Robert Hammond.

Jennifer Beall speaks in favor of both Lang and Reardon as conservative pro-life, pro-marriage fiscally conservative Republicans.  She speaks of the poor fiscal state of the district under the pro-union CUSD trustees.  She says they will never be bought by the unions and are pro-Prop 32.

Committee Member Mary Young says there isn’t anyone who more thoroughly vets candidates than Jennifer Beall.

The committee votes quickly and unanimously to recommend both men for endorsements.

Huntington Beach City Council

6:24 PM – Erik Peterson speaks of his conservative beliefs and his desire to help Matt Harper and the other conservative councilmembers. He wants Huntington Beach to clean house and be a fiscal model for the state and country.  He’s served in the United States Marine Corps, with his church, as a scoutmaster for Boy Scouts, and on the Huntington Beach Finance Board and Planning Commission.

Committee Member Matt Harper speaks of being impressed with Peterson for the last two years and reiterates Peterson’s points.

The committee votes quickly and unanimously to recommend Peterson for endorsement.

Measure FF (City of Orange)

6:27 PM – Elizabeth Spillane discusses how a developer wanted to build homes on land that the developer owned.  The plan was approved by a City Council vote of 4-1, with all four Republicans supporting the plan and Democrat Tita Smith opposing.  She noted that various environmental activists, including the Sierra Club, referended the plan.  She urges Yes on FF to gain parks and trails built at the developer’s expense and to protect private property rights.

Matt Cunningham notes that he is a longtime Orange resident and states that the developer has followed all the legal processes to build homes compatible with the local area while being “vilified by NIMBYs.”  He says private property rights are one of the most fundamental rights Americans have.

The committee votes quickly and unanimously to recommend an endorsement in favor of Measure FF.

Brea City Council

6:31 PM – Former Brea Councilman Steve Vargas speaks of his prior election to the council and how he lost by 410 votes to a liberal Democrat in the last election.  He warns that candidate Christine Marick is a liberal Democrat.  Vargas is running with Marty Simonoff, another Republican.  Vargas speaks of his own military service, including in Fallujah in a tour of duty in Iraq.  He says he is up against unscrupulous RINOs (Don Schweitzer and Ron Garcia) who endorsed Democrat Marick.

(7:47 PM – OC Political fact check: No Democrat serves on the Brea City Council.  DTS Brett Murdock beat Vargas by 410 votes in 2010.)

(8:32 AM – OC Political fact check: Marick is an NPP.)

The committee votes quickly and unanimously to recommend Vargas for endorsement.

The committee is now 25 minutes early despite starting 17 minutes late.

The committee has recessed, as there are now no candidates present.

Metropolitan Water District of Orange County, Division 7

6:54 PM – Running six minutes ahead of schedule, the committee has resumed, beginning with three-term incumbent Susan Hinman.  She describes the district, speaks of her record as a staffer for an unnamed Orange County Supervisor.  She speaks of her work on various water boards, including one that consolidated three agencies.  She speaks of groundwater supplies, sustainability, and efforts to maintain reliable water supplies.  She is endorsed by Supervisor Pat Bates, Senator Mimi Walters, Assemblywoman Diane Harkey, Ed Royce Sr., SOCCCD Trustee Nancy Padberg, Mayor Jim Evert, and Mayor Lara Anderson.

Alice Anderson speaks in favor of Hinman, touting her conservatism, her hard work, and her diligence.

MWDOC Division 1 Director Brett Barbre speaks in favor of Hinman, praising her record.

The committee votes quickly and unanimously to recommend Hinman for endorsement.

Lake Forest City Council

7:01 PM – Dwight Robinson speaks of being a lifelong Republican who helped get Scott Voigts elected.  Voigts encouraged him to run for the Council. He’s endorsed by Assemblyman Don Wagner, Assemblyman Allan Mansoor, District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, and various unnamed City Council members and Central Committee members.  He feels the City has only given lip service to being pro-business.  He wants to make the city actually pro-business by cutting regulations that impede businesses.  He speaks of his own Republican activism since the 1990s.  He speaks of his family.  He wants to keep an $80-million sports park may run overbudget.  He states the council has no members with profits-and-losses experience.

Adam Nick speaks of his experience immigrating to the United States.  He speaks of his experience in growing business.  He complains of special interest and crony influence on the Lake Forest Council.  He feels city government should operate as a business.  He says he wants to work with Robinson to make the Council more business-friendly.

OC Political blogger Chris Emami speaks of the lack of transparency in Lake Forest and the Sizzler U.S. Flag controversy in Lake Forest.

An emissary for Committee Member Ray Grangoff says Grangoff would support Nick.

Tim Whitacre speaks in favor of Robinson as a “good American” with solid credentials and the backing of Scott Voigts.

Committee Chair Mark Bucher jokes he was leaning in favor of supporting endorsing Robinson but is reconsidering since Whitacre spoke.

The committee votes quickly and unanimously to recommend both for endorsement.

Fullerton City Council

7:08 PM – Emami says, “Get your popcorn ready.”

Jennifer Fitzgerald wants to do away with local elected official pay and benefits.  She wants principled, reasoned conservatism.  She speaks of her conservative activism in college, her work as a staffer for Republican elected officials, and her business experience. She says she is endorsed by Supervisor Shawn Nelson and the OC Taxpayers Association.

Barry Levinson says he is the only Republican candidate who actively worked to support the recall.  He was the highest vote-getter of the candidates who did not win running in the recall replacement election.  He says he is regularly at City Council meetings but has never seen Fitzgerald.  He speaks of his MBA and his business experience.  He says he understands numbers and can tackle the $1.2 billion unfunded liability in Fullerton from pensions, healthcare, and redevelopment.  He says he spearheaded Fullerton Ordinance 3149, Orange County’s first ordinance restricting sex offenders.  As a Parks & Recreation Commissioner, he helped get a skate park reopened at little cost to the city.  He wants small government to facilitate public needs not to grow government.

Councilman Greg Sebourn speaks in favor of Barry Levinson.  He states Fitzgerald did not support the recall and reiterates Levinson’s increasing vote totals.  He notes Levinson’s conservative voting record as a Parks & Recreation Commissioner and his well-formed opinions based on research in public comment during Council meetings.

Pat Shuff speaks in favor of Fitzgerald.  She says it is unfair to not endorse Fitzgerald based on her non-support of the recall.  Shuff says the majority opposed the recall (Nguyen note: that’s impossible, as the recall passed nearly 2-1).  She says the recall risked the election of a Democrat, which happened in the recall with the election of Doug Chaffee over Levinson.

Tim Whitacre speaks of Levinson’s activism in the recall.  Whitacre says Levinson had the toughest of three replacement recalls.  Whitacre says Fitzgerald is too close to Pat McKinley who gave money to Democrat Doug Chaffee who beat Levinson for a council seat in the recall.

MWDOC Director Brett Barbre speaks of working for Bill Dannemeyer.  He met Fitzgerald in 1995.  She was his children’s Sunday school teacher.  He says she understands Republican principles, politics, and issues.  He says she has given time to the Planning Commission.

Allan Bartlett states Levinson is endorsed by Bruce Whitaker.  (Nguyen note: I don’t believe that’s accurate.)

(7:33 PM – OC Political fact check: I have confirmed with Fullerton Mayor Pro Tem Bruce Whitaker that he has only endorsed fellow Councilman Travis Kiger in this Fullerton Council race.  He has not endorsed either Fitzgerald or Levinson.)

Matt Cunningham notes Fitzgerald has helped Republican causes longer than many people in the room.  He notes Fitzgerald only spoke positively about herself while arguing Levinson and his supporters all attacked Fitzgerald.

Committee Member Chandra Chell asks why Fitzgerald opposed the recall.

Fitzgerald says she opposed the recall because she had various unnamed issues with the recall.  She states she was unhappy with the incumbents’ behavior, so she says that’s why she did not actively work against the recall.

Levinson asks why she had anti-recall signs in her yard.

Fitzgerald doesn’t answer.

Committee Member Mary Young notes that she met Fitzgerald 19 years ago working for conservative causes.  Young says Fitzgerald’s long-term record of activism more than offsets her recent record of non-activism.  She compares the Fitzgerald vs. Levinson endorsement bid to the Santa Ana Franklin vs. Hart endorsement bid from last night without naming Franklin and Hart.

Committee Member Matt Harper says what Councilman Sebourn said is very important to his thought process and Levinson’s efforts to get to know Harper and other Republican officials.  He expresses his concern about Levinson attacking Fitzgerald and notes that he himself had only attended 1 City Council meeting before being elected.  Harper says he’s known Fitzgerald for well over a decade.  He states he will support Fitzgerald.

Young moves to recommend the endorsement of Fitzgerald, with Harper seconding.  The vote is 2-2 (Harper and Young in favor and Chell and Gordon opposed).  Bucher breaks the tie in favor of Fitzgerald.

Levinson shakes the hands of all the committee members.

The committee is now 30 minutes early and recesses.

Laguna Niguel City Council

7:48 PM – Laura Davies speaks of not changing but preserving Laguna Niguel. She says the city is fiscally sound and does not require business licenses. She wants to help the council preserve this. She is a member of the Laguna Niguel RWF. She is on a City Commission and her HOA board. She volunteers for her church and a senior center. She cites endorsements from Congressman Dana Rohrabacher, Senator Mimi Walters, Assemblywoman Diane Harkey, Supervisor Pat Bates, former Senator Marian Bergeson, all five Councilmembers, and the California Women’s Leadership Association.

Cindy Uhlenhoff of the Laguna Niguel RWF speaks of Davies as a conservative activist.

Committee Member Thomas Gordon says he has trouble reading her questionnaire answer about whether California should be a “shall issue” state. She says she loves shooting and is strongly in favor of 2nd Amendment rights, including “shall issue” status for California.

The committee votes quickly and unanimously to recommend Davies for endorsement.

Mesa Consolidated Water District, Division 2

7:52 PM – Incumbent Jim Fisler speaks of his activism for Republicans since the 1990s.  He was endorsed by the OCGOP in his previous (and successful) election bid.  He speaks of his extensive experience in water districts and on LAFCO. He precinct walked for Assemblyman Allan Mansoor, who’s endorsed him. He’s endorsed by Costa Mesa Councilman Jim Righeimer, Councilman Gary Monahan, and Colin McCarthy.

The committee votes quickly and unanimously to recommend Fisler for endorsement.

Anaheim City Council

7:56 PM – The committee does Anaheim 4 minutes early.

Brian Chuchua notes his previous endorsement by the OCGOP in 2010.  He speaks of his long term residency in Anaheim.  He complains that special interests control the Anaheim City Council, citing the TOT vote.  He says he will work well with Mayor Tom Tait.(Nguyen note: Tait has not endorsed Chuchua.)

Tim Whitacre speaks in favor of Chuchua, citing Chuchua’s activism in the unsuccessful effort to put a charter amendment on the ballot to prevent the TOT plan from ever being used again.  Whitacre states that Tait will endorse Chuchua (several murmurs in the audience about if Tait’s going to endorse Chuchua, why hasn’t he already done so?).

Lucille Kring, who has already been endorsed by the Central Committee in early endorsements, speaks for Chuchua and against Steve Chavez Lodge for the latter’s contributions to Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez and the allegations that Lodge committed police brutality.

8:01 PM – Steve Chavez Lodge arrives 1 minute late.  He introduces himself as Steven Albert Chavez Lodge, with a couple giggles from the audience.  He says he is a Reagan conservative with 5,000 arrests as a Santa Ana Police Officer.  He wants Anaheim to be pro-business.  He says the most important function of city government is public safety.  He says his experience will help stabilize Anaheim.

Allan Bartlett speaks against Lodge, repeating Kring’s comments that Lodge donated money to Loretta Sanchez and that Lodge may have committed police brutality.  Bartlett says, “it’s not conservative to give millions of dollars to a large corporation like Disney.”

Tim Whitacre says, “On behalf of Mayor Tom Tait, who previously endorsed Mr. Lodge, has unendorsed Mr. Lodge.”  He asks if Lodge has sought union support in violation of the non-union pledge in the OCGOP questionnaire.

Committee Member Chandra Chell asks if either candidate is endorsed by Curt Pringle.

Pringle endorsed Lodge but not Chuchua.

Lodge says he gave money to Sanchez because being in construction requires that he give a donation to Sanchez.  He apologizes and says he regrets it now.  Lodge says, “people get hurt when they fight” in reference to the allegations of police brutality.  He says he did not violate any police department policies.

Committee Member Mary Young asks if Chuchua gave money to a Democrat.

Chuchua gave money to Democrat John Santoianni running for Anaheim City School District who he called a personal friend.  Chuchua says he was curious about Santoianni.

Committee Member Thomas Gordon asks Lodge about defined benefit vs. defined contribution.

Lodge says pension reform is necessary to make the system solvent and that Governor Brown’s 12-point plan did not go far enough.

Committee Member Thomas Gordon asks Lodge if he is backed by any unions.

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.

Committee Member Ray Grangoff expresses concern about Lodge’s ties to Jordan Brandman.

Lodge says while many people have endorsed both he and Brandman; he says he has no ties to Brandman and has never been to any events with Brandman.

Chuchua interjects that there’s pictures of Brandman and Lodge at events together.

Committee Chair Mark Bucher asks Lodge to further elaborate on pension reform.

Lodge says he feels more reforms are necessary.

Committee Member Mary Young expresses concern that both gave money to Democrats.  She says they both seem conservative.

Committee Member Chandra Chell says some people in the room support Chuchua while none support Lodge.

Chell moves to support the endorsement recommendation for Chuchua and Gordon seconds.

Chell expresses concern about Lodge’s endorsement by Pringle.

Committee Member Matt Harper says Anaheim is very complex and Kring was an easy call.  He wants to delay an endorsement vote, and gets agreement from Young and Grangoff.

Committee Member Ray Grangoff says both would do well.

Committee Member Mary Young says you can’t control who endorses you.  She says OCEA head Nick Berandino endorsed her against her will.

Committee Member Thomas Gordon asks who Lucille Kring would rather have as a colleague.

Kring says she’d “much prefer” Chuchua over Lodge because he “has a lot of baggage” and is backed by “special interests” and SOAR, Anaheim Chamber, Disney, and Pringle.  She blasts OCBC and OCTax as Pringle high-speed rail tools who are also backing Lodge.

Committee Chair Mark Bucher asks if Lodge supports high-speed rail.

Lodge thinks money should be spent on local transportation rather than high-speed rail.

Committee Chair Mark Bucher is “more troubled” by union support than the other members of the committee.

Committee Member Mary Young thinks if the police union didn’t back Lodge, it might be a sign he was a bad police officer.

Committee Chair Mark Bucher cites Assemblyman Allan Mansoor as an example of a former law enforcement officer who is opposed by police unions.

Kring interjects that police unions could still do independent expenditures.

The vote was 3-3 for Chuchua (Bucher, Chell, and Gordon in favor with Grangoff, Harper, and Young against).

The committee vote fails.

Buena Park City Council

8:24 PM – Baron Night says he’s been registered as a Republican since he was eligible to vote.  He’s never voted for a Democrat, given one money, nor volunteered for one.  He says he’s a conservative on every issue and has been on the Central Committee for a number of years.

Allan Bartlett says he loves Baron’s limericks.

Committee Member Thomas Gordon asks about Night’s position on the Costa Mesa charter.

Night says he’s in favor.

Committee Member Thomas Gordon asks about Night’s position of opposition on the Buena Park charter citing Night’s statement, “If isn’t broke, don’t fix it.”

Night claims he didn’t like the way it was written, not the charter itself.

Committee Member Thomas Gordon says Buena Park is broke.

Night says Buena Park has $12,000,000 in reserves.

The committee votes quickly and unanimously to recommend Night for endorsement.

Santa Ana Unified School District

8:29 PM – Ceci Iglesias speaks of growing up in Santa Ana and her educational background.  She wants to bring a conservative voice to the Santa Ana Unified School District board.  She says she has a child in SAUSD schools.  She opposes SB 48.  She supports a back-to-basics and STEM (science, technology, engineering, and math) education.  She notes she is an immigrant from El Salvador and believes it is important to have English as a Second Language programs for students who don’t speak English.  She started a non-profit to teach deaf children.

Santa Ana resident Charles Hart speaks in favor of Iglesias and speaks of Reagan’s 80/20 ratio.  He says everyone in the room agrees with 80% of what Iglesias stands for and likely more.  He says Santa Ana needs more Republicans.

Fullerton resident Pat Shuff says she is in favor of bilingual education and the DREAM Act.  Shuff claims Igleisas has only been a Republican for two months.  Iglesias says she has been a Republican for eight years but briefly left the GOP.

Orange County Board of Education Trustee Robert Hammond, a Santa Ana resident, says Iglesias opposes the DREAM Act.  He notes he’s never seen Shuff in Santa Ana.  He says she has helped register lots of new Republicans, including persuading many Democrats over.  He says Iglesias supports ESL programs, not bilingual education.  He says she opposes SB 48 and is opposed to the teachers’ union.

Committee Member Ray Grangoff asks why she left the GOP.

Iglesias says she ran as an independent for Congress because a number of Republicans opposed her for being too conservative.

Committee Member Ray Grangoff expresses concern that she ran against Tran and Sanchez because conservatives united behind Tran.

Iglesias says she didn’t understand the dynamics of the party establishment.

Committee Member Mary Young urges her to consider English immersion and welcomes her into the Republican Party.

Iglesias says she supports immersion with ESL support.

Committee Member Ray Grangoff asks about the party affiliations of the candidates in the race.

Iglesias says three Democrat and three Republicans are running for three seats.  She says she is the most conservative candidate.

Committee Member Chandra Chell says regardless of Iglesias’s registration, Chell has seen Iglesias working for conservative candidates, even candidates who were endorsed by Republicans but without any money (like Hugh Nguyen’s bid against Tom Daly).

Committee Member Mary Young notes that Ronald Reagan was a Democrat and that Iglesias should be welcomed.

Committee Member Matt Harper notes that there’s only three Republicans for three seats and that she’s the only one seeking the endorsement.

Committee Member Thomas Gordon notes Iglesias’s opponents have massive financial campaign assistance from Planned Parenthood and that Iglesias is very pro-life.  He cites Iglesias’s efforts to gain new Republicans.  Gordon tells a story about how a Santa Ana resident screamed “Republicano” and ran like Republicans were the chupacabra.

The committee votes unanimously to recommend Iglesias for endorsement.

Orange County Water District, Division 3

8:48 PM – Incumbent Roger Yoh speaks of his conservative record on the water district.  He fought to maintain the defined contribution retirement plan when the OCWD general manager tried to insert a defined benefit plan.  He notes his family legally immigrated to the United States in 1982.  He supports the death penalty and specifically praises the efficiency of China’s death penalty.

The committee votes quickly and unanimously to recommend Yoh for endorsement.

Mission Viejo City Council

8:51 PM – Mission Viejo begins, with four candidates for two slots.

Ed Sachs says he would like to support Ceci Iglesias.  Sachs says he’s endorsed by Tom Del Beccarro.  He wants to make Orange County even more Republican.  He says he was veterans chair for Carly Fiorina and speaks of various other Republican activist activities.

Wendy Bucknum says she is represented by every Supervisor, Congressman, and state legislator who currently represents Mission Viejo or will represent Mission Viejo.  She speaks of volunteering for Republican candidates and registering Republican voters and young people.  She changed Dave Leckness into a Republican.  She says she is pro-business, pro-public safety, and pro-youth programs.

Incumbent Cathy Schlicht says she walked precincts for Dana Rohrabacher and Allan Mansoor.  She says she is active in the Saddleback Republican Assembly.  She has registered Republican voters.  She states she has pushed the Mission Viejo City Coumcil to have more competitive bidding.  She supports Prop 32.  She has opposed all fee increases based on administrative costs; she prefers to cut those costs.  She says she has been active in Mission Viejo during its entire history.  She works in the construction industry.  District Attorney Tony Rackacukas, OCBE Trustee Ken Williams, Assemblyman Don Wagner, Assemblyman Allan Mansoor, Assemblyman Chris Norby, and Lake Forest Mayor Kathryn McCullough (a Democrat), and numerous other people I didn’t catch.

Incumbent Frank Ury blamed his Hungarian parents for his initials.  He is a founding board member of ACC-OC.  He cites his conservative voting record on the City Council.  He used budget surpluses to create fee holidays where fees were temporarily suspended for six months to assist businesses and residents.  OCBC, Congressman Ed Royce, Congressman Gary Miller, Senator Mimi Walters, and Assemblyman Jeff Miller have endorsed Ury.

Steve Sarkis speaks in favor of Cathy Schlicht, citing her conservative voting record, including on sex offenders, taxes, and public safety.

Chris Emami speaks in “slight opposition” to Schlicht, citing her voting record.  Specifically, he cited when Schlict filed suit on a city ballot measure where Schlict sought attorney’s fees from the city, and the council voted on her request.

Larry Gilbert speaks in favor of Schlicht, citing her longtime volunteerism for Republicans.  Gilbert speaks on the suit’s merits but did not speak about the attorney’s fees.

Tim Whitacre speaks in favor of Sachs, citing him as “new old blood” on the basis of his life experience and his fresh perspective in politics.  He cites Sachs’s service in the United States Navy.

Shirley Morgan speaks in favor of Wendy Bucknum.  Morgan was Laguna Woods RWF President for ten years and spoke of Bucknum’s assistance to the Laguna Woods RWF.  Morgan praises Bucknum’s people skills with seniors and youth.

Matt Corrigan, former President of the Saddleback Republican Assembly, states Bucknum supported union-backed Democrat Dave Leckness (and shows pictures demonstrating this) and Bucknum opposed the candidates endorsed by the OCGOP.  He says she even attacked the OCGOP-endorsed candidates in numerous voter communications.

Joe Holtzman speaks of Prop 32 and how Bucknum is depending on special interest money.  He questions “her moral compass.”  He says she did nothing during a swim team scandal.  He speaks of her questionable fiscal stances.

Larry Gilbert speaks of Ury’s support of Leckness.  Gilbert says Supervisor Shawn Nelson opposed the watering down of the Mission Viejo City Manager’s contract termination clauses, and that Ury then voted to water down the clauses.

Joe Holtzman says Ury has been forced to rewrite ballot statements due to violating the law.  He also says Ury has caused numerous legal expenses for the city.  He says Ury tried to undermine the school board and public education when Ury was a school board member.

In response to Emami’s “slight” allegation, Schlicht only sought $70 in attorney’s fees in order to get attention to the fact that she, and not Ury, had won in the lawsuit demanding language be changed on the ballot measure because she said the City Attorney was incorrectly spinning that Ury and the City had prevailed over Schlicht.

In response to Corrigan and Holtzman’s allegations, Bucknum had a “No on [Lance MacLean] Recall” sign because she felt the term expired in six months.  She says apparently the sign was paid for by the union.  She says she opposes smear campaigns like the one she’s suffered tonight.

In response to Gilbert and Holtzman’s allegations, Ury cites his efforts to pass school vouchers while a school board member.  He says he won awards from the OCGOP and CA GOP for the effort.  He says the unions spent enormous sums to remove him from the school board.  He says if that’s undermining public education, he’s guilty as charged.  He believes property rights are paramount, and he fought to battle ballot box zoning (in reference to Schlicht’s lawsuit).

Committee Member Thomas Gordon asks if Ury voted to prevent citizens from pulling consent calendar items.

Ury feels council members should pull consent calendar items because there are some citizens who try to pull all consent items.  He notes the city has never turned down serious citizen requests to pull a consent item.

Committee Member Thomas Gordon asks if Ury voted to bestow lifetime medical benefits on part-time council members.

Ury gives a lengthy complex explanation arguing that it’s only irrevocable if a councilmember signs a document that they’re forever waiving lifetime medical benefits because a council could reverse a vote in the future.  He says his vote was to rescind an illegal vote.

Committee Member Ray Grangoff asks if the Republican Party took a position on the recall of Lance MacLean.

Committee Member Matt Harper asks people’s positions on the Mission Viejo ballot box zoning measure.

Sachs couldn’t recall.

Schlicht said she supported the measure to protect the private property rights of local residents, open space, and parks to prevent a state mandate for high-density housing.

Committee Member Matt Harper asks Schlicht if it’s like Newport Beach’s Greenlight initiative.

She says yes.

Committee Member Matt Harper asks Schlicht points out it doesn’t protect the property rights of the landowner.

She supports the measure because it harms the property values of the neighbors, thereby harming their property values.

Bucknum opposed the measure.

Ury opposed the measure.  He said the Schlicht lawsuit only changed two minor words.  Ury’s side prevailed 70%-30%.

Committee Member Ray Grangoff asks how Sachs would vote on the measure today if he saw it now.

Sachs says he would have voted the way Schlicht did.

Committee Member Matt Harper asked who was endorsed by Senator Mimi Walters and Assemblywoman Diane Harkey.

Walters and Harkey endorsed Ury and Bucknum.

Committee Member Ray Grangoff supports Ury for holding to conservative Republican values.

Committee Member Mary Young says she knows all four as good conservatives.

Committee Chair Mark Bucher says he first met Ury when Ury was running for school board.  He wrote the first paycheck protection measure with Ury.  Bucher notes that when someone backs a Democrat, it’s a good thing when that Democrat is converted to Republican.  While there are minor Ury voting issues, nothing of a serious issue has arisen.

The committee votes to recommend Ury for endorsement 4-2 (Chell and Gordon dissenting).

Committee Member Mary Young is excited that conservative Democrat Dave Leckness became a conservative Republican.

Committee Member Ray Grangoff believes the Republican Party must make a stand in favor of private property rights.

Committee Member Matt Harper believes private property rights is one of the most important issues City Councils have jurisdiction over.  He is thrilled there is this much battle among Republicans because the city is so heavily Republican.

The committee votes to recommend Bucknum for endorsement 4-2 (Chell and Gordon dissenting).

Apparently, Emami’s “slight opposition” can change the direction of an endorsements meeting.

Rancho Santa Margarita City Council

9:45 PM – Appointed incumbent Carol Gamble speaks of her prior Council electoral history and her reappointment after she returned to California.  She urged that Tony Beall replace her when she left the Council to take care of her dying parent.  After she returned, and after another Councilmember resigned, she was reappointed to the Council.  She helped lead the cityhood movement in Rancho Santa Margarita and was elected to its inaugural City Council, serving until she left California.  She owns a consulting and engineering firm based in Rancho Santa Margarita for 17 years.  She says she is a major proponent of private property rights.

Committee Chair Mark Bucher notes that Tony Beall is the only thing standing in the way of the committee members going home.

Beall gives one sentence in support of Gamble.  He speaks one sentence stating he supports Brad McGirr, who cannot make it because he is at a Rancho Santa Margarita Planning Commission meeting.

The committee quickly and unanimously vote to recommend the endorsement of both Gamble and McGirr.

The Endorsements Committee adjourns at 9:52 PM, a stunning 8 minutes early.

Posted in Anaheim, Brea, Buena Park, Capistrano Unified School District, Fullerton, Huntington Beach, Laguna Niguel, Lake Forest, Mesa Consolidated Water District, Mission Viejo, Municipal Water District of Orange County, Orange, Orange County Water District, Rancho Santa Margarita, Republican Central Committee, Santa Ana Unified School District | 18 Comments »

OCGOP Endorsements Committee Agenda

Posted by Chris Nguyen on September 5, 2012

Live after being caught in traffic on the 55, but I still beat a majority of the endorsements committee here.

The following people will be considered by the Endorsements Committee tonight, but their recommendations must still be ratified by the full Central Committee on September 17.

  • Steve Nagel for Fountain Valley City Council
  • Steven Lang for Capistrano Unified School District
  • Jim Reardon for Capistrano Unified School District
  • Erik Peterson for Huntington Beach City Council
  • Barbara Delgleize for Huntington Beach City Council
  • Yes on Measure FF (Orange)
  • Steven Vargas for Brea City Council
  • Craig Young for Yorba Linda City Council
  • Susan Hinman for Municipal Water District of Orange County
  • Dwight Robinson for Lake Forest City Council
  • Adam Nick for Lake Forest City Council
  • Jennifer Fitzgerald for Fullerton City Council
  • Barry Levinson for Fullerton City Council
  • Brian Neil Chuchua for Anaheim City Council
  • Steve Chavez Lodge for Anaheim City Council
  • Jim Fisler for Mesa Consolidated Water District, Div. 2
  • Laurie Davies for Laguna Niguel City Council
  • Ed Sachs for Mission Viejo City Council
  • Wendy Bucknum for Mission Viejo City Council
  • Cathy Schlicht for Mission Viejo City Council
  • Frank Ury for Mission Viejo City Council
  • Roger Yoh for Orange County Water District Director, Div. 3
  • Baron Night for Buena Park City Council
  • Cecilia Iglesias for Santa Ana School Board
  • Carol Gamble for Rancho Santa Margarita City Council

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

More OCGOP Endorsement Fun Tonight

Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on September 5, 2012

Just wanted to send out a quick note to our readers that the endorsements meeting for the OC GOP was not limited to last night. The fun will continue tonight with another round of endorsements. We as always will be live blogging the event and if you want the most recent updates check in with us starting at 6:00 PM and be ready to keep hitting refresh.

For all of you Fantasy Football fans out there Chris Nguyen has been icing his thumbs and is listed as probable for tonight’s contest.

Posted in Republican Central Committee | Leave a Comment »

Anaheim Court Case Aftermath

Posted by Former Blogger Chris Emami on September 5, 2012

OC Insider beat me to the punch but I wanted to follow-up a bit on the Anaheim court case and the aftermath from the judge’s ruling. The case itself had 2 major points that were being argued:

1) Steve Chavez Lodge was using the name Chavez to simply try to increase votes he would receive from the latino community. This part of the lawsuit would force him to change his name on the ballot to Steve Lodge.  (12:37 AM Nguyen correction: the legal point being argued is whether or not Lodge is entitled to his birth name of Chavez, based on whether or not he is known by that name.)

2) Steve Chavez Lodge cannot used the designation of retired policeman because he is currently employed as a businessman/consultant.

Chris Nguyen and I had discussed the case and we actually predicted the outcome being what it was. Lode was allowed to keep the name Chavez. However, he also was forced to change his designation to businessman because in order to be retired under election law you must be at least 55 years old.  (12:37 AM Nguyen correction: Lodge was actually forced to change it to businessman because he had “another more recent, intervening principal profession, vocation or occupation” as he currently works at Hill International as Director of Public Affairs.)

With all of the anger and negative press with the police my thought is that Chavez-Lodge might have actually benefitted from being placed on the ballot as a businessman instead.

I sent over 3 questions over to Cynthia Ward after the final decision in order to get her take on what could be considered a substantial victory for Chavez-Lodge:

1) You won the challenge of his designation, however, do you think it benefits him to run as businessman and not policeman considering all the tension with police in Anaheim?

I do not think it is the tension of being associated with Police work in general that would be a negative for Lodge, at least not associated with APD. After all, he did nail the public safety union endorsements, both Fire and Police, and they are likely to do plenty of mail reminding voters of his ex-cop background even if the ballot does not allow for the wording.

I think the law enforcement image Lodge needs to live down at this point is his own record as a Santa Ana cop. Plenty of blogs scooped me while I was embargoed, and have revealed public records showing Lodge involved in court cases not as an expert witness, but as a defendant, including an excessive force case in which the victim was awarded half a million dollars in punitive damages for injuries suffered while apparently being arrested for the heinous crime of jaywalking. That is going to be harder to live down than an association with cops in general.

I think a lot of Anaheim voters understand that while there are bad apples in every batch, in large part the APD is staffed with professional, decent people, trying hard to protect and serve, under a Chief that is greatly respected throughout the city. It may shock you to know that Chief John Welter is greatly respected in the neighborhoods like Ponderosa, where unrest has been kept to a minimum because the residents trust Welter, and when trouble broke with a Police shooting of a gang member, the residents fell back on that trust rather than follow the trouble-making team of Joanne Sosa and Lorri Galloway, who together with Yesenia Rojas appear to be largely responsible for riling up the Anna Drive residents and creating much of the unrest.

That is a long way of saying that I do not think Anaheim voters have a problem with APD or Police in general, but they are very suspect of anyone tagged with a “bad cop” label, and Lodge is going to have to live down the recent allegations on the blogs, which are certain to hit the papers, especially with the media attention he seems to have ginned up.

2) What is your take on the judge’s ruling to allow him to keep the name Chavez and adding the name Albert?

I have nothing but respect for Judge Charles Margines, I did some research on his work as soon as I knew we drew his courtroom, and he seems not only fair, but incredibly intelligent, and quite a bit witty. He not only refused to allow the last minute “evidence” that Lodge’s lawyer tried to present, he seemed to almost mock Baric for trying. Margines pointed out the absurdity of the argument that they “just received” these documents, asking why Mr. Lodge did not have his own personal papers ready prior to court. It was a really informative session to watch, I would actually go back to his courtroom just to watch him work, he takes no bull from either side.

The ruling ultimately came down to a recollection from the Judge’s own memory banks, which none of us could have foreseen. Lodge’s case had bounced from “it is the name on my birth certificate” to “I never legally changed my name to Lodge” (an oddity since he presumably has a Social Security number, Driver’s License, etc. in that name, but I digress) and finally landed on “I have testified in court as Steven Albert Chavez Lodge.”  Baric even argued that Lodge had testified before Judge Margines himself, although I did not see evidence that he provided a case number or transcript to verify that. But that last argument seemed to strike a chord.  It was Judge Margines himself that recalled Lodge testifying in his own courtroom years ago, and he believed it was as Chavez-Lodge.

Now, to be fair, recalling that a Police officer used a name once years ago while testifying in a Santa Ana courtroom as a Santa Ana cop may not establish that he is widely known by that name in the community in which he is now running for office. And again, Lodge and his lawyer did not produce the evidence of that, beyond a verbal statement. But the lightbulb went off over the head of a Judge I greatly admire, and I can respect that decision without argument.

On the way home my husband and I were discussing the potential repercussions radiating outward beyond the campaign, had the Judge decided against Lodge. If Lodge had testified in court against a criminal, even once, as Chavez-Lodge, and had an officer of the court then ruled that it did not appear to be his legal name, the ramifications for opening case loads on technicalities may have been more than any of us bargained for. Given a choice between letting Lodge use the name he has requested, or potentially opening a Pandora’s Box of legal challenges in criminal court, he can have the name. Gladly.

It appears the “Albert” was added because the question of what Lodge calls himself was so completely up in the air, and the Judge may have wanted to cover all his bases. When asked what his client’s legal name was, attorney Steve Baric insisted it was Steven Albert Chavez, (no Lodge.) That got the Judge’s attention. Since so many options were presented about what Lodge calls himself depending on day and conditions, I think the judge threw it all onto the ballot just to be sure we got it all. Kind of like throwing pasta at the wall.

3) Will you still attempt to get Lodge to pay your attorney’s fees?

My attorney had included that in the original Petition as an option, should we prevail, and I have not discussed it with him yet. But unless I am mistaken, I think we split the decision equally. I certainly have no interest in being punitive, no matter what Lodge has said about me.

Honestly, I just want the nastiness to stop. This was never meant to be personal, I think people get very emotional when they hear the word “lawsuit” they think damages and awards of vast sums of money, and that is not what this was. The suit is the only mechanism for stopping the process of the City Clerk and Registrar of Voters from moving forward with the wording they are given by the candidates. As you know, once the filing period is closed even the candidates themselves cannot change the wording they have submitted, so a Petition to the Registrar and Clerk is the only way to challenge the system. These challenges are common; they happen all over the country in every election cycle, and they are usually handled without the toxic sludge that has been polluting the internet since this hit.

In fact, the case just ahead of ours was yet another Petition, in which a candidate in RSM was being challenged with the claim that they had used their ballot statement to disparage other candidates. If ever a case could become negative it would be that one, but it did not get the national attention we got because the candidate did not escalate the arguments into the public eye like Lodge seems to have done. I honestly wondered where the negativity came from, and then noticed that Lodge was accompanied to court by Dave Ellis. It explained a lot. So while I think we both came out equally, I suspect this is far from over, no matter where the attorney’s fees end up.

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

Jon Dumitru Loses Court Fight Over Ballot Title

Posted by OC Insider on September 5, 2012

In other ballot title litigation news, Orange Councilman and mayoral candidate Jon Dumitru lost a court fight this morning over his ballot designation of “Businessman/City of Orange Councilman.”

Dumitru’s opponent, Councilmember Tita Smith, field a lawsuit challenging the “businessman” part, because Dumitru’s full-time job is as a dispatcher for the Orange County Fire Authority.

Dumitru’s rationale for using “businessman” was because he has a side-business buying and selling the contents of abandoned storage lockers, like on the reality series “Storage Wars.”

The judge disagreed, “businessman” is out and his ballot designation will presumably be shortened to “City of Orange Councilman.”

Smith’s ballot title is “Councilmember, City of Orange.”

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