Measure "O" - The Bogus Charter

PLENTY OF REASONS TO VOTE NO ON "O"

There are many reasons NOT to vote in favor of Measure "O", the most recent attempt by Mayor Jim Righeimer to take over complete control of our municipal government and solidify his position as a de facto dictator.  We'll enumerate them as time passes and we get closer to election day.

MOONEY'S COMMENTARY
However, I cannot miss the opportunity to direct your attention to Charles Mooney's current commentary in the Daily Pilot, HERE, which outlines the two sections of this very flawed document that, from my standpoint - and Mooney's too - are stakes in the heart of this measure - Sections 104 and 806.

PROBABILITY OF ABUSE OF POWER

Those segments provide the elected leaders of this city with unlimited power to do whatever they wish to do once this flawed document is adopted.  The kind of probable abuse of power provided by those sections is precisely why Costa Mesa should remain a General Law city, with all the protections from abuse that form of government provides.

READ IT YOURSELF

You will likely hear and read lots of rhetoric about The Charter as we head for the election in November.  It's hard to sort fact from politically-driven fiction.  So, I invite you to READ the document itself - it's not that complicated - and focus on Section 104 and 806.  I think you'll find Mooney's opinion accurate.  You'll find The Charter HERE on the City web site.  Additionally, if you go HERE you'll find other links that might be helpful to you, including direct arguments for and against The Charter and rebuttals to each.

A "STACKED" COMMITTEE

Keep in mind that when folks tell you that The Charter was created by a "blue ribbon" committee, that committee was stacked by Righeimer and his majority on the City Council with folks who he knew shared his vision for the takeover of the government.  I attended most of the Charter Committee meetings - I saw the interaction among the members and the bias they brought to the table.  I watched as facilitators Kirk Bauermeister and Mike Decker toiled to keep the meetings productive.  Attorney and former City Council candidate John Stephens - an opponent of The Charter - outlined the process and the result in a recent Daily Pilot commentary, HERE.

DON'T BE FOOLED...
So, don't be fooled by the smoke screen of Pension Reform - The Charter will do NOTHING to resolve our Unfunded Pension Liability!  Don't be fooled by the mantra of "Local Control" being chanted by supporters of Righeimer's latest Charter.  That is code for more power in the hands of the elected leaders, NOT the people of the community.

VOTE NO ON "O"!

Mooney Demands Identity of Trail Violators - From Mensinger

REGISTER COMMENTARY DEMANDS ANSWERS
Those of you who subscribe to the Orange County Register probably have already seen the commentary published on those pages Saturday, December 27, 2013 written by Costa Mesa resident Charles Mooney titled, "Official owes public an end to trail mystery".  You can read it HERE, if you've paid the price to sneak behind their pay wall, that is.


DOES MENSINGER KNOW?
In a nutshell, Mooney aims an incriminating finger directly at Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger on the issue of the illegal application of decomposed granite on a trail that encroached on federally-protected vernal pools, suggesting through the use of direct quotations by Mensinger, that he knows who installed the decomposed granite.

COSTS SHOULD BE REIMBURSED
Mooney also gives us a very brief summary of activity by federal officials regarding the trail and the vernal pools and suggests that the $14,000 the city is paying to have the offending materials removed should be reimbursed by those responsible for it.  And, we still don't know what kind of sanctions, if any, will be imposed on the City regarding our poor stewardship of Fairview Park - that shoe is waiting to drop.

MOONEY'S STATEMENT...
His final two paragraphs says the following:

"I can somewhat understand why the person or persons who installed the trail are afraid to confess and pay for the trail's removal.

However, it seems that Mayor Pro Tem Mensinger knows who installed the trail and, as a public official, has the responsibility to Costa Mesa taxpayers to identify those responsible."

IF MENSINGER KNOWS...
I agree with Mooney... if Mensinger does know who is responsible for the installation of the decomposed granite on the trail that may have harmed an endangered species - the San Diego Fairy Shrimp -  he is violating his responsibility as a sworn council member if he does not come forward with that information.  Of course, there's always the small chance that he might incriminate himself, in which case he is protected by law from doing so.  It's a very sticky wicket.  Perhaps the reward that was announced a few weeks ago will  produce verifiable leads so this mess can be cleared up once and for all.

Mensinger Blasts The Daily Pilot

CHARLIE MOONEY'S COMMENTARY STRIKES A NERVE
Last week Costa Mesa activist Charles Mooney published a commentary in the Daily Pilot titled, "I see shades of Bell in Costa Mesa", which you can read HERE.  In that excellent commentary Mooney provided a sort of mini-primer for the readers, comparing how the whole City of Bell debacle unfolded and provided warning signs for those of us in Costa Mesa who may be asked to consider a charter proposal next year some time.

WE KNEW THEY WOULDN'T LIKE IT
I thought Mooney did a great public service with his commentary, but knew that the current power elite in Costa Mesa wouldn't like it one bit.  I was right.

SYCOPHANTS WAKE UP AND ATTACK
The very first comment posted on Mooney's piece was by sycophant Dennis Popp, the operator of a boring blog that attempts to convince his readers that Jim Righeimer and Steve Mensinger have all the right ideas before they nod off.  He's one of the cadre of Pit Yorkies that yap the party line when opposing views are expressed.  From there it became an experience very much like watching a professional badminton match - back and forth, back and forth with an almost dizzying pace.  As I type this 61 comments have accumulated as both sides of the issue in a spirited "debate".

MENSINGER'S MANTRA
Then today, our mayor pro tem wrote a scathing commentary that is published in the Daily Pilot, too.  It is titled, "Bell-Costa Mesa comparison is irresponsible" and can be read HERE.  In this angry epistle Mensinger doesn't really attack Mooney for what he said more than he attacks the editors of the Daily Pilot for daring to publish an opinion piece that carries a message different from his world view.

OH, NO - SAUL ALINSKY!
He conjures up the specter of Saul Alinsky - he and his pals have been doing that a lot lately to attempt to discredit the opinions of critics - accusing Mooney of ridiculing the current charter process.  His pathetic attempt to debunk Mooney's presentation is almost juvenile as he tries to deflect the readers from the importance of this issue by throwing out red herrings - more "worthwhile debates", as he calls them.  He cites the budget, infrastructure, Fairview Park, unfunded pension liabilities, schools, attracting young professionals and seniors as more important issues than the charter discussion.

MENSINGER MISCHARACTERIZES MOONEY
In his commentary Mooney does not say Costa Mesa is Bell, he provides chapter and verse for the readers to assess how Bell got where it was when the wheels came off as an alert for those paying attention to the current charter process... to be aware of the possibilities of municipal malfeasance if a proper charter is not created.

REALLY?
In summation Mensinger accuses Mooney of "practicing politics as usual" - like he's not with his commentary.  He then says, "But blame lies with the Pilot editors, who should know better.  They are the gatekeepers of the community debate and shouldn't mindlessly publish everything that comes across their desks."

NO VIEWS BUT HIS SHOULD BE PUBLISHED
So, let me see if I've got this right.  The Mayor Pro Tem doesn't want the editors of the Daily Pilot to publish anything he disagrees with, right?  That's how I read what Mensinger wrote.  The editors should not "mindlessly" publish things that express an opinion opposing the current power elite.  How idiotically arrogant!

ALL VIEWS SHOULD BE PUBLISHED
Let me be clear about something.  Because the conversion of Costa Mesa from a General Law city to a Charter City is singularly the most important issue facing this council and the voters today, ANY credible opinion on this issue should be published.  For the editors of the Daily Pilot to do otherwise would be a violation of the public trust.  Heck, they published yours, Steve.

YOUR DECISIONS STINK!
Mensinger complains that Mooney is, "also not a fan of the City Council majority and our attempt to rein in out-of-control local government and reset priorities."  Well, gee, Steve, I wonder why?  Could it be that your decisions actually stink?

WRONG FROM THE BEGINNING
From the very beginning, when you decided to send illegal layoff notices to more than 200 employees that resulted in legal challenges that cost the city millions in unnecessary fees, through almost every single overture you've made since then, each has been stamped with a big FAIL!  The tactics your group uses have caused this once-proud, vibrant city to become an unsafe and toxic workplace for city employees.  They are followed - stalked, as it were - and been forced to work unconscionable overtime hours to compensate for your arbitrary unwillingness to properly staff public safety positions, then are vilified as being greedy for working that overtime!  You've referred to a highly-skilled employee with three decades of dedicated service to the city as a "Jiffy Lube Guy".  You refer to a battalion chief as a "$350,000 firefighter", but neglect to acknowledge that your policies required him to work more than 4,000 hours in a year to provide coverage to keep our residents safe.  I'm having a hard time deciding whether your actions are vindictive or just the result of stupidity - or maybe both.

CHARTER IS MORE IMPORTANT
All those issues Mensinger tries to use as distractions - in his words, "shiny objects" - to shift the focus of the importance of Mooney's message are certainly important.  But, even if taken as a whole, they are nowhere as important to the future of this city than the decision about converting to a Charter City, and the content of that charter.  And the City of Bell debacle demonstrates that very clearly.  If the charter that is being painstakingly cobbled together by the Charter Committee produces a work product that does not address the issues important to the residents of the city - if it is focused on the political priorities of a very small group among us - the results could be every bit as cataclysmic as Bell.

GET A JOB!
Mensinger made an oblique reference to how little council members get paid for meetings that stretch into the wee hours.  Well, perhaps he should get a job to supplement that $904.40 he receives each month like other council members do and quite trying to be a martyr.  He signed up for this gig, so if he doesn't like it, he should step down.  There are several other hardworking members of the community willing to take that seat and do some good with it - not try to tear the city apart.

CRITICS WILL NOT BE SILENCED
So, let Mayor Jim Righeimer and Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger be advised.  The opposition views will not cease just because you don't like them.  Critics will continue to express their views, so get used to it.  You both were elected to represent ALL the residents of Costa Mesa - more than 110,000 souls, with varying needs and priorities.  Those people will continue to demand their right to express their views to you.  They have every right to expect that you will hear them with courtesy and not chide them for their willingness to speak out.


*********

REGISTRATION REQUIRED TO COMMENT
Remember, you MUST register BEFORE attempting to post a comment.  All others will be rejected without being read.

WORD VERIFICATION RE-ACTIVIATED
Sadly, I had to re-activate the "word verification" feature.  I tried it for a day without and the spam submissions were too great to deal with long term.  So, just keep on trying.  If your first attempt doesn't make it, just try again and again until you get a code you can read and duplicate.  Thanks

Costa Mesa Charter Ball Is Rolling

CAUTIOUS OPTIMISM
After more than three and half hours, I came away from the second meeting of the Costa Mesa Charter Committee last night with a sense of guarded optimism.  Let me explain...


IGNORING RIGHEIMER
Right out of the gate facilitator Kirk Bauermeister cleared the air about the mission of this group.  Copies of agendas and minutes of relevant council meetings were included in the packet distributed to the committee.  Bauermeister acknowledged that he knew of the comment stated by Mayor Jim Righeimer at the meeting where the committee was selected in which he clearly stated that the committee was to determine whether the city needed a charter or not.  I've quoted it twice recently.  Bauermeister told the group that he "doesn't take direction from one council member", and affirmed his belief, based on the record of recent council decisions on the subject, that his role is to facilitate the creation of a Charter for the city.  I made a mental note for future reference that it's probably a good idea to ignore the mumbles of our mayor most of the time.  Member Harold Weitzberg affirmed his continued belief that, as the committee goes about deliberating the value of a charter, it might determine that changing the type of governance may, in fact, not serve the residents of the city better than remaining a General Law city.  And the group moved on...

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Of the dozen members of the public attending the meeting, four, including former councilman Jay Humphrey, addressed the committee during Public Comments.  He expressed concern that the committee consider all aspects of the criteria that will be used to evaluate charter options.  Robin Leffler said she was going to wait to see what kind of product the committee produces, but that she hopes it will not propose a Charter to the exclusion of all other options.  Charles Mooney expressed concern about the City of Bell - a charter city and encouraged the committee first establish requirements before deciding on a charter.  The remaining speaker - a grumpy old fella - identified himself as a "simple guy" who was looking for the charter to provide local control.  The guy is anything BUT simple, and he left after saying his piece without bothering to see how the process was going to work.  Facts are seldom an issue for him.

NO OFFICERS, YET
Facilitators Bauermeister and Mike Decker led a discussion on whether the group wanted to elect officers - Chairman, Vice Chairman, Time Keeper - as described in the agenda, HERE.  After a few minutes it became clear that most wished to continue awhile longer with the facilitators running the show, and voted to consider the issue again two meetings from now.  For now Bauermeister and Decker will provide "facilitation" for the group.

 BREAKING THE ICE
The group went through another "Ice Breaker" exercise - they paired-up, spent a few minutes getting to know their partner, then introduced them individually to the group.  It worked - the group seemed looser following that little exercise.

STARTING THE LIST
They then launched into an exercise designed to help prioritize the issues to be considered by going around the room and allowing each member to present one issue for consideration.  Then they went back around for a second choice from each member and, eventually, decided as a group to get all those items the members had compiled as part of their homework exercise up on the boards for discussion.  (An aside - the group seems to be settling into their role and reached most decisions through thoughtful, considerate discussion)

WINNOWING IT DOWN
The group generated more than two dozen individual issues they felt should be included as they moved forward.  They then winnowed those down by combining those that were, in part, redundant and then used red stickers placed on the sheets with those issues listed to indicate their priorities.  The results are shown on the images of those sheets below.  As you can see, Public Contracts got the most red stickers and will be the first issue discussed at length beginning at the next meeting on July 24th.  This list is NOT the final list, just a start.  Members were encouraged to think more about it and add items in the future.  Of course, the public is always welcome to contribute their thoughts, too, by communicating with the City Clerk, Brenda Green.  She is the focus of all communication for the committee.

NO SURPRISE HERE...
While the group has not yet found themselves lining up on one side or the other on issues, there are some clear indications about how this is going to go.  For example, "Tea Party Tom" Pollitt, a loyal follower of Mayor Jim Righeimer and Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger, contributed the need to review "the 15 or 16" problems with the last charter - Jim Righeimer's Charter.  It was he who asked to have a copy of that document included in their reference materials along with actual real charters from several other cities.  It's likely that he will push to just have that document "fixed" and present it to the council for consideration.  We'll see.  Later he pushed for a specific timeline for the process, but the group reminded him the objective was to produce a proper document.  Hank Panian, the senior member of the group and the only one who has gone through this process before several decades ago, emphasized something he's told the group before - that "this is arduous, difficult, complex work and there's no way to predict how long it's going to take."  Bauermeister told the group that the council wanted to measure their progress in 6 months.  Pollitt made me smile when he referred to "the minority people" - apparently meaning the folks who may not agree with his view - and hoped they will feel they got a fair hearing.  Us vs. them...  It's interesting to watch him work because you never know what he's going to say.  He's demanding another consideration for his request for an invocation at the beginning of each meeting - an issue that will be discussed by the group next time, following some legal guidance from attorney Kimberly Hall Barlow.

PUBLIC CONTRACTS
Several members expressed concern about Public Contracts, prevailing wage, etc.  Enough did so to place that collection of issues at the top of the heap for discussion.

THAT FOUR-LETTER WORD...
Many members brought up the City of Bell, expressing concern that a Costa Mesa Charter not permit the abuses that happened in Bell.  Financial concerns and employee issues - contracts, outsourcing - also ended up high on the list.

KEEPING A POSITIVE THOUGHT
So, the ball is rolling and I'm encouraged by the progress that was made over the past two meetings.  The tough part is ahead and, as the specific issues begin to be discussed at length, we'll see just how cohesive they remain.  Because Bauermeister and Decker have found their footing, and because the group presently seems comfortable with them providing direction to the process, I'm keeping a positive thought, but understand the politics of this process.  There seems to be four or five members firmly in the camp of the current council majority, but we won't know what that means until further down stream.  I expect "sides" to coalesce in the weeks to come.  That's when we find out how valuable this process will be, and whether the group can work through the different viewpoints and arrive at something resembling consensus.