Anger Management - Who's Next?

YANKIN' HIS CHAIN
Well, it certainly has been an interesting few days here in the Land of Newport-Mesa. I've managed to provoke a man who very much resembles my theoretical character, Your Neighbor, into writing not one, but two blog entries aimed directly at me, here and here. Any day is a good day when he's unhappy with me. I think he's just peeved because he fancies himself an ace reporter and I managed to scoop him on a couple issues in the past week or two. Of course, he's never happy when I point out the failings of his Anointed One, our supreme leader, the mayor. That means he stays peeved a lot.


MAD MAYORS A DEUX
I ticked off the current mayor and a former mayor with my commentary about the bogus plan to directly elect the mayor of our fair city and how it went down in flames, here.



BUGGED BEVER BLUSTERS
Then, a friend pointed out an entry on the Daily Pilot blog purportedly posted by our resident court jester, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Bever, in which he threatens me with legal action. For your reading pleasure I've copied and pasted that entry below. This comment was the fifteenth and final one posted at the end of the recent commentary, here, co-signed by Mayor Mansoor, Bever and Councilwoman Wendy Leece published in the Daily Pilot online on 6/30/07.

Eric Bever wrote on Jul 8, 2007 8:20 PM:

" Mr. West again incorrectly states: "The only voices they listen to are those of their tight knot of westside buddies and one guy from Mesa North. All other voices are just ambient noise to them." MR. WEST, YOU ARE COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY MISTAKEN. We listen to all who have a viewpoint to share regarding city issues. At council meetings we all listen to every person's comments. West’s oft-repeated incorrect statements like the above only confirm his complete lack of credibility. Mr West, you are hereby informed. Your continued promulgation of this incorrect claim shall constitute libel. "

As usual, Bever knows not of which he speaks. When he tossed his hat (and pony tail) into the ring as a politician he opened himself up to criticism and ridicule, when appropriate. Unfortunately for him, "when appropriate" seems to come around quite often. For example, in this very instance he sets himself up for criticism, not only by me, but by anyone with the slightest knowledge of the legal system. If he, as an elected official, continues to threaten me - or any other resident of this city - he might find himself at the other end of that legal system he has used as a threat, for harassment and abuse of his power. He obviously feels he's a very clever fella, so he will likely realize the error of his ways and think twice - or three times - before printing such a statement in the future. I hope so - he has a lot to lose.

CROWD "FIRED UP"
Then, I think I've managed to make more than half the people in Costa Mesa, including some good friends, angry at me with my commentary in the Daily Pilot today, here, responding to their columnist, Steve Smith's column on Tuesday, here. I won't bore you with the details of our little spat about fireworks in this city - you can read both pieces for yourselves - except to observe that he shouldn't poke a beast in the eye with a stick and expect it to continue to sleep peacefully.


IN SUMMARY...
All in all, it's been a very interesting and productive week here at the old Cauldron. A week ago I was watching "bombs bursting in air" during the Independence Day celebrations. Tonight, I can almost hear the "blood vessels bursting" around town. Yep, it's been a productive week. To all of you still ticked-off at me tonight, please remember this. What you read here are only my humble opinions. Take them for what they're worth. (I heard that, Andrew!)

Liberty Is Alive And Well In Costa Mesa Today

What a way to start Independence Day!

All that "bombs bursting in air" stuff is going to take a back seat to the events of the Costa Mesa City Council meeting in the early morning hours of July 4th, 2007

At the end of the meeting, the last item to be discussed was the subject of whether or not to place before the voters the question of a directly elected mayor. This discussion began at 11:55 p.m. and went on for a half hour before the issue was finally voted upon.

The item was placed on the agenda by Mayor Allan Mansoor at the request of former mayor Gary Monahan, who served this city for twelve years on the council, including multiple terms as mayor. As it turned out, Monahan was the only person who spoke in favor of placing this subject on the ballot this morning. All other speakers, including former mayor Sandra Genis, spoke opposing the concept. The few other citizens who spoke, each of whom were respected community activists, said, basically, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it!"

During the debate on the dais the issue looked like a slam dunk to be placed on the ballot, particularly since Councilwoman Linda Dixon was absent from the meeting. Mansoor made a motion to do exactly that - have the issue placed before the voters on the ballot at the primary election on February 5, 2008. This, coincidentally, would be the most costly solution - probably costing the city in the neighborhood of $200,000. Councilwoman Wendy Leece, the barnacle on his rump during the past election, seconded our young jailer/mayor's motion - demonstrating for about the zillionth time that she has no mind of her own.

The debate was heated between Councilwoman Katrina Foley and the mayor, particularly when she pressed him on the issue of term limits for the directly elected mayor. He hadn't included any mention of that in the motion to be placed on the ballot, even though he was quite specific that he wasn't interested in additional compensation for the position, nor was he interested in any additional enumerated powers - like the power to appoint commission and committee members. Finally, after several questions like, "Do you support term limits for a directly elected mayor?" the closest he would come to an answer was that he didn't like term limits.

Earlier speaker Jay Humphrey pressed the issue of the additional powers, stating that, while Mansoor wasn't interested in the additional powers, other future directly elected mayors may be - and this decision would provide them with the power.

Mansoor championed his issue weakly. When pressed to explain why the city needed this after fifty-four years, he didn't have a response. He said it would provide more "clout", but speakers reminded him that clout from half the six Orange County cities that have a directly elected mayor came from their size, not the mayor.

Finally, at 12:25 this morning, the vote was taken. The result was 2-2! Tie vote, motion failed! Mansoor and Leece voted yes - Foley and Mansoor's buddy, Eric Bever, voted no! The look on Mansoor's face was priceless as his head snapped to the left in a classic double-take, looking at Bever as if to say, "What the heck is going on here?!"

I have no idea what happened to cause Bever to vote against his pals on the dais, but he sure did make the right decision. Maybe he was peeved because he was rebuffed by his buddy a couple times earlier in the meeting. Once, for example, he kept trying to interrupt the debate on the CarMax project when the issue of a wall was being negotiated and Mansoor put him off you could hear him mutter an epithet. Or, maybe, Bever remembered that a couple years ago columnist Jim DeBoom once named him an "Eagle" and he picked tonight to finally begin acting like one.

So, regardless what happened with Bever tonight, the spirit of the day prevailed. As former mayor Genis - appropriately attired in a blouse resembling the American Flag - so rightly put it during her comments opposing the proposal, "I think it's quite fitting that we're doing this just at the very beginning of the Fourth of July, 'cuz two hundred and thirty years ago we said 'We don't need no stinkin' kings' and that's what I say here - 'We don't need no stinkin' kings!'" I couldn't have said it better myself. You could practically envision George Washington smiling.

On this Independence Day, I wish you all a safe and sane celebration. The spirit of liberty, hard won and painfully retained, is alive and well in Costa Mesa today.

Snapping Fingers, Monahan Lingers, Anti-Airport Wrath and A New Bike Path

You know, sometimes watching a Costa Mesa City Council meeting can be a little like watching someone riding the Tea Cups ride at Disneyland. The way some members of the council change their minds, you almost half expect them to dizzily stumble off the dais from all that spinning.

PLAN AHEAD? WHO, US?
As predicted, the Mansoor Majority on the Costa Mesa City Council decided Tuesday night to discard the Neighborhood Traffic Calming Program, previously discussed here. Instead of taking a proactive position and proceeding with the plan staffer Peter Naghavi had proposed to establish guidelines for implementation of traffic solutions when residents bring them to their attention, the council majority - using it's obviously limited grasp of management principles - decided to require the staff to just keep on chugging away, handling one problem at a time.

I'm not surprised at this outcome at all. It just demonstrated for us all exactly how much control our young jailer/mayor has over his two lackeys on the dais with him. Both Eric Bever and Wendy Leece were enthusiastic supporters of Naghavi's plan when it was presented at the study session in January. All it took was for Mansoor to snap his fingers and they did a 180 on this issue. No good reasons were given for this turnabout by either of them. I guess they want to be sure their pal, the mayor, doesn't forget them when campaign time comes around. After all, he's still going around building his war chest, so he'll have plenty of bucks to pass around.

There was a moment of humor in this discussion, though. At the end - once the mayor moved to stop further action on the plan and to receive and file the report and it passed 3-2 - he asked the City Manager, Allan Roeder, to have a report prepared briefly discussing potential solutions for Eastside streets Flower, Raymond and Westminster. Others chimed in stating that all those Eastside streets, including Broadway - much beleaguered by speeders in the recent past - Magnolia and 19th Street should be included. Because the staff had already wasted lots of time, money and energy on the Traffic Calming issue, Roeder responded that he'd like to have that in the form of a motion, so they were sure of the direction the council was giving this time. After some hemming and hawing the whole idea was dropped because Mansoor apparently realized that he was asking for exactly the kind of information Naghavi's plan would have provided! Hoisted on his own petard! Ya gotta love it!

MAYOR FOR LIFE?
Another interesting event occurred at the council meeting Tuesday night. You may recall that in an entry at the end of March this year, here, I speculated about the probability of there being a movement afoot to propose the direct election of the position of mayor. Well, Tuesday night former council member and mayor Gary Monahan peeked over the speaker's podium and formally asked for the council to consider putting on the ballot a measure to provide a mechanism to do exactly that - directly elect the position of mayor of our fair city. This comes as no surprise to me - I've heard rumors about this for months. What surprised me is that the request came from Monahan and not the mayor. Of course, Monahan wants his old job back. I wouldn't be surprised if he thinks it could end up being a lifetime gig for him.

That whole idea brings with it many questions. For example, presently the mayor is selected from his peers on the council for a two-year term. I assume the directly elected mayor would have an automatic four year term. Also, would our current term limits regulations apply to that position? Maybe we should elect the mayor for only a two-year term... that would be fun.

Would this position be a full time job or a part time position like the current council seats? Monahan is already the only council member to qualify for a pension, which would be padded by his elected for, say, two terms of four-years each.

Also, even though the present position of mayor is largely ceremonial, the person on that throne does control the flow of debate to a very large extent and is in a disproportionately powerful position relative to his fellow council members. To put that much power in the hands of one person for as much as eight consecutive years creates a situation ripe for abuse and corruption.

This is going to be one issue that gets thoroughly vetted before it hits the ballot - maybe as early as the primary election early next year.

ALL IS NOT LOST
On a more positive note, among the other items considered Tuesday night, the council did pass a resolution opposing the use of the back nine holes of the Newport Beach Golf Course for parking and recommending using the current Bristol Street Mini Storage site as much-needed lighted playing fields.

They also agreed to fund a study to consider using the route along a couple flood control channels as a bike path across the city. This is another good move.