OC Register Editors Get It Wrong!

MISGUIDED PRAISE
This morning the editors at the Orange County Register published an opinion on their pages, which can be found online HERE, that postulates that "after decades of attempting to root out several problematic motels through coercion and police action" Costa Mesa stumbled upon a more "novel solution: the free market."

COSTA MESA MOTOR INN
In their piece they refer specifically to the recent decision by the operators of the Costa Mesa Motor Inn, the largest of the so-called problem motels and the one which racked up the greatest number of calls for public safety services in recent years, to demolish their 236-room facility and build a new "luxury" apartment complex with 224 units - 20 of which would be aimed at the "moderate income" demographic.  In Costa Mesa, that would be someone earning north of $100,000.

LOSS OF LOW INCOME HOUSING
One of the impacts of this decision is that it removes from the city inventory a significant number of housing units currently being utilized by very low or low income families and individuals.  Yes, city officials will correctly observe that those rooms were NOT counted as part of their government-recognized numbers, but the fact is that facility has housed many such individuals and families.

YES, THE "PROBLEM MOTELS" HAVE DETERIORATED
Nobody will argue that the Costa Mesa Motor Inn - a place where families headed for a beach vacation would book a room or two for a week or two back in the 1970s when it first opened - and many of it's contemporaries in the motel business in Costa Mesa, currently provide accommodations acceptable to most of us.  They have deteriorated into venues for folks temporarily - and sometimes not so temporarily - down on their luck.  They are the last bastion for many before becoming homeless or the first step up on their way back from homelessness.  Mayor Steve Mensinger has regaled us many times with his personal story of picking up Estancia High School students - young men on his beloved Eagle football team - who lived at that motel because it was the only place their families could afford.

YES, SOME ARE CRIME-RIDDEN
Yes, some of those places have become havens for crime - drugs, prostitution, etc. - which makes the plight of those forced to seek shelter there even more traumatic.  Yes, they need to be cleaned up.  Yes, the photos of some of the units presented in open council sessions shook us to the bone. 

BULLYING WAS THE MOTIVATION
But, please do not be wooed by the Register Editorial writers into going along with the premise that these property owners just magically recognized the free market as a solution.  They did not!  They have been bludgeoned into that decision by our elected leaders and their policies.

TARGETED GOVERNMENTAL TERRORISM
The owners of those properties have been the targets of a specific campaign of what amounts to governmental terrorism, spearheaded by Mayor Pro Tem Jim Righeimer.  Ever since he took a seat on the City Council he has made it very clear, in unequivocal terms from the dais, that his goal was to "help" the owners take a more realistic view of the value of their properties.  He meant they thought they were worth more than his developer-buddies wanted to spend to turn them into high density apartment complexes.

USING HIS POWER
Toward that goal - and he IS a goal-oriented guy - he unleashed the full fury of his position.  He created a brand new Code Enforcement entity, apart from the established Code Enforcement group, and had them charged with specifically making those "problem motels" the focus of their activities.   Police, Fire and Code Enforcement organizations began to pay special attention to those handful of businesses.  Fines were levied and they were publicly called-out for their perceived transgressions.  And yet that was not enough.

TIGHTENING THE SCREWS
So, with the warped "wisdom" so common with bullies, in January, 2014 he and the council majority crafted a special treat for those businesses - Title 14, Chapter VI of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code, HERE, the Excessive Use Of Resources Ordinance.  Those "problem motels" were assigned a specific number of calls for service they were permitted to make.  If those numbers were exceeded, the violating business would be subject to very significant fines.  One could almost feel the screws being tightened.

TOUGH DECISIONS
This forced some of those operators to make some very difficult decisions.  If there was an emergency - say a screaming woman in one of their units - and they had already "used up" their quota of calls, their choice was to either call the police or not, and let the chips - and the screaming woman - fall where they may.  And, of course, they kept their fingers crossed that nobody else would call, because it didn't make any difference WHO called - the penalties were the same.

THE LAST STRAW
Following months of intense focus by public safety organizations the Costa Mesa Motor Inn was the recipient of a special "inducement" a little over a year ago when the city decided to revoke it's Conditional Use Permit for long term occupancy rooms.  Straw, meet camel's back.

"LOCKDOWN"
In the case of the Costa Mesa Motor Inn, they accomplished a dramatic drop in calls for service by creating a virtual - and literal - prison at their establishment.  It is on "lockdown" 24/7/365.  Based on the testimony at the recent Planning Commission hearing where their request was heard, they chose not to become operators of a prison, so they're asking for code changes so they can scrape their property and build apartments - market rate apartments, except for those few designated for moderate income folks.  But don't for a second think that doing this was a voluntary decision.  One can take only so many punches to the gut in the form of fines before you begin to see the light - while you can still see anything.

RELOCATION PACKAGE TO BE OFFERED
And, to their credit, they have planned to offer a "relocation package" to current residents who continue to pay their bill and keep their room in good condition which will include 3-months rent reimbursement plus $1,500 if they stay until given eviction notices - likely to be next June for an August evacuation date.  This could amount to $4,500 - $5,500 each - perhaps enough to secure housing elsewhere, but not likely in Costa Mesa.  In an attempt to abrogate that issue, their consultant, former Costa Mesa Director of Development Services, Don Lamm, told the Planning Commission that only 17% of the current residents of the Costa Mesa Motor Inn are from Costa Mesa.

AMAZING!
I'm astonished that the editors of the most widely-read newspaper in our county would so openly condone the governmental bullying tactics that got the Costa Mesa Motor Inn to this point.  Their last sentence is "Let the market work."  I don't think they actually envisioned the market "working" with brass knuckles, but that's the reality of this situation. 

DEMONSTRATION THURSDAY
Whether you agree with this outcome or not, next Thursday, October 22, 2015, from 5-6:30 p.m., activists from the Costa Mesa Affordable Housing Coalition - distraught at the loss of those affordable units and with no official relief in sight - will demonstrate in front of the Costa Mesa Motor Inn to draw more public attention to this issue.  And, I suspect, they will present themselves to the City Council when this issue is heard before that body. 

WHO'S NEXT?
A final question for you to consider.  Who will be next in the cross-hairs for your elected leaders?  What kind of business will next be found to be undesirable and be targeted for extinction in Costa Mesa?  We already know industrial business owners on the Westside of town are feeling pressure.  We know that Roger MacGregor - one of the most respected small boat builders in the country and an institution on the Westside for decades - saw the handwriting on the wall, retired in 2013 and his daughter decamped much of the business to Florida.  His iconic former headquarters remains a sobering reminder of what an industrial powerhouse the Costa Mesa Westside once was.

Righeimer's Fuzzy Math

RIGHEIMER'S VICTORY LAP
Costa Mesa Mayor Jim Righeimer - apparently enjoying his victory lap following what appears to be a very slim 47 vote victory to retain a seat on the city council over his closest challenger, former councilman Jay Humphrey - paused long enough to be quoted in a Daily Pilot article by Bradley Zint, HERE.

OOPS, HE ONLY FINISHED SECOND!
Righeimer finished a distant second to former councilwoman and current Newport Mesa Unified School District trustee Katrina Foley.  His pronouncements don't mention that fact, although he does mention that he'll meet with Foley, quoting the Zint article, "to see what's important to her.  I think there are things we all agree on that we can get done right away.  And the things we don't agree on, we'll work on those issues and close those gaps... our job is to represent the whole city, not half."   One might infer that he thinks half the people in this election supported his candidacy, when only 21.3% of the votes cast went to him.  The other 79% went to other candidates.  Foley got more than 26.5% alone.  And, you know, there's something slightly right about the image of Righeimer shouting "I'm Number Two!"  Some of us have thought that for a long, long time.

MESSAGE?  WHAT MESSAGE?
Zint's article includes this observation, "Righeimer said his win is not necessarily 'a runaway,' but one that sends a message."  I agree - the result of this election DOES send a message - to him.  That message is that he DOES NOT have a mandate to continue to run roughshod over the residents of this city.  That message is that he must consider the views of others instead of his own, narrow political dogma.

CHECK YOUR MATH, JIMBO!
Righeimer is further quoted as saying, "The message is that the community is 50-50 on the important issues.  As an elected official, you have to look at that.  They didn't go out there and give you a mandate to do whatever you're doing and continue to do."  I'm not sure where he gets that "50-50" ratio, because the results of the election certainly do not support that view.  If you measure community sentiment by observing the results of the election, fewer than a quarter of the voters think he's the right guy to be sitting up on that dais.

AND DON'T FORGET THE CHARTER!
And, if you factor in the overwhelming defeat of his pet project, a municipal Charter, it's very clear that his views are not shared by the electorate.  Two years ago, the first time he tried to quick pitch his Charter scheme - Measure V - 60% of the voters rejected it.  This time around the voters looked at his second attempt to change the form of municipal governance to give himself even more unfettered power - Measure O - and rejected it by an even larger margin.  More than 63% of the votes cast on that issue rejected it.  Clearly, he doesn't listen to the voters of this city because one of his point persons on Measure O has been heard to state that if Measure O fails they will just gear-up for 2016.  Talk about arrogant disregard for the will of the people!

MANDATE?  ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
I suggest that Righeimer expunge the word "mandate" from his lexicon because he certainly DOES NOT have one.  He's codified ignoring members of the public by bifurcating public comments at council meetings to discourage dissenting views.  He has shown us that he listens only to a small knot of his hangers-on - many of whom have been rewarded for their loyalty with plum commission and committee assignments - and to his developer buddies who stand at the city border salivating all over themselves trying to build over-dense, under-parked projects.  So enamored is Righeimer with the thought of developing every single square inch of open space in this city that he and his cronies have codified away protections for the rest of us in the form of a Small Lot Ordinance - which did away with all those nasty variances, deviations and other changes his developer buddies had to deal with.  Now we see dense developments sprouting up all over town like mushrooms.

OBSOLETE OVERLAYS CHASE BUSINESSES OUT
They've been using the decade-old Westside Overlay plans to facilitate many of those developments, which has resulted in long-established commercial and industrial business operators choosing to leave town - taking with them prestigious businesses and high-paying jobs - rather than deal with the specter of residential neighbors adjacent to their noisy, aromatic industrial operations.

PUMMELING BUSINESSES
We've seen him and his pals brazenly state that they plan to force established businesses - so-called "problem motels" - out of business by slamming them with police, fire and code enforcement attention and the fines that would go along with it.  They established an "Excessive Use Of Resources" ordinance to discourage those business owners from calling for help when they have an emergency situation.  Then, they crow when those calls diminish, but the owners are still saddled with the crime and public safety problems - they just don't call for fear of exceeding their threshold of calls and thus incurring fines.  The apparent goal - stated from the dais - is to cause those business owners to "re-value" their properties so they could be sold to developers at a more reasonable price, who would then build equally dense, very profitable, developments.  Profit seems to be the only thing Righeimer understands - a very bad characteristic for someone heading up an organization the sole purpose of which is to provide SERVICE.

DECIMATING THE POLICE DEPARTMENT...
Righeimer and his pals have decimated the Costa Mesa Police Department, as indicated in a very recent article in the Daily Pilot by Jeremiah Dobruck, HERE.  Dobruck outlines the reduction in DUI enforcement in our city - once the high-water mark for such enforcement in the county.  Similar reductions in the Narcotics and Gang units have made our city much less safe.  Right now Chief Tom Gazsi and his command staff are holding things together, barely, through horrendous overtime hours being worked by the staff that remains.  In recent months we've seen early retirements and lateral moves to other jurisdictions by four dozen members of the CMPD.  Today, nearly 20% of the diminished authorized staff is unable to work because of illness or injury - some of that certainly due to the long, tough hours being required.

...AT THE WORST TIME...
This occurs at the worst possible time.  The early prison releases as a result of AB109, the passage of Prop. 47 that changes the penalties for certain crimes and keeps criminals on the streets, the growing proliferation of drug and alcohol rehabilitation (group) homes in our neighborhoods and the pending probability of the re-introduction of medical marijuana sales in our city will further tax our beleaguered police department.  And more officers will leave.  And Costa Mesa will be a less-safe city.

SHAME ON YOU!
To those 7,524 voters who marked their ballots for Jim Righeimer I say, Shame On You!  You're willing to let this man and his cronies destroy this city - to put potholes before public safety and to let outside interests, developers and out-of-town politicians, control the municipal agenda instead of doing what is right for the residents.  The mayor has said over and over that he wants to attract more young families to our city, yet perpetuates housing development that will not serve that demographic and creates situations where crime will increase.

RULES?  WHAT RULES?
And, he has demonstrated that he thinks rules are for somebody else, beginning with his bogus scheme to layoff more than half the so-called "miscellaneous employees" that fateful St. Patrick's Day of 2011... the day young maintenance worker Huy Pham jumped to his death from the roof of City Hall as he was about to be given his layoff notice - and then-mayor Gary Monahan chose to stay garbed in his kilt and pull beer taps at his bar instead of attending to distraught and grieving employees and residents.  That tragic event was a direct result of Righeimer's violation of municipal policy and generated a lawsuit that still ferments.

MENSINGER AS MAYOR?  ARRGGHH!

So, dear voters, you're saddled with a Righeimer-dominated regime for the next two years.  Monahan will be termed-out (again) and Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger will be up for re-election.  Some are postulating that Mensinger may be the next mayor.  That's problematic - for him.  That means he'll be required to focus his teeny attention span on city business and set his cell phone aside.  No more texting from the dais and ignoring the agenda.  If there's a positive side to that possibility, it's going to be VERY interesting for those of us who actually take the time to pay attention to municipal affairs.  He'll quickly demonstrate his ineptitude and it should make for some entertaining meetings.

STRAP IN...
Time for us to tighten our seat belts and get ready for more bumpy roads ahead - probably beginning with the meeting tonight where good old Mary Jane will come a'visitin' again.  See you there.

Motel Police Calls And Nuisance Complaints Plunge!

NEW ORDINANCES EFFECTIVE?
In a press release today, HERE, the City of Costa Mesa, via Chief Executive Officer Tom Hatch, announced that police calls and nuisance complaints for motels and hotels within the city have dropped dramatically during the first quarter of 2014 when compared to the same period last year.

MANY RECEIVE CREDIT
Hatch credits City Council members, Planning Commissioners, the city staff, the Orange County Health Care Agency, community members and motel operators for this drop.

GOOD NEWS, BUT...
This, of course, is good news - as far as it goes.  Unanswered is the question of how many calls that should have been made were NOT made because of fears of very significant fines that would be levied against the motel operators.  The press release tells us that the city has not YET begun fining motel operators, but if they had, the fines would have totaled $2,880.

CALLS NOT MADE?
I watched the many hearings on the new ordinances set in place to manage this issue and heard the concerns from the motel operators about how the fines might severely hurt their businesses.  Many of them speculated that law enforcement might not be called because of the potential for fines and serious issues may not be handled in a timely manner.  We have no sense of that part of the equation from the city press release.

RIGHEIMER'S GOAL...
Still lingering in the back of my mind is Mayor Jim Righeimer's many statements about his goal of making motel owners take a more "realistic" view of the value of their properties - something he intended to facilitate by hammering them with code enforcement fines and, now, fines for violations of the nuisance ordinance and excessive calls for service.  It was very clear that Righeimer felt some of the motel owners needed to be made to see the folly of valuing their properties to high, making them difficult for his developer buddies to acquire.

 WHAT ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEMANDS?
And, based on recent comments during Planning Commission meetings, it is clear that the intent is to reduce the number of long-term-stay units in motels to ZERO - a fact that negatively impacts those in the community who have no alternative source for affordable housing.

KUDOS, BUT NEED MORE INFO...
So, congratulations to all involved for making life easier for the public safety staff and, theoretically, making the community safer.  Perhaps some enterprising real reporter will help us with the other side of the equation - how many calls that should have been made were not because of the potential for "using up" their authorized number of calls?   That would be good information for us to know to fully assess the effectiveness of these new initiatives.

Council Meeting Wrap Up

IN GENERAL
Last night the Costa Mesa greeted Australian exchange students, approved the 2013-2021 General Plan Housing Element, heard plans for 89 dwelling units on the Westside of town, approved a fee for Excessive Use Of Resources and approved the addition to a dozen new employees to a critically depleted staff.  Read Jill Cowan's Daily Pilot article HERE.

MADE A CHOICE...
I attended the first hour of the meeting before departing for a memorial service for my dear friend, former Daily Pilot columnist Joe Bell.  By the time it ended the council meeting was over, so I'm gleaning my observations from the replay available online, HERE.

60TH ANNIVERSARY COSTS
Before I left, during Public Comments resident Sue Lester stepped to the speaker's podium and asked, actually demanded, that the city release the information dealing with the 60th Anniversary celebration, which had been promised by January 15th.  In response, CEO Tom Hatch said they hope to release the information by Friday, but then did a serious tap-dance, indicating that if they missed that date they would provide regular updates.  What?!  That sounds very much like he expects to miss the date, and not by a little bit.  I agree with Mayor Jim Righeimer's comment - it's time to get this overwith and behind us.  I don't agree that we should rush release the documents IF they are still part of an ongoing investigation.  Getting to the bottom of this mess is more important than early release of documents.

FINES FOR USE OF RESOURCES CODIFIED
The Excessive Use of Resources fine of $360 per call over the pre-determined number by the formula the staff created was approved on a 3-1 vote -  voted no.  It was amusing to watch Genis try to get specifics on just HOW this fee was reached.  Righeimer sparred with her on the dais - a completely inappropriate action on his part.  Her discussion was directed at Assistant CEO Rick Francis, but Righeimer hijacked the discussion.  One motel owner - a Costa Mesa resident and long-time operator - decried the fee and predicted a diminished number of calls for service by motel operators.  He feared a very serious event as a result.

ADDING A DOZEN STAFFERS
Around 8:30 CEO Hatch presented the request for a dozen additional staff members.  He told us that four years ago we had 611 authorized positions.  The current budget included 466 authorized slots, twelve of which were eliminated by the Fire Department redeployment model.  He indicated that technology and other efficiencies will allow a cut of another six slots, taking the total today to 454 authorized positions.  He indicated that we are currently at a bare minimum of staff to provide good services.  Also in his preamble on this item he said, "We're going to continue as we move forward to look at each position as it comes open to see whether or not we absolutely need to fill it.  We're going to look at restructuring at times if necessary.  And we're going to look at contracting, and using temporary help and consultant whenever needed help to fill in the gaps."  He also indicated that they'll be coming back to the council for more possible additions in Development Services.  He wants $600,000 in General Funds to meet the need for the 12 positions in this fiscal year.  In response to a question by Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger, concerned about getting back to the 611, Hatch told him that, with the approval of these 12 slots, we would still be 145 positions short of the 611 with a similar mission.

FISHING
Mensinger threw Hatch a couple curve balls when he asked about specific populations in specific police department slots - Park Rangers and Community Services Specialists.  Hatch dove into his budget book and gave him partial answers, which the impatient Mensinger seemed satisfied with... strange.

SCHMOOZING WITH THE CHIEF
Righeimer alluded to a conversations he has recently had with Chief Tom Gazsi - one of which apparently took more than 3 hours over breakfast one morning - to resolve issues.  Seems peculiar, since Gazsi works for Hatch, not the mayor.  Anyhow, the council passed the issue with very little discussion of other positions or the new department being proposed, 4-0.  It will be interesting to see who fills that brand new Assistant CEO/Administrative Services Director slot.

ASLEEP AT THE SWITCH?
By the way, sources tell me that the Buyer position is a critical addition.  Apparently, we ran with nobody at the wheel in Purchasing for a couple years except a well-intentioned and over-worked part time clerk.  I find myself wondering if that may have contributed to whatever problems there may have been with the 60th Anniversary Celebration costs - no oversight!  I wonder what the investigation will reveal on that subject?

CHARTER COMMITTEE MEETING TONIGHT
So, off we go to the Charter Committee meeting this evening at the Emergency Operations Center at 6:00 to hear, among other things, what Pension Oversight Committee Chairman Jeff Arthur has to say about possible solutions to our alleged pension crisis.  More on that later.

City Council Meeting Agenda

BUSY WEEK AHEAD
Tuesday, January 21, 2014 begins a busy post-MLK, Jr. holiday week when the Costa Mesa City Council will hold the second meeting of this new year in Council Chambers at City Hall beginning at 6:00 (A Closed Session precedes it at 5:00), and there's no way to predict the length of the meeting.  You can read the full agenda HERE.

WARRANT INFORMATION
The Consent Calendar is relatively short and looks non-controversial.  There is only one warrant, #2507, HERE, and not a lot on it to be anxious about.  I do note that we paid the following:

• Dougherty & Dougherty Architects $3,761.50 for design work on City Hall and PD entry way.  
• IntelliBridge Partners, LLC $10,069.51 for Purchasing Assistance (See New Business #3, below).  Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. $9,780 for professional services.  (They work on the homeless housing stuff for us).  
• Liebert Cassidy Whitmore $3,378.90 for legal services (they are our contract negotiators).  
• US Bank for $20,867.37 for Miscellaneous Procurement Card Purchases.  Seems like a lot of "miscellaneous" stuff.  
• Costa Mesa Conference and Visitor Bureau $167,025.42 for November.
• David Volz Design $28,268.39 for several items, including two charges for "Fairview Boardwalk Project" - a project that has been quashed by outside agencies.
• Beyond The Office Door, LLC $9,982.82 for a Chair, Sofa and Table!  For Whom?
• FTOG Inc $2,745.00 for an Interim Buyer (see NB#3 below).
• Scientific Resource Surverys, Inc. $9,905.50 for Fairview Park Cultural Assessment.

The previous agenda had five (5) warrants on it, which can explain why this one was a little thin.

GENERAL PLAN HOUSING ELEMENT

The only Public Hearing on the agenda is the approval of the General Plan Housing Element, something that MUST be done soon or we will be forced to revisit this issue every four years instead of eight, as is now the case.  That agenda item is HERE.  This work product is the result of numerous meetings, dating back to last spring, including several public workshops and a booth at the 60th Anniversary Celebration, at which community input was gathered. 

89 UNITS ON WHITTIER
There is no Old Business on the agenda, but there are three New Business items listed.  The first, HERE, is a General Plan screening request for an 89-unit development on Whittier Avenue which includes several live/work units.

RIGHEIMER'S BLUDGEON
The second New Business item is the so-called Excessive Use Of Services Ordinance - the club Mayor Jim Righeimer plans to use to flog "problem motels" into submission.  You can read the staff report HERE and the method of calculating the charge for that excessive use HERE.  At $360 a pop beyond your authorized number of calls, it won't take long for motel owners to feel pretty darn oppressed.  I'll be watching for the first lawsuits to hit us on this issue - probably no later than March.

 RE-ORG/ADD A DOZEN POSITIONS
The final item on the agenda, New Business #3, HERE, is the proposed reorganization and addition of a dozen new positions, including the creation of yet another Assistant Chief Executive Officer position!  This one will also hold the tag of Administrative Services Director.  I covered this item at length in a previous entry, HERE.  City Hall sure seems to be getting top heavy these days!  And, yes, this proposal would add four more police officers, bringing the total authorized to 136.  However, we're a long, long way from that many pairs of boots on the ground today.

READY FOR SOME FOOTBALL?!
This is just the first of several meetings this week.  I'll cover the others in another post.  In the meantime, sit back and enjoy the football playoff games.. I know I will!  Broncos over the Pats by 6.  Seahawks over the 49rs by 9.  Enjoy!