MY TAKE ON THE 11/8/22 MUNICIPAL ELECTION

HERE WE GO AGAIN - ANOTHER ELECTION!

My city, Costa Mesa, California, like many others in our state, is in the midst of campaign season for city, county, state and national elections.  On November 8th we will choose three city council members and a mayor, chime in on a very important municipal ordinance, plus vote for members of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District, Mesa Water District and the Orange County Board of Supervisors.  This is about the city races…

THREE SEATS PLUS MAYOR UP THIS TIME AROUND

There are three council seats available this time around.  The City began electing city council members by district PLUS a directly-elected mayor in 2018, having been extorted by a Malibu law firm into converting from at-large voting to “give our Latino population a greater voice in government”.  Costa Mesa is 37% Latino, most of whom reside in what is known as the West Side - those areas represented by Districts 4 and 5 - two of the seats up for election this time.  The remaining seat is District 3, an area roughly surrounding the Orange County Fairgrounds near the center of the city.

SOME NOT-SO-GREAT MEMORIES

Let's review some history so you can understand why I think this election is so darn important.

THE SCHEME TO HOLD CONTROL

When the city was forced to go to district voting the then-Republican majority, led by Jim Righeimer and Steve Mensinger, tried to quick pitch the process when putting the District voting on the 2016 ballot.  Instead of using the 5-District configuration preferred by 100% of the residents who attended all the meetings held by the demographer, they had him conjure up a 6-District and Directly Elected Mayor choice, figuring they could field a group of like-minded individuals to control the city council.  That was the only choice on the ballot for the voters to consider and it passed with 64.8% of the ballots cast.  In an interesting sidebar, the existing mayor, Steve Mensinger, was ousted, finishing 4th the race for 3 open council seats.  And, further demonstrating the ire of the electorate, controversial Measure Y was passed by an even greater margin - just over 68%.  That citizen-generated measure was designed to slow, or stop, development in the city by requiring a “vote of the people” if certain triggers were met.  Since that measure passed not a single project has moved forward - no “vote of the people” has been taken.

DISTRICT VOTING QUICK-PITCH BACKFIRED

In the next election - November 2018 - council members were elected by district for the first time.  Districts 3,4 and 5 - the same ones up for election this time around - chose new council members.  Interestingly, all three of them chose persons with a Latino heritage.  In District 3 United States Naval Academy graduate and former Navy officer Andrea Marr defeated a Republican-supported candidate soundly.  In District 4 Manuel Chavez - who grew up in that district and was the youngest council member ever elected - was chosen over a hand-picked contender favored by the council majority by a wide margin.  In District 5 local woman and MIT-graduate Arlis Reynolds defeated seated councilman Allan Mansoor - a former mayor and state Assemblyman - by more than 20 points!.  And, in the biggest news in that election, Katrina Foley - who had been ousted as mayor by the majority in a bit of pure partisan politics just a few months earlier - soundly defeated the woman who replaced her, long-time councilwoman Sandy Genis.  That was a stunner and certainly made the point that the voters had had enough.  

TRYING TO RUN THE CITY LIKE A BUSINESS FAILED - HUY PHAM DIED

One must think back on what it was like back then.  Republican activists - Jim Righeimer, Steve Mensinger, Gary Monahan and Allan Mansoor - controlled the city and made some very controversial moves.  For example, on March 17, 2011 - St. Patrick’s Day - their council decided to issue layoff notices to 213 “regular employees” - non-public safety staffers.  This was their idea of how to control large unfunded pension liabilities.  In a tragic result of their actions young maintenance worker Huy Pham, upon receiving his layoff notice, leaped to his death from the roof of city hall.  This was the darkest day in our city in my memory - 48 years and counting.  There was a huge public outcry and outpouring of sympathy for Pham’s family and his entire city family, too.  Monahan, who was mayor at that time, didn’t bother to come to City Hall to console grieving employees - he was too busy pouring green beer at his bar, muttering something like, “What am I supposed to do?  This is the biggest day of the year for me.”  That was a quote from a news reporter who sought comment from him as he pranced around his bar in his kilt.  Disgusting!  Even worse, courts later determined that the layoff notices were illegal!

POLICE/COUNCIL FRICTION

About that same time friction ensued between certain members of the City Council and the Costa Mesa Police Department.  The council members sued the Police Association’s law firm and the association.  That went on for several years, but was finally settled.  In the meantime, the toxic atmosphere created by that council provoked several members of the Costa Mesa Police Department to abandon their jobs, choosing to either retire early or bail out to another police jurisdiction.  For more than 8 months the Righeimer/Mensinger council refused to permit recruitment efforts to fill more than 50 vacancies.  It’s been more than a decade since all that was going on and we still have not achieved proper police staffing levels.  That same council decided that the A.B.L.E. helicopter program - a joint venture between Costa Mesa and Newport Beach that provided police helicopter support for both cities and was a model for all municipal helicopter programs nationwide  - should be disbanded.  They proceeded to do just that, selling off the assets - 3 multi-million dollar helicopters - and reassigning the pilots back into patrol duties.  That was another low-morale moment in the CMPD.  This group also decided to privatize both the police jail and street sweeping services - causing more layoffs.  It was rumored that the successful contractor for the jail services was operated by family members of Jim Righeimer.  That unfortunate experiment has failed and the jail is, once again, under control of members of the CMPD.

MANSOOR’S “ICE” PLAN

Another bellwether of discord was Allan Mansoor’s scheme to deputize every single Costa Mesa Police Officer as an ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) officer so they could randomly snatch up members of our Latino community and process them for deportation. For his efforts Mansoor was anointed as an honorary “Minuteman”.  That scheme failed, fortunately, but it terrorized the entire Latino community to the point where they seldom expressed concerns about city issues.  That has changed under the current council.  Recently we’ve seen Latino’s bravely step to the speaker’s podium and air grievances.  They know they will be given a fair hearing on issues important to them and no longer worry about being hunted down like stray dogs in the street and deported.

A TOXIC, ANTI-RESIDENT ATMOSPHERE

The atmosphere in our city during those years was very tense.  That council decided that they were tired of hearing residents stand before them during the Public Comments segment of their regular meetings and gripe about issues - things that were important to the residents - so they bifurcated the public comments.  Only the first 10 people in the queue could speak early in the meeting.  Any remaining speakers had to wait until the very end of the meeting - sometimes midnight or later.  Few speakers stayed around that late.  At that time we saw several highly skilled senior staffers choose to retire early instead of dealing with the atmosphere created by that council.

WHAT’S MY POINT?

Well, in the four years since the core of the current council was elected - those choices clearly sent a message to the Republican establishment with the ouster of Mansoor and Mensinger and the rebuffing of Genis , who was soundly thumped as a directly-elected mayor by Katrina Foley not just once, but twice - a lot of important things have happened in our city and it’s appropriate to talk about how they were handled.

HOMELESSNESS

The city, for years, has had a growing homeless population.  The current council found a way to manage that issue by first contracting with a local church to provide temporary housing until a new facility could be created.  They then found and purchased an industrial building not far from John Wayne Airport and created a 70-bed shelter and worked out a deal with the City of Newport Beach to use 20 of those beds for a fee.  That system is working.

COVID-19

More than 2 years ago the hellish Covid-19 pandemic hit us, just as it did in every other city in America.  Our council, led by the tireless Mayor Katrina Foley (who has earned your vote for her seat on the Orange County Board of Supervisors, by the way) and John Stephens as Mayor Pro Tem, helped provide the leadership to get out ahead of this issue before any other Orange County city.  Right off the bat they rejected the Governor’s scheme to house 60 infected people from an airliner in northern California at the under-used Fairview Developmental Center - right in the heart of our city.  They crafted emergency ordinances to govern mask-wearing, short-term rental assistance, rules to keep covid-affected renters from being evicted, and much, much more.  And, they made the tough decisions and managed to keep a balanced budget without tapping municipal reserves.

LACK OF HOUSING

Recently the State slammed our city with the demand for us to plan for 11,760 new dwelling units during the next 8 years (now 7 years), then told us our “Measure Y”, constraints passed by the voters in 2016, effectively created a roadblock to preclude the city from completing a required satisfactory Housing Element.  The failure to do so would cause the city to be penalized $100,000 per month, become ineligible for ALL State grant funds and - the worst part - lose all local control over development in our city - the State would take over.  So, with that gun to our head, in January the council appointed an Ad Hoc Committee of Mayor Pro Tem Marr, Councilwoman Reynolds and Councilman Jeffrey Harlan - a land planner and lawyer - to assess this problem and come up with a solution.  That effort resulted in what is now known as Measure K.  This ordinance, which is on the November 8th ballot, will basically de-fang Measure Y and thereby permit development of the much-needed (and State-demanded) new housing units, some of which will be affordable housing units.  To facilitate that action an Inclusionary Housing Ordinance is being crafted and will be presented to the council for consideration by December.

COMMITTEE ROUNDLY CRITICIZED

The Ad Hoc Committee has been roundly criticized by the people who conceived and marketed Measure Y, stating it would gut their product and “take away the vote of the people” on development decisions.  This, of course, is a flat-out lie!  Should Measure K pass next month ANY project submitted to the city for consideration will have to run the gauntlet of bureaucratic hurdles - including approvals from the Planning Commission and City Council.  At every step of the way residents or other interested parties have the opportunity to express themselves before those official bodies and/or write to them in detail with their concerns.  Measure Y was passed 6 years ago and, as I mentioned above, not a single project has been placed before the voters.  Any developer - every developer - will simply take their development dollars and expertise elsewhere when faced with spending tons of money and time, only to be informed that they now must go before the vote of the people.  Our city will shrivel under these constraints.  Our major commercial and industrial corridors will atrophy and our economic vitality will wither.

CITY COUNCIL CHOICES

I wrote all the above to make a point. This time around Mayor John Stephens, a former council member who was appointed mayor when then-mayor Katrina Foley was elected to the Board of Supervisors, is being challenged by Republican John Moorlach - a partisan who has held positions on the Board of Supervisors and in the State Senate.  Moorlach’s record in those roles is undistinguished, although some tout him as being a financial expert because he predicted the Orange County bankruptcy two decades ago.  Stephens, on the other hand, has been an instrumental part in leading Costa Mesa through a series of crises including the homelessness issue and the covid pandemic.  In both those cases Costa Mesa has led the way among all Orange County cities in dealing with those issues effectively, in great part due to the wisdom, energy and leadership of John Stephens.

OTHER SEATS

In this election only the seat occupied by Manuel Chavez is safe - he has no opposition.   Andrea Marr is being challenged by a Republican-supported newcomer, John Thomas Patton, who brings absolutely no governance experience to the party.  And Arlis Reynolds is being challenged by Rob Dickson, a former Righeimer/Mensinger sycophant who was part of “the problem” back in those days as he rubber stamped the council majority wishes while on the Planning Commission.  They have joined the creators of Measure Y to oppose Measure K - something our city MUST HAVE - and spread the lies provided to them.  This is not only disappointing, but very dangerous for our city.  Should all three of these men be successful that would change the balance of power on the City Council and combine them with lazy, hapless, hopeless, partisan hack Republican councilman Don Harper - the worst councilman in my memory - and we could be right back where we were nearly a decade ago.  This is NOT GOOD for our city..

ABOUT THAT “UNFUNDED PENSION LIABILITY”

Candidates Moorlach, Dickson and Patton constantly harp about the “unfunded pension liability” facing Costa Mesa, as though this is something this council created and fails to “fix”.  Well, this is not a new issue - every city council in the state that subscribes to the CalPERS retirement system is facing the same thing and THERE IS NOTHING THAT CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT at the local level.  The problem is the way the system was conceived.  It is managed by a board that understands little about municipal finance.  Their plan is to receive a 7.5% annual return on their investments to keep their ship afloat.  However, if the markets in which they play fail to generate that kind of return they simply bill their subscribers - hence the “unfunded liability”.  The only way this actually becomes a problem for our city, or any city, is if every single employee decides to retire simultaneously.  Then there wouldn’t be enough cash in the till to fund the retirements.  Of course, that’s not going to happen.  Predecessor  councils - the Righeimer/Mensinger group, for example - decided to “solve it’ by putting a paltry million dollars each year towards the debt, knowing full-well that would do nothing at all to solve the problem.  Their other solution, mentioned above, was to lay off over 200 employees, and we all know how that turned out.  This “issue” is really a “non-issue”.  It’s a straw man to attempt to burnish the candidacy of Moorlach, a theoretical finance expert, and the others are just piggybacking the issue.  If Moorlach has a solution let him speak out for the public good.  Otherwise, he should quit barfing up that politically-charge rhetoric.

ABOUT THOSE DARN DEVELOPERS

Some non-incumbent candidates are making a big deal about campaign funding by “out of town developers”.  Well, yeah!  The city is in desperate need of housing - affordable housing, for the most part - and the people that build that stuff are…. DEVELOPERS!  Of course they want to see a council in place that will give them a fair hearing, and that will help with the negative quagmire Measure Y has created.  All that jabbering about “out of town developer money” is a smoke screen, designed to inflame the voters into voting against Measure K.  The smartest guy I know on land use and planning issues, current Costa Mesa Planning Commission Chairman Byron de Arakal, has expounded frequently, loud and clear, why Measure K is critical to the future of our city, and has given us example after example of what happens if we don’t comply with the State rules.  That’s good enough for me.

THE BALL IS IN YOUR COURT, NEIGHBORS

Yeah, I know… you’re saying to yourself, “But Geoff, you’re a lifelong Republican and you’re asking us to support Democrats!”  That’s true.  I’m asking you to support proven, rational, clear-headed, non-partisan leadership who have effectively guided our city through multiple crises simultaneously instead of a trio of partisan hacks who march to the tune that caused chaos in our city in the recent past.  Because the future of our city is at stake, I implore you to not be bamboozled by those who lie about the issues.  Please re-elect Mayor John Stephens, Mayor Pro Tem Andrea Marr, Councilwoman Arlis Reynolds and Councilman Manuel Chavez.  And, if you hope your children and their children will be able to afford to live in Costa Mesa, please vote YES ON MEASURE K. 

Light Agenda Faces Planning Commission Monday Night

A THIN AGENDA AWAITS
The Costa Mesa Planning Commission meets for the first time in a month for a meeting that should get everyone home early on Monday.  You can read the agenda, HERE, for the meeting that begins in City Council Chambers at 6:00 p.m.

FORMER COMMISSIONERS TO BE RECOGNIZED
While such segments are very unusual for the Planning Commission, I'm happy to see that a presentation is scheduled early in the meeting to recognize former Planning Commissioners Rob Dickson, Jeff Mathews, Colin McCarthy and Tim Sesler, shown above with current Chairman Stephan Andranian.  While I often disagreed with those four men as a group and as individuals, one cannot deny their service to our community.  It's completely appropriate to recognize them for that contribution.

PACIFIC ARTS PLAZA DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT REVIEW
There are three (3) public hearings on the agenda.  Item #1, HERE, is the two-year review of the Pacific Arts Plaza (formerly Two Town Center) development agreement.  This one shouldn't take long, even if the new commissioners have questions.

SMALL LOT DEVELOPMENT AT 245 KNOX PLACE
Public Hearing #2, HERE, is yet another small lot ordinance project at 245 Knox Place at the corner of Westminster Avenue, replacing an existing single story residence and a detached garage with two two-story residences.  The project appears to comply with all codes.

SMALL LOT DEVELOPMENT AT 1933 CHURCH STREET
Public Hearing #3, HERE, is one more small lot ordinance project at 1933 Church Street.  This proposal will replace a single story residence and detached garage with two two-story residences.  It appears to meet all codes and asks for no variances.

A THOUGHT...
Permit me an observation...  Since the City Council has recently opted to exclude the Planning Commission from the review of the dammed-up Sober Living Home appeals and applications, this group will find itself with much less to do than anticipated over the next few months.  That decision was a mistake, in my opinion.  This commission is the appropriate body to be the first stop in the appeal process and the City Council is going to find itself buried in those issues for the next few months.

Anger, Frustration Mark The Planning Commission Meeting...

...AND THAT WAS JUST AMONG THE COMMISSIONERS!
Yes, it was a short, tense Planning Commission meeting tonight.  Yes, there was anger, frustration and disappointment in the City Council Chambers, and probably felt most strongly on the dais, as all five commissioners clearly showed their anger and frustration at not being able to hear the four remaining items on their agenda.  Three others had been pulled last week.

LAWYER ABSENT DUE TO FAMILY MEDICAL EMERGENCY
According to information provided by staff during the short discussion of the first item, it seems the lawyer for all of the applicants tonight had some kind of a family medical emergency and so all the applicants and the lawyer requested that all the items on the agenda be continued - and they were!

ANGRY CROWD HEARS BAD NEWS
At the very beginning of the meeting, before what I've been told was a packed house, Chairman Rob Dickson mentioned that there was a possibility that each of the items on the agenda - all sober living homes - would be continued, but they wouldn't know for sure until they began hearing the items.  The members of the public who took time out of their busy lives - again, for some of them - clearly were not happy with that news.

HELPING STANDING ROCK
Thirteen (13) members of the public stepped up during Public Comments to express their views on this situation.  Only one, Mary Spadoni, spoke on another issue - the recent community outreach to gather goods for the Native Americans at Standing Rock.  She used a clever video clip of a pooch to enhance her presentation for the sales of homemade dog cookies, the sale of which will be donated 100% to the folks at Standing Rock.

QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES
Many of my Eastside neighbors spoke tonight.  Katie Arthur spoke about the impact of the sober living homes on our neighborhoods, citing quality of life issues.  She encouraged the commission to be bold - to think outside the box and work together to get this issue resolved.

"ENOUGH IS ENOUGH"
One speaker told the commission she was appalled that they were considering continuing the items, advising them that these venues were all over the Eastside and that they were near areas earmarked for high density housing.  She told the commission that "enough is enough".

"SICK AND TIRED OF IT"
A local businessman angrily spoke to the commissioners, telling the commissioners they are not listening to what the people are saying, and that they - the people - are sick and tired of it.  He used the word "corrupt" without any details.

SHARED HORROR STORIES
Flo Martin spoke about personal issues and those of her relatives and neighbors in College Park dealing with the impact of sober living homes.

RESTRICT TO COMMERCIAL AREAS
A gent from Irvine who alleged having ties to Costa Mesa suggested closer attention be paid to the State Health and Safety Code and that sober living homes should be restricted to commercial areas.

PANDERING
Richard Russell, a frequent speaker, praised the commission - "you guys make good decisions" and refuted an earlier suggestion by a speaker that the city "invited sober living homes into the city."

CORRUPTION?
The final speaker, who didn't identify himself but proclaimed that he had previously worked for Solid Landings - a large sober living outfit in town - and painted a grim picture of those operations.  He said the operators take advantage of the families of kids in need of detox - claiming that they charged $30,000 per bed per month.  He claimed that the organization broke the rules by housing too many clients, then disbursing them when inspections were scheduled, only to return them later.

SESLER PLEADS FOR UNDERSTANDING
The Public Comment segment lasted about 25 minutes, then came Commissioner Comments and you could see the steam coming from their ears.  Stephan Andranian had nothing to say.  Tim Sesler acknowledged the passing of Jeff Arthur, Chair of the Pension Oversight Committee.  He then pleaded with the audience to understand that the commissioners were there to do the right thing, citing the fact that they all live in the city and raise their families here.

COLIN DEMANDS NUMBERS
Colin McCarthy also acknowledged Jeff Arthur.  He then asked interim Development Services Director Jay Trevino to check with the staff and come back with a number of high density projects this commission had approved in the past 4 years - again, attempting to refute claims made by earlier speakers.  He said he could only recall a couple.

MATHEWS SHOULD HAVE KEPT QUIET
Vice Chair Jeff Mathews was clearly peeved and he said he wanted one or two Code Enforcement officers assigned to doing regular, frequent checks on all the sober living homes in Costa Mesa.  He said if we don't have enough staff he wanted more to be hired.  He also complained about sober living homes being located in residential neighborhoods, defining it as "stupid" that they can be there.  I thought it was interesting, since all the guidance the city has gotten from our lawyers tell us to avoid inflammatory statements like that because it may bite us later in court - it shows an institutional bias against sober living clients - a class of people protected by the ADA and Fair Housing laws.  Usually Mathews just sits there and says nothing.  Tonight that would have been a good idea.

STAFF READY TO GO, MORE OR LESS
At 6:40 p.m. Interim Assistant Director of Development Services Sherri Vander Duessen began, with Deputy City Attorney Tarquin Preziosi, to discuss Public Hearing #1, the sober living home at 2041 Tustin Avenue - a couple blocks from my home on the Eastside.  It was this hearing that took the longest because the issue of the absence of the lawyer for the applicant was discussed at length.

SUMMERHILL KEPT THEM ON COURSE
As each commissioner expressed their anger and frustration it became clear that they REALLY wanted to move forward with the hearing, but the staff was firm in their advice against it.  Deputy City Attorney Yolanda Summerhill held a steady hand on the tiller, reminding the commissioners that it was critical that the applicant receive a fair hearing and that he not be denied due process.  And, of course, she was correct.   To do otherwise would have likely entangled us in lengthy, costly legal battles.

NO MAS!
Both Andranian and Mathews expressed the opinion that if they agreed to continue this item they wouldn't agree to subsequent continuances, even if the applicant's lawyer wasn't available.  Andranian opined that there are plenty of other lawyers out there.

VOTED TO CONTINUE
Summerhill reminded the commissioners that we need to take these issues step-by-step.  Finally, at 6:55, the commission voted, 5-0, to continue this item to a future date - undefined at this time.  The crowd was angry and many began to leave, so Dickson called for a short break - it lasted 2 minutes as the angry folks filtered out of the auditorium.

TEN MINUTES FLAT FOR THE OTHER THREE
When they re-convened they made quick work of the other three sober living issues remaining on the agenda.  It took less than 10 minutes to have each read into the record and to vote to continue them on 5-0 votes.  During the first couple several commissioners continued to grumble about it.

SHORT AND NOT VERY SWEET
At 7:05 p.m. - 65 minutes after the meeting was called to order - Dickson adjourned in memory of Jeff Arthur to the meeting NEXT Monday night, December 12th.  It's my understanding that they have a full agenda at that meeting, too. 

FRUSTRATION ALL AROUND, BUT THEY DID THE RIGHT THING
Here's my view on what happened tonight.  I certainly understand the anger and frustration expressed by my friends and neighbors - and by the commissioners, too.  I believe the commissioners had no other choice but to honor the requests for continuances, even though all were frustrated because a couple had previously been continued.  McCarthy, in an earlier meeting, opined that they were being "played" - manipulated by the lawyer.  That may, in fact, be the case.  However, Summerhill gave them good advice - all five of the commissioners have legal training - and they took it, although begrudgingly.

THE NEW CITY COUNCIL WILL HAVE THESE THROWN TO THEM
It's going to be very interesting to see how this all plays out over the next few months.  The staff has consistently recommended denial of these issues.  The can will be kicked down the road under the normal course of events to a brand new city council.  These hot potatoes will be dropped squarely in their lap, most likely beginning in January.  It's going to be very interesting.

ON JEFF ARTHUR...
On a personal note, I didn't know Jeff Arthur well, but did have several conversations with him and had a chance to watch him work on city committees.  He was a hardworking, decent man who brought intelligence and decades of solid business experience to his assignments for the city.  His presence on the Pension Oversight Committee will certainly be missed.  You can read Bradly Zint's piece on his passing from the Daily Pilot HERE.  Condolences to his family and his friends on this loss.  The following is a video clip from our pal, Barry Friedland at Costa Mesa Brief of a presentation Jeff made to the local Tea Party group on the issue of pensions.

Rancorous Marathon Planning Commission Meeting

7 HOURS, 45 MINUTES!
Wow!  Now that I've regained consciousness I'm going to try to give you a short summary of what happened last night at the Costa Mesa Planning Commission meeting.  It was one for the ages.  It began at 6:00 p.m. and, although the commission continued the four items on the agenda that were NOT sober living issues, they still didn't make it through the agenda.  Three sober living items were also continued to future meetings and the meeting still ran until 1:45 a.m. today!  Yes... I watched it all!  Yes.... I'm thrashed, but I'll give it my best shot.

SHORT-HANDED COMMISSION CONTINUES 4 ITEMS
The commission was short-handed - Colin McCarthy was absent.  Right off the bat Chairman Rob Dickson advised the audience - a packed house - that four items, #1, #2, #3 and #12, would be continued to a special meeting NEXT Monday evening.  The commission went through the process of officially "continuing" those items for the record and took NO testimony from the public on any of them.

ANGRY SPEAKERS TOOK AN HOUR
However, many residents of the College Park community were in the audience and they had been led to believe that their comments WOULD be heard last night.  Dickson angered them when he told them that they could use their 3 minutes during Public Comments - when non-agenda items may be heard.  So, 21 of the 27 speakers during Public Comments directly addressed item #12, the proposed development at 440 Fair Drive.  Public Comments took more than an hour to get through.

CONTRACT STAFF PROVIDED BAD INFORMATION
A sidebar at this point.  Last week I contacted City Hall when I saw the agenda included items to be continued.  I specifically asked about 440 Fair Drive because the residents have been jerked around on this development for months.  I was told, in response to my specific inquiry, that even though 440 Fair Drive would be continued to November 21st, members of the public WOULD be able to speak to the issue.  Not one mention was made about having to use their "Public Comments" time to do so.  This information was provided by one of the many consultants that now inhabit the Planning Department - not a knowledgeable city employee.  This was BAD staff work and it angered a lot of folks in the contiguous community.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
In addition to all the folks who joined the first speaker, Tamar Goldmann, and addressed 440 Fair Drive, several others spoke.   

Kim Hendricks reminded the commissioners of their job.   

Beth Refakes gave us a recap of the recent Trunks For Toys project at Camp Pendleton.  She and others from the Military Affairs Team took donated candy down to the children of our adopted Marine unit - the 1/5 Marines.

Steve Chan asked the three commissioners whose terms do not expire in January - Chair Dickson, Vice Chair Jeff Mathews and Commissioner Stephan Andranian - to join Commissioners McCarthy and Tim Sesler by resigning at the earliest possible date.  That was interesting.   

Mary Spadoni praised the grass roots efforts that accomplished the passage of Measures Y and AA. 

Mesa Water Board candidate Alex Reich thanked those folks who voted for him - and read a passage from my blog entry about the City Council meeting tonight.  Thanks to Alex for that.

JUMPING OFF THE SOBER LIVING HOME CLIFF
Then the commission began hearing the Sober Living issues before them.  This effort was spearheaded by Contract Deputy City Attorney, Tarquin Prezioni and Contract Assistant Development Services Director, Sherri Vander Duessen.  You will recall in my previous entry I observed that her contract is being extended at the City Council meeting tonight through next June - a contract that will cost the city $499,999.00.  She led the discussion by first giving a brief primer about the laws regarding Sober Living patients.

HAMPTON HOUSE
Public Hearing #4, the request for a Special Use Permit for a group home with 6 residents at 1180 Augusta Street, commenced at 7:20.  It took nearly an hour to wade through this one - the first of eight such issues to be heard last night.  Big time lawyer Steve Poulin - who represented several operators last night - began his night by observing that the Planning Commissioners were "creatures of the City Council" - I suspect that endeared him to them.  After a lengthy discussion and public comments by eight members of the public during which one, Steve Chan, encouraged the commission to NOT burden the new City Council with their actions, the commission upheld the Director's denial of the Special Use Permit.  This will likely be appealed to the City Council soon.

653 JOANN STREET
Public Hearing #5, a Special Use Permit for a group home with 6 residents at 653 Joann Street, began just after 8:00 and took about 35 minutes to handle.  The commission voted, 4-0 to uphold the Director's denial.  This also will likely be appealed to the City Council.

647 JOANN STREET
This item, operated by the same person as the item above, was given quick processing and was also denied on a 4-0 vote.

A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT 165 EAST WILSON
Public Hearing #7, a Conditional Use Permit (CUPs run with the land) for an all-male sober living facility with 11 occupants within 2 existing condominium units at 165 East Wilson.  This one got very interesting very quickly and took more than two hours to hear.  During that process we learned from the operator, local realtor Keith Randle, that he charged $1550 per month, per bed and it's an all-cash business.  This particular operation has 11 beds, including a house manager.  That would gross Randle around $15,500 a month - cash!  Randle told us none of it is paid for by insurance and that most of his residents are local, Orange County, men.  Seven members of the public spoke on this issue, a few of which were concerned that the CUP stays with the land.  Finally, at 11:20, the commission voted, 3-1, to approve the permit.  Commissioner Stephan Andranian voted NO.

READY TO DENY, BUT WAIT...
Following a break they began the hearing on #8, a similar facility to the one above with the same operator, at 2041 Tustin Avenue - a long rock-throw from my home.  After an hour-long hearing, which included comments by 10 members of the public, most of which opposed the operation, the commission was prepared to vote for denial, but there was no resolution provided by staff!  So, this issue will be continued to the meeting on December 5th for the final vote.

TWO MORE ITEMS CONTINUED
At this point, at 12:30 a.m.!, the commission polled the remaining applicants and it was decided to continue #9 to December 5th and #11 to November 28th. 

CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR 266 and 271 16th PLACE
Then, at the request of the applicant and speakers, public hearing #10, a Conditional Use Permit for a sober living facility with a maximum of 28 occupants at 266 and 271 16th Place.  The two separate units required two separate decisions.  This is an all-woman facility.  A major problem with this one is the proximity of each to the other - they violate our code, which requires 650 feet between.  Five speakers addressed this issue.  At 1:30 a.m. the commission voted to uphold the denial for the  reasonable accommodation, 4-0.  They then voted for the CUP at at 269 16th Place.  The vote was 2-2, with Sesler and Andranian voting NO.  That meant the vote failed.  In a subsequent conversation attorney Preziozi opined that because they both were so intertwined they could be appealed to the City Council together.

INTERESTING FACTOIDS
A couple observations from the meeting last night/this morning.  First, we learned from staff that Costa Mesa probably has 40% of the sober living facilities in Orange County.  Second, we also learned that there will be Planning Commission meetings for the next four weeks - November 21, November 28, December 5 and December 12 - due to the avalanche of these sober living issues.  Yikes!

The Case Of The Shrinking Agenda

REMAINING TWO SOBER LIVING ISSUES CONTINUED!

You will recall that I mentioned that the Planning Commission meeting Monday had an even smaller agenda than originally planned.  Well, it got shorter before the meeting actually began when the two remaining Sober Living Home appeals were snatched from the agenda, by the applicant minutes before the meeting began.  Seems he figured out that he needed legal representation at the meeting, even though he had been notified of the schedule on October 6th.  Chairman Rob Dickson announced the request for extension and asked the applicant, Richard Perlin, to explain the reasons.  The commission agreed to continue the hearing to a date certain - November 14th - and Perlin jumped up AFTER the vote was taken to opine that his attorney might not be available on that date.  Commissioner Stephan Andranian expressed what appeared to be the opinion of the other commissioners when he said the applicant had plenty of time to acquire legal representation and he was not willing to consider re-voting to extend this process further.  The November 14th date stood.

440 FAIR DRIVE CONFUSION
And, the meeting took an even weirder turn when several members of the public showed up hoping to address the proposed development at 440 Fair Drive even though that item was NEVER on the published agenda!  Seems the plan was to include it when the deadline for notification of neighbors approached, so notices were sent out, but the issue never made onto the agenda.  This resulted in several members of the public even angrier than they already were about this project.

GANAHL LUMBER EXTENSION
That left only one item on the agenda - Public Hearing #1, the request from Ganahl Lumber for a retroactive extension on the plan to move their business next door to a site next door.  That one was dealt with quickly as consultant Peter Naghavi explained the process and the delays with several layers of bureaucracy.  He said they will be ready to go before the end of the year.  The commission passed the extension, 5-0.

PUBLIC COMMENTS
Earlier, during Public Comments, a half-dozen members of the public stepped up to the podium.

Beth Refakes told the commission that the recent candy drive for the children of the 1/5 Marines was very successful and thanked the public for the support.

Steven Chan addressed the commission on the issue of the noise coming from the recently-opened night club, Holiday, near his home.  He called for the resignation of Chairman Rob Dickson for what he perceived as his unwillingness to follow state law when approving the project.

Then up stepped defrocked Planning Commission Jim Fitzpatrick, to thank the commission for all their hard work.  He told them he took time out of his busy day (twice) to express his gratitude for their efforts.  He also expressed disappointment in the residents who dared to criticize the commissions actions, which he described as having lack of emotional control.  Funny, he should re-read some of his recent Facebook posts if he's looking for lack of emotional control.  Fitzpatrick is one pathetic individual - a chronic underachiever.

Tamar Goldmann told the commission she and her neighbors were very disappointed and angry about the way the 440 Fair Drive project is being handled, particularly in the confusion about the noticing.

Richard Russell, a supporter of the current council majority, praised the commission and told them to stick to their guns in the sober living appeals.

An unidentified person also addressed the sober living issue, observing that there seems to be a concerted effort to make life difficult for the small practitioners - like the ones originally scheduled for this meeting.  She referred to what appeared to be preferential treatment given to a local realtor and campaign contributor in a similar situation not long ago.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS
During Commissioner Comments Andranian inquired about the noticing procedures with 440 Fair Drive.

Tim Sesler, who apparently removed the marbles from his mouth for this meeting, whined about the criticism leveled at the commission by speakers.  He said it was unethical and immoral.  He said it showed a lack of stability and professionalism.  Yes, sir... little Timmy, making friends whenever he opens his mouth.

Colin McCarthy also addressed the noticing issue.  He said, "We've come a long way."  Maybe, but there's clearly much room for improvement.  He then praised Sesler for his recent commentary in the Daily Pilot on the pension issue.  Of course, Sesler was wrong in so many ways that it's almost not worth the time to comment.

Dickson addressed Chan's concerns and said he's not going to resign.  He also addressed the overwhelming workload in the Planning Department and thanked the staff for their efforts.  He encouraged folks to call the Planning Department front desk at the number shown on this image.

Interim Development Services Director Jay Trevino addressed the noticing issue, indicating that the staff is working hard on improving the situation.

The meeting lasted exactly 54 minutes, finishing before 7:00 p.m.  Easy to do when 75% of your agenda gets tossed out!