Why Vote YES On Measure AA and NO on Measure BB

TRYING TO SAVE THE "JEWEL"
Measure AA on the Costa Mesa ballot was placed there by a dedicated group of volunteers obtaining more than 7,100 signatures of registered voters who joined those who wrote the initiative in their concerns about the future of Fairview Park - widely described as Costa Mesa's Jewel.

COUNCIL MAJORITY INTENT WAS CLEAR
The petition was circulated because of actions taken by the current City Council majority over the past nearly six years that implied a clear intention to turn this mostly natural park into something akin to a regional sports complex.

STACKED COMMITTEE
The Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee was created by the City Council and stacked with cronies who apparently followed the party line when creating a process to determine what should be considered for Fairview Park.  They crafted goals and a list of issues to consider.  The original 35-item list included things like hard-surface sports courts, playing fields and much, much more.  The meetings evolved from a couple dozen attendees to well over 100 in some of the later meetings.

DR. MEHREN RESIGNS IN DISGUST
The committee went about discussing the park, quadrant by quadrant, over many months.  The meetings were heavily-attended by concerned citizens and they saw the attempts by the stacked majority to manipulate the process.  Finally, in January of 2015 - not quite two years after the committee was created - the chairman of the group, Dr. Richard Mehren, described by many in the community as the "Father of Fairview Park", resigned in disgust and shortly thereafter the committee was placed on hiatus.

PETITIONS CIRCULATED AND QUALIFIED
Dr. Mehren and a group of dedicated volunteers, the Fairview Park Preservation Alliance, launched their petition drive and, earlier this year, submitted more than 7,100 signatures - more than enough to qualify for the ballot next Tuesday.  Their goal was to protect the park from what they perceived to be a focused effort by some in authority to violate the deed and add "facilities" of all kinds to the park venue.

COUNCIL CREATES CONFUSING MEASURE
The City Council majority, once again ignoring the will of the people and apparently unwilling to simply trust the voters and let this issue be decided in November with a Yes or No vote, cobbled together a bogus competing measure - Measure BB - to confuse the voters.  It implies that no sports fields would be permitted at Fairview Park, but is worded to permit many other kinds of facilities "normally expected in a park".  That left the gate wide open for development.  And, the City Council authorized the City to spend $8,500 on misleading mailers to support Measure BB.

THIS VIDEO TELLS THE STORY
The following video presentation does an excellent job of defining the issue and provides you all the reasons you need to vote YES on Measure AA and NO on Measure BB.

VOTE YES ON MEASURE AA - VOTE NO ON MEASURE BB

Fairview Park Initiative Qualifies For November Ballot

ON THE BALLOT!
As many already know, late this afternoon Costa Mesa City Clerk Brenda Green announced that she had received word from Orange County Registrar of Voters Neal Kelley that sufficient numbers of signatures on the petitions for the measure known as "An Initiative Requiring Changes In Use At Fairview Park Be Subject To Voter Approval" have been counted and the measure has qualified for placement on the November 8, 2016 ballot.

THE NUMBERS
Number of Signatures Filed:                       7,144
Number of Signatures Required:                 4,995
Number of Signatures Verified:                   6,025
Number of Signatures Found Valid:        5,001
Number of Signatures Found Invalid:         1,024
Invalid Because of Duplicate:                        151

STOPPED COUNTING WHEN GOAL MET
The Registrar's office stopped counting once sufficient numbers of valid signatures had been recorded.  At the City Clerk's request, they counted another few, hence that 5,001 number.

MORE NUMBERS
1119 signatures not checked (They didn't need to check them)

Of the 1,024 signatures counted and found to be invalid:
490  were not registered
11    were out of district
151  signed more than once
100  registered late
120  registered to a different addrss
6     declaration incomplete
6     no  residence address given
1     no signature
138 signatures don't match
1     page filed in wrong county

CELEBRATING!
So, there is celebration among Dr. Richard Mehren and his cohorts on the Fairview Park Preservation Alliance - the names are too voluminous to list here - who worked so tirelessly to circulate the petitions on those hot days in the park, standing on street corners and out pounding the pavement, going door-to-door.  Now the work of convincing the voters that this measure is necessary to protect Fairview Park - described by many as "The Jewel Of Costa Mesa" from development in perpetuity.

KUDOS!
Kudos to all who played a role in this effort.  Certainly, this would not have been necessary if the public's confidence in the elected majority in this city was not at such a low ebb.  They have demonstrated by their actions that they cannot be entrusted with the future of Fairview Park without some kind of codified protection - this initiative.

Group Launches Initiative To Protect Fairview Park

PROTECTING OUR "CROWN JEWEL"
A group of activists has launched an initiative designed to protect Fairview Park from any kind of future development efforts.

INITIATIVE PRESENTED LAST FRIDAY
On Friday, September 18, 2015, representatives of the group Fairview Park Preservation Alliance presented an initiative to the Brenda Green, Costa Mesa City Clerk, for processing.  Now that document will be vetted by the City Attorney and, as was the case with the so-called Smart Growth initiative, he will produce a summary document and a title by which this new initiative will be known.

THE TIMETABLE
Once that process is complete - it must be returned to the proponents by October 2nd - they will have 180 days in which to gather signatures of registered Costa Mesa voters - at least 5,500, but will probably need 8,000 - 9,000 to be sure.  Once those signatures are presented to the City Clerk, she and her staff will accept them, count them, then present them to the Orange County Registrar of Voters.  His staff will then have 30 days in which to verify every single one of the signatures for validity.  Assuming all that goes well, the initiative will qualify for the November, 2016 ballot.

THE PURPOSE
Although I've seen the text submitted to the City Clerk, I'm not going to publish it yet, just in case there are changes.  However, from that text, the purpose for this initiative is:

• Keep Fairview Park as a natural and open space as documented in the Fairview Park Master Plan as defined in November, 2008.
• Give the citizens of Costa Mesa a voice in determining whether the development of a project beyond the As Built condition of Fairview Park shall be allowed or not.  In this case "As Built" means the amenities and alterations that have been built in Fairview Park as of the effective date of the ordinance.
• Ensure that the Costa Mesa officials provide timely, accurate and unbiased review of any such proposed development or change to Fairview Park.
• Ensure that the Citizens of Costa Mesa receive all necessary and accurate environmental and relevant information needed to cast an informed vote on any such proposed development or change. 

OPPOSITION MOUNTING ALREADY
It will come as no surprise that opposition to this initiative is already mounting, even though - in theory - nobody has yet seen it.  That's kind of how it works, isn't it?

WHY?  HERE'S MY GUESS
Although I've not spoken with any of the proponents of this initiative about WHY they felt it was necessary, the actions over the past couple of years make it pretty easy to figure out.

THE STACKED FAIRVIEW PARK CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
For example, the very obvious attempt to ramrod playing fields into at least part of Fairview Park using the stacked Fairview Park Citizen's Advisory Committee as a tool demonstrated to many observers that some currently in power wish to plow under large parts of Fairview Park and install any manner of recreational amenities.  During those meetings at least 90% of the folks who attended and spoke to the committee preferred Fairview Park to remain in it's current state.  Dr. Richard Mehren, (shown here with vice chair Steve Smith) the man who is largely responsible for The City purchasing Fairview Park originally and the chairman of the FPCAC until he abruptly resigned in protest at a meeting near the end of their deliberations, is a participant in the group sponsoring this initiative.

THE INFAMOUS "DG TRAIL"
The destruction of the vernal pools by replacing a user-defined trail by overlaying a decomposed granite road is another perfect example of this kind of ill-regard protected habitat is held in the eyes of some in power.  That intentional, misguided effort has resulted in nearly $20,000 in remediation and the ill-will of the United States Fish and Wildlife Department.  That debacle is not yet over - we're still waiting for the other shoe to drop - which could mean the removal of The City's stewardship of Fairview Park and sanctions imposed on individuals involved.

EDUCATE YOURSELVES
I'll keep you informed on this issue as it moves along.  As is the case with the Smart Growth initiative, I suggest each of you read it and try to understand it BEFORE signing the petitions that will be making their way around town.  You can find the Facebook page for the sponsoring group HERE.  The contact person for this group is Larry Courter who can be reached at lcourter@fairviewparkadvocates.com.  Their mission statement reads as follows:

"Our Fairview Park Preservation Alliance mission is to sustain Fairview Park as an open space, undeveloped, natural park, for public enjoyment in perpetuity. We strive to preserve, enhance, and protect Fairview Park for present and future generations."

THE DAILY PILOT STORY

For more information read Brad Zint's story in the Daily Pilot, published an hour ago, HERE.

Fairview Park Committee Goes On Hiatus With A Dull Thud

OPTIMISTIC FLOOR PLAN
Arriving a little early at the Victoria Room of the Neighborhood Community Center last night for the most recent - and maybe final - meeting of the Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee I was surprised by the optimistic number of chairs arranged for the event.  You can take the time to count them from this panorama shot, but my best guess was that just over 100 seats were available for attendees.  Fewer than half that many were actually used.

SMITH AT THE HELM...
Vice Chairman, now identified as "Acting Chair", Steve Smith kicked the meeting off following the roll call which saw member Anna Vrska absent due to travel complications - she's stuck in Munich - with a glib statement that "the rest of us are here because we didn't have a good excuse."  Nobody in the "crowd" of fewer than 20 people at the time laughed, which kind of marked the way the meeting would proceed.  The remaining other six members of the committee were present: Smith, Ron Amburgey, Terry Cummings, Dennis Popp, Lee Ramos and Frank Davern.  Council Liaison, Mayor Pro Tem Jim Righeimer, was absent and his alternate, Sandra Genis, showed up well into the program.  A footnote: former Chairman Dr. Richard Mehren attended the meeting and sat quietly observing the proceedings near the front of the room.

...AND STAYED THERE
Smith then addressed the issue of possibly electing a new Chairman, citing the fact that this may be their last meeting for at least a year.  Nobody nominated anyone else, so Smith proceeded to conduct the meeting.

MEJIA PRESENTS...
We then heard the Staff Presentation conducted by Parks Project Manager Bart Mejia on the "field" related issues that the staff had been working on since January - the February and March meetings were canceled.  Unlike in previous meetings, there would be NO vote by the committee as to whether they would recommend them being forwarded to the Parks and Recreation Commission or not.  The three issues that would be presented were:

 Mejia would just present the staff report and that would be that.

OVERVIEW AND CONSTRAINTS
He began with an overview of the Southeast Quadrant of the Park - the final remaining chunk of land to be considered.  He then spoke briefly of the Constraints that were faced when considering placing fields of any kind in this quadrant.

BURROWING OWLS
He spoke of the biological resources thought to be part of this section of the park, including the burrowing owl and other species.

POSSIBILITIES
He then went through several slides showing possible sites for playing fields within the existing infrastructure - mainly the Orange County Model Engineers tracks and buildings.

FEASIBILITIES AND IMPACTS
Based on the staff analysis he presented the following thoughts about the feasibility of certain types of fields in the existing configurations:

GRADING THE ENTIRE SITE
He then went through the scenario if the entire Southeast Quadrant was to be graded to overcome some of the topographical constraints that currently exist, and the Model Engineers infrastructure was to be relocated.

"IF"..."AND"...
The result was the following configuration, which he stated would be the best use of the land IF fields were to be considered AND if funding could be found to do it. As you can see, this configuration provides parking along Placentia, relocated the Model Engineers facility slightly, and includes (1) a synthetic turf field, (2) two youth ball fields), (3) a multipurpose field overlaying the ball fields and (4) two soccer fields.

IMPACTS AND COST
The impacts to the Master Plan are shown below.

THAT'S ALL, FOLKS!
And that was that!  Following the short - ten (10) minute - presentation by Mejia, Chairman Smith said, "And that fulfills the requirement assigned to us by the council." He told us the PowerPoint presentation would be available online shortly and we moved on without comment from any of the members.  It was bizarre, since this analysis took many, many hours of staff time to prepare and has the potential to make the greatest impact on the park, yet none of the members were permitted to make any kind of observations.  I found myself thinking about just how frustrating this must be for the staff, which has toiled for nearly two years on this project.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Smith then opened up the meeting for Public Comments, limiting each speaker to two (2) minutes each.  From my vantage point I got photos mostly of backs of heads, so I'll just try to give you a short summary of what most speakers said.  Let me say right up front that 20 speakers - about half the number in the room -  addressed the committee in two segments because Smith botched up the first segment.  Of those speakers, only two were in support of playing fields anywhere in the park.

Mary Spadoni led off with a quote from member Ramos from a Feet To The Fire Forum last fall in which he said he wanted to keep the park as it is, and accusing him of lying to the public in a campaign because he voted to proceed with the analysis of playing fields on the Southeast Quadrant.

Jay Humphrey briefly thanked the committee and staff for all the work they'd done and said he was looking forward to the committee reconvening in 2016.  He encouraged them to continue to be involved with the consultant hired for the update of the Master Plan, and to look into the acquisition of the Fairview Developmental Center property.

Gary Stickle, a professor from UCLA, spoke of the protected species and the Native American artifacts, calling Fairview Park our "Stonehenge".

Patricia Martz - a frequent speaker at these meetings - observed that "capping" of the area to make fields was inappropriate because they are sacred burial grounds and kids shouldn't be playing on burial grounds.

Terry Koken stepped up and chided Popp about his birthday, then stated that Fairview Park should be left the way it is.

Lynn Redmond spoke about the project his son, Christian, was completing in the park - replanting native plants, and thanked those who supported the project by helping and contributing.

Beth Refakes thanked the committee for their efforts, but suggested that we had the cart before the horse because we had not done a needs assessment first.  She suggested that if the decision was made to move forward with playing fields, particularly in light of the probable costs, then the issue should be placed before the voters.

Cindy Brenneman also stepped up and said the park should be kept natural.

Ann Parker chided Ramos for lying to the people and suggested that he was just a plant by Mayor Mensinger and Righeimer on the committee to sway it toward playing fields.

Gay Royer spoke of her personal experience with development on Native American locations.

Kim Hendricks said no data had been presented that showed a shortage of playing fields and said the committee failed to listen to the public.

Lou Desandro identified himself as "the other side" - one of those in support of playing fields in the park.  He said those speaking didn't represent the majority of residents, then suggested that the Southeast Quadrant be converted to playing fields, "because the rest of the park is natural".

Steve James, a professor from Cal State Fullerton, suggested that the Native American sites are too precious to be defiled, and that the park should remain natural.

Cindy Black identified the committee as "tools" - of the council and suggested that Ramos and Davern didn't know anything about the park when appointed.  She suggested that big campaign contributors - "Argyros, Segerstrom and Buck Johns" - should provide some cash to identify other sites for playing fields.

Margaret Mooney also cited Ramos campaign comments and noted how quickly folks were supporting lighting, but said it should be done at other venues, not Fairview Park.

Robin Leffler thanked the committee for their work, then observed the lack of a needs analysis and suggested that the committee should remember they are to serve all the people.  That took us to 7:00 p.m.

FORCED TO DO THE RIGHT THING
A half hour later, just as the meeting was about to close, Smith was forced to permit four other speakers to exercise their time because of his screw-up.  When originally challenged about it his response was, "It's not my problem!"  Not very "leaderly", to say the least.

Anyhow, a pair of soccer moms stepped up with their two little girls in tow and pleaded for the park to remain natural.  The children spoke, too.

John Rubright - an AYSO supporter and the only other "pro-fields" speaker - stepped up and chided those who wanted to keep Fairview Park natural.  He chided the OCME site, stating that it "was not natural".  Rubright has spoken before to the committee and each time he doesn't serve his side well because he doesn't present a compelling argument for more fields.

Cindy Black stepped up (again) because Smith had screwed up earlier on the  final agenda item and refused to let the public speak to it.  She said 'No" to the trail.

The final public commentor was self-described Soccer Dad and AYSO referee, Kevin Shannon, who strongly recommended that Fairview Park be kept natural.

EAST FAIRVIEW CHANNEL TRAIL
Back to 7:00 p.m.  The final item on the agenda was the consideration of a possible East Fairview Channel Trail.  No member indicated an interest in discussing it and Smith failed to permit public comments on it but the committee voted, 5-1, to have the staff prepare a study!  They won't hear about this for a year.  This was a major boneheaded move on many levels and showed a tremendous lack of leadership on Smith's part.  Interesting, since he has been openly critical of former Chairman Mehren's leadership but did virtually nothing to help him for the past nearly two years!

CUMMINGS IS CORRECT
As the committee began winding down it was time for Committee Members comments and Cummings led off with a prepared statement.  He observed that the February and March meetings had been canceled and he didn't know why.  He observed that Mehren and Eckles were gone, so the committee was down to seven members from nine.  He observed Senate Bill 639, which placed Fairview Developmental Center in play, was in the works and that the city should be considering that venue for any new playing fields.  He made four points:
1 - The FDC property would be free of environmental or cultural complications.
2 - It would be a great project for new State Senator John Moorlach to champion.
3 - Sports Fields should be made a priority for the property and the consultant dollars for the Master Plan should be diverted to investigating the acquisition of the FDC property.
4 - Leave the existing Master Plan in force and adjourn to 4/1/2020.

AMBURGEY
Ron Amburgey had nothing to say.

POPP
Dennis Popp expressed disappointment in the personal attacks.

RAMOS
Ramos said he was suprised that it became "Lee Ramos Fan Night", referring to several critics.  He said he does believe in passive parks and criticized member "Varska" - he meant Anna Vrska, but added a vowel to her name - for taking up staff time demanding statistics.    He defended his knowledge of the park by stating he walks it three days a week.

DAVERN
Davern, who replaced deceased David Stiller midstream, responded to criticism by Cindy Black, indicating he DOES know about Fairview Park, having hiked "280 miles" there.  He said, to her, "I've yet to see you there."  He said he formed his opinion about the need for more fields by talking with the people he encountered in the park - "mostly Latinos" - who said they need playing fields.  He said 99% of the residents don't attend these meetings.  Well, duh!

SMITH
Smith then said, "The real losers in this year-long delay are the kids of the community."  He cited the need to continue moving forward, particularly with the school district, to find more fields.  He thanked the City staff for their hard work.  At that point, as he was about to adjourn, we had the followup Public Comments.

UNCLEAR FUTURE AND THE BROWN ACT
Then, at about 7:30, the Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee folded up its tent and departed.  Nobody knows when - or even if - this group will meet again to discuss the future of Fairview Park.  And, since the committee has NOT been disbanded, the members are still governed by the Brown Act, so if, for example, Ramos, Popp, Amburgey and Davern gather and discuss this issue they will be violating the Brown Act.  The City Council should disband this committee to remove that burden for the unknown period of time into the future and, if necessary, re-constitute it in the future.

SOME THOUGHTS
A couple observations.  This committee was hastily-created by a council majority intent on finding a way to develop playing fields in Fairview Park, and stacked the membership toward that end.  I doubt if they, the council, actually thought it would take nearly two years to reach this point, and then to basically have nothing they were looking for to show for all the time and effort.

PREMATURE
This effort - which was premature at best, because there was no data presented at ANY TIME to demonstrate the need for more playing fields anywhere, much less in Fairview Park - should not have been launched in the first place.  The update of the Master Plan of Parks and Open Spaces was pending and this effort should have been subordinated to that process. 

VAST MAJORITY OPPOSE FAIRVIEW FIELDS
I've attended almost all of the meetings of this committee and among the things that have been consistent is the ratio of members of the public who spoke out against playing fields versus those who stepped up to ask for them.  The numbers were overwhelming from the very beginning.  One would think - with the organizational skills of the youth sports groups - that they would have eventually rallied THEIR troops to present THEIR side of the issue to the committee.  That effort was feeble to the point of being almost non-existent.  Where the heck were they?

WORK THE RIGHT PROBLEM
I'm NOT saying we don't need more places for kids to practice organized sports, and actually to just "play".  In recent months the pro-fields groups have uniformly acknowledged that the shortage is in "lighted" fields for kids to practice - not "game day" fields on which to compete.  Well, if 10% of the effort expended with this committee had been spent working with the school district to hammer out an agreement about field use and lights thereon, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

WORK ON FAIRVIEW DEVELOPMENTAL CENTER
In my view, THAT is where our municipal energies should be aimed right now.  And, I agree with Terry Cummings - the City should be making EVERY effort to line up our ducks toward acquiring the Fairview Developmental Center property when it becomes available - and NOT to just have it become more congested, rabbit-warren type housing that we're seeing sprout up all over town like mushrooms.

SO LONG, FAREWELL...
So, farewell to the men and woman of the Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee.  All of you - current and past members - worked long and hard and actually DID accomplish a lot over the past 20 months.

...AND THANKS
And a HUGE thank you to Ernesto Munoz, Bart Mejia, Yolanda Summerhill, Fariba Fazeli and the rest of the City staff for the thousands of hours spent on this effort.  Good job!