Charter Deja Vu All Over Again Tuesday

IT'S BACK!
Tuesday, April 22, 2014, the next installment of the grand Costa Mesa Charter adventure takes place when the first of two mandatory Public Hearings takes place in City Council Chambers at City Hall beginning at 7:00 p.m.  This is a special meeting, with only the latest iteration of a Charter on the agenda.  The announcement is HERE.  There will be a second mandatory Public Hearing in a month.  Tuesday the council will also discuss what kind of outreach, if any, will be made to the public about this Charter.  In theory - HA! - the council will eventually decide IF a Charter should be placed on the ballot in November.

REPORTS
You can read the staff report for the meeting HERE.  You can also read the March 18, 2014 staff report HERE and the text of the draft Charter HERE.

THE COMMITTEE
Over the past year I wrote about the efforts of the Charter Committee - that hand-picked group charged by the City Council (Mayor Jim Righeimer, actually, since this whole thing is his idea) - to craft a Charter for the city.  In point of fact, the night the committee was formed Righeimer said they were to determine if we needed a Charter, then later recanted that comment, even though it was the proper charge for the committee.  They should have determined, to the best of their ability and with strong staff support, IF there was a compelling need for the City of Costa Mesa to convert from a General Law City - which includes all the built-in protections of that form of government - to a Charter form of government.

(The Team - left to right - Sawyer Pendleton, Brenda Green, Mike Decker, Lee Ramos, Gene Hutchins, Tom Pollitt, Brett Eckles, Ron Amburgey, Kimberly Hall Barlow, Hank Panian, Kevin Tobin, Yolanda Summerhill, Kirk Bauermeister, Mary Ann O'Connell, Kerry McCarthy, Andrew Smith, Harold Weitzberg, Bill Fancher and Tom Graham.)

REMEMBER BELL?
Only a quarter of California cities are Charter cities - including the now infamous City of Bell.  You'll recall that the former City Manager of Bell, Robert Rizzo, was sentenced to a dozen years in prison last week for his malfeasance in office there, which places a resounding exclamation point on the potential problems with that form of government.  


IF, THEN...
IF the committee determined that there is sufficient need to consider a Charter form of government, THEN - and only then - would they begin the process of building such a document.  Instead, they plowed ahead on the assumption that, just because Righeimer said we should be a Charter city, they should create one.

HARD WORK
I attended almost all the Charter Committee meetings, so I observed the hard work that most of the members put in toward their goal.   Even though I don't believe there is ANY need for Costa Mesa to change forms of government, I do appreciate the efforts of that group, their facilitators and the staff to complete the task handed them.

SOME BIAS AT PLAY
Clearly, there were members who arrived at this assignment with a strong bias one way or the other and a few were willing to listen and discuss the various issues before making a decision.  In the end, though, the result was as I anticipated - a Draft Charter was presented to the council on March 18th, HERE, and that is the document that will be considered Tuesday evening.

UNFUNDED PENSION LIABILITY
Some items you may find of interest.  From the very beginning a year ago there were those on the committee who were adamant that a Charter was necessary to "fix" our Unfunded Pension Liability problem.  It became the mantra of at least one member, who ignored the agreed-upon rules of procedure to frequently slide white papers with his views into the meetings without prior agreement.  Well, there is NOTHING in this Charter Draft that "fixes" the unfunded pension liability.  In fact, Righeimer has admitted recently that there is really nothing the City can do - it's up to the State and CalPERS.

COUNCIL MEMBERS COMPENSATION
I've mentioned before - see the link above - that the committee spent large parts of many meetings over many months with many hours of staff time devoted to gathering and presenting information regarding council members compensation.  They finally, after much haggling, decided to include a $2,100 per month stipend for each council member - they currently receive $904.40 per month.  However, from that stipend any additional benefits - health care, life insurance, etc. - would be deducted.  Then, at the very last minute at the final meeting of the group, one of the committee members raised a red flag.  He said the voters might think they wanted to give the council a big raise, so he convinced his fellow committee members to eliminate that segment.  As it turns out, several members of the council would have had to actually PAY to be a council member if that plan had been adopted.  I was amused...

COMMUNITY OUTREACH?
It's going to be very interesting to see what kind of community outreach the city plans for this iteration of Righeimer's pipe dream.  Two years ago a meeting was held for that purpose and it was a disaster!  It may be helpful for you to check out an entry I wrote a year ago, which included a bibliography of items relevant to Jim Righeimer's Charter from two years ago and subsequent discussions about Charters, HERE.

REFUSAL TO LISTEN TO THE VOTERS
So, off we go again.  Once more, despite the fact that a Charter proposal was soundly defeated at the ballot box, Righeimer stubbornly refused to accept the clear mandate against that form of government and jammed this latest iteration down our throats.  I hope some of you will show up Tuesday to let him know how you feel about.  See you there.

It's "Charter Committee" Meeting Time Again

OFF TO CITY HALL AGAIN
In a couple hours I'll be off to City Hall again, for yet another meeting.  I'm NOT attending the latest meeting of the Pension Oversight Committee - it's a waste of my time, since they really don't have anything to do, but meet weekly to do it.




IT'S "CHARTER COMMITTEE" TIME AGAIN
No, I'm heading over to the second meeting of the Costa Mesa Charter Committee, which convenes at 6:00 in the Emergency Operations Center (EOC), next to the Police Department.  You can read the agenda for that meeting HERE.  You can follow the embedded links on that one for more information.

FIRST THINGS FIRST - OR NOT?
It will be very interesting to see how they handle the issue of whether this committee has been charged with, FIRST, deciding whether the City needs a Charter form of government, or if facilitators Kirk Bauermeister and Mike Decker will insist that THEY have been charged by whomever hired them with facilitating the committee to produce a charter without first answering that question, as was the case last time.  Item #12 on the agenda says, "Identify Potential Key Issues the Charter Might Address".  That emphasis on the word "the" is mine, since it appears to presume that there WILL be a charter.

TO PRAY OR NOT?
And, it's going to be interesting to see how they handle "Tea Party Tom" Pollitt's request for an invocation at this meeting.  It's shown on the agenda as a "Moment of Silence", during which attendees can apparently ask whichever deity they worship for some guidance - silently.



GUARANTEEING FAILURE
Last time the members were given a huge packet of information, including copies of charters from several other cities.  One member asked for a copy of the charter that was proposed last year - Jim Righeimer's Charter, that failed miserably at the ballot box.  So, if and when they begin to "cut and paste" pieces from other charters to form our charter, they will have available to them the most onerous pieces of the failed charter to include in their work product.  They might just as well put a gun to the head of the process, since those segments will all but guarantee the failure of this charter, too.

"NORMS"
One of the things this group accomplished at the first meeting was to establish "Norms", rules for their behavior and actions as they move forward.  Those are chronicled in the minutes that will be reviewed tonight and appear as #11.  Here's what they look like:

Will they "plop" or won't they?  Will they respect the opinions of others?  This is going to be VERY interesting.

ATTEND FOR THE WHOLE STORY
This meeting is open to the public, although you won't be fed, like the committee members will be.  If you're hungry, bring your own grub.  Still, since these meetings are not recorded on video tape, attending them is the ONLY way to get the whole story.  I'll give you my view of the events, but some of you don't like that very much.  Members of the real media may attend again and provide the facts as they see them.

A MARCH TO FUTILITY
So, off we go on this next step in futility.  These good people will work hard on the presumption that a Charter form of government is superior to being a General Law city - as we have for 60 years and have managed quite well.  If the council doesn't like their work product they will simply "fix it", by stripping out objectionable sections and inserting their pet ideas.  It will be THAT document that is presented to the voters.  The committee needs to frequently be reminded that most of the cities in California that are in deep financial trouble, even considering bankruptcy, are Charter Cities.  The Charter City form of government is NOT a bad form of government, but it makes it easier for mischievous leaders to play fast and loose with the best interests of the residents, as we all saw in the City of Bell fiasco.

BELL HORROR STORIES
By the way, in a curious quirk of coincidence, last weekend while my wife and I were out of town celebrating the Independence Day holiday, we met a fellow who is among those attempting to salvage the City of Bell from the quicksand that Robert Rizzo and the ignorant, inattentive and incompetent city council drove it into.  His stories makes one's head spin and, quite honestly, makes it hard to see how they will be able to dig out.  We'll see.  I sure don't want to see Costa Mesa headed in that direction.

Why You Can't Trust Righeimer With His Charter

PROMISES A LEXUS - DELIVERED A YUGO
OK, it's time to talk seriously about Jim Righeimer's Charter.  Make that "more seriously", because many of us who oppose his scheme to take over Costa Mesa government completely by trying to convince a typically disengaged electorate that his bogus plan will solve every single problem in the city by providing "local control" HAVE been taking it VERY seriously for most of the past year.  Righeimer is, essentially, promising us a Lexus and has delivered a Yugo.

BECOME A "BIG BOY"
From the very beginning, when Righeimer first proposed his plan in November of 2011, his motives were suspect.  He told us it was time to join the "big boys" - the 25% of California cities that have a Charter form of government.  He avoided mentioning that 75% of the cities in this state remain General Law cities and benefit from the protections from corruption that a Charter makes so possible.


IGNORES BELL
Righeimer shrugged off suggestions that Bell was a Charter city and it became the poster child for corruption around the country.  He blamed the Bell fiasco on one person, Robert Rizzo, but neglected to mention that a disengaged electorate permitted the conversion to a Charter city with a vote of only 450 voters in a special election.
 
FEAR AND MISINFORMATION
For nine months - that's been the gestation period of Jim Righeimer's Charter so far since he first hatched the scheme in November, 2011 - he has attempted to frighten the voters with the specter of financial ruin, when, in fact, things were getting better through the cooperative efforts of the staff and the fiscal management of the previous administration began to have an effect.  Along the way he conveniently ignored the fact that nearly all of the California cities that have recently declared bankruptcy are Charter cities.

MORELLO - BANKRUPTCY AN OPTION
In fact, Phil Morello, president of the Costa Mesa Republican Assembly and one of the most visible supporters of Jim Righeimer's Charter, may have actually let the cat out of the bag recently.  At the July 31st council meeting, when the council took the vote to place it on the agenda, Morello casually mentioned that one acceptable way out of our financial difficulties would be municipal bankruptcy!  More than a few of us who pay attention to these issues wondered if he might not have been telegraphing the plan if the Charter is adopted in November.  That would be the ONLY way Righeimer can get rid of the employee association contracts.

JUST NOT THIS CHARTER
I've said it before and will say it again - and again and again, if necessary - I am NOT necessarily against Costa Mesa becoming a Charter City.  The problem is THIS Charter, and the lack of safeguards included to head-off a Bell-type situation.  It was clear from the outset when Righeimer first charged contract City Attorney Tom Duarte to return with the details in writing of what it would take to convert our city from a General Law city to a Charter city, that he had an agenda.  Then he, himself, did all the work by cutting and pasting snippets from other city's charters in a patchwork that blended his own, personal political agenda and the lack of controls mentioned earlier.
 

 HE JUST DOESN'T LIKE RULES
From the first day Righeimer became part of the government of our city - when he was appointed to the Planning Commission by then-mayor Allan Mansoor despite the fact that he had failed to meet the application deadline and after having lived in our city for only a few months - it was obvious that he didn't like all those nasty rules that he had to follow.  When Mansoor appointed him in what certainly looked like an act of political patronage for the help Righeimer and his buddy, Dana Rohrabacher, gave to him during his re-election campaign in 2006, the handwriting - graffiti, actually - was on the wall.  The Orange County Republican Party, skippered by Scott Baugh, was ready to take over our city and had massaged the dim and gullible Mansoor as the preamble to that effort.

MENSINGER APPOINTMENT LOCKED IT UP - NOT!
Righeimer ran unsuccessfully for City Council in 2008 and when he was finally elected to the City Council in 2010 - the first time he was actually elected to something in his political life - his frustration with the rules became even more apparent.  After he facilitated the appointment of his pal, Steve Mensinger, to the City Council he apparently thought he had all he needed to take over - a 4-person majority on the council.  He was wrong, of course, because even a super-majority has to follow the rules.

PREMATURE LAUNCH
When he and Gary Monahan hatched (no offense to our City CEO, Tom Hatch) their outsourcing scheme at Monahan's pub and launched it prematurely by issuing layoff notices to more than 200 municipal employees on St. Patrick's Day, 2011 they made a major gaffe - several, actually - that has resulted in millions of dollars in litigation costs and has done immeasurable damage to the reputation of our city.  And Huy Pham jumped from the roof of City Hall.  And then-mayor Monahan chose to continue to pour beer for his customers rather than see to the needs of the employees of our city.

AMBITION AND UNION-HATRED DRIVES HIM
All this because Righeimer has a long-standing hatred of unions and has spent much of his political life trying to crush their influence.  In his haste to start tossing municipal employees out the door he and his pals forgot to follow the rules.  This has become a familiar theme.  The great irony of that outsourcing fiasco is that, if they had actually just followed the rules last year, it is possible that a big chunk of their outsourcing scheme might have been consummated by now.  Instead we, the taxpayers and voters of this city, are paying one of the most expensive law firms around, Jones Day, nearly $500 per hour with NO CAP on it.  In the fiscal year that ended June 30th we had paid them nearly $1 million and that tally isn't complete yet.
 

UNWILLING TO NEGOTIATE
So strong is his union hatred that it has virtually rendered Righeimer incapable of considering any kind of serious negotiation with the employee associations in our city.  NOTE:  They are NOT unions - they don't have the right to stage job actions, for example.  Even though both the police and fire departments are seriously understaffed, the Righeimer-led council refuses to permit hiring replacements or to fill the pipeline with new folks to cover anticipated retirements.  They demand a second pension tier be established BEFORE replacements will be approved, yet have refused to consider serious offers made by both bargaining units.  And, they've spent over $40,000 on a labor negotiator in just a few months to facilitate their plans.  As a result, every resident, visitor to our city and business within our borders are at much greater risk.  He is not only willing, but apparently eager, to place our public safety at risk to further his political future.

MORE ABUSE OF POWER
There are many, many examples of his attempts to abuse the power of his office, but the last time the council met - in a hastily-called "emergency" meeting to "clean up some administrative issues" - we saw just how dangerous he will be if HIS charter passes in November.  That meeting - covered on this blog and in the local media - demonstrated the lengths to which Righeimer and his pals on this council will go to hide the truth from the voters of this city.  It was called with only hours left before the deadline to submit the paperwork to the Registrar of Voters and at a time that left NO time for the opposition to re-frame its argument against the charter - their deadline had passed.  By approving the elimination of a reference to "no-bid contracts" in the Ballot Descriptions, Summary and Enumerations of Powers section that is required by law to be included in a charter proposal, Righeimer and the council demonstrated their disdain for the voters - even more than they've been showing in recent months.  They know that the voters will NOT, in all likelihood, read the entire text of the charter.  They'll depend on that summary to tell them what they need to know - and it doesn't do that now.
 
3 MONTHS AND COUNTING...
We now have 13 weeks until the election.  During that time there will be, so far, five (5) candidate forums at which Jim Righeimer's Charter might be discussed.  One of the meetings, on September 5th, is dedicated specifically to that subject.  I fully expect to see the proponents of the charter attempt to manipulate the facts and, perhaps, flat-out lie to the public about this issue.  They will almost certainly demonize those opposing it.  I encourage each of you to pay attention, attend as many of those events as you can or watch the taped version on CMTV - each will be covered.  This issue is too important to just casually stroll into the voting booth and flip a coin.  It is the second-most important decision the voters of this city will make - the vote to incorporate nearly 60 years ago being the first.  We'll try to help you understand the issues and the candidates as the campaign season move along. 

TRUST AND A PROMISE NOT DELIVERED
As Daily Pilot columnist Jeffrey Harlan and former city executive and frequent council critic Perry Valantine have reminded us in recent weeks, this is really a matter of trust. So far, Jim Righeimer has failed that test.  Remember, he promises us a Lexus and has delivered a Yugo - with him at the wheel.  Vote NO on Jim Righeimer's Charter.

Of Planning Commissioners, Charters And Business License Fees

MORE FUN IN THE SUN AHEAD
It's going to be another interesting week in the land of the Newport-Mesa.


 
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Monday, July 9th, the Costa Mesa Planning Commission will hold its monthly meeting at 6:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers at City Hall and will have a couple very interesting items on the agenda.  It could be a short meeting.

WIRELESS TOWERS
They will consider an ordinance to apply some municipal regulation to the installation of wireless towers in the public right-of-way, HERE.  This seems to be an essential piece of regulation because of the proliferation of wireless communication.  This photo shows the "unregulated" tower installed not too far from my Eastside home recently.  I refer to it as a "super suppository" for very obvious reasons.
 
 
 REPLACING JIMMY FITZY?
Of more importance, in my view, is the agenda item dealing with candidates to replace resigned Planning Commissioner, Jim Fitzpatrick.  The commission, after getting the "who's responsible for what" issue out of the way, will evaluate the candidates and make a recommendation to the City Council for a person to replace Fitzpatrick and serve out the remainder of his term - which ends in January, 2015.  Here's the list of candidates.  You can read all about them in the staff report, HERE.

Byron de Arakal
James Kane
Marshall Krupp
Paul Loubet
Jeff Mathews
Andrew Pham
Jonathan Zich

WHO ARE THESE GUYS?
Some of those names are very familiar and others are complete unknowns.  Reviewing their applications you'll find that some seem to be VERY qualified while others are not.  It will be VERY interesting to see how much partisan politics plays a part in this selection.

 
BUSINESS LICENSE FEE STUDY SESSION
Tuesday, July 10th, the Costa Mesa City Council will have an interesting evening.  Right off the top, at a new start time for Study Sessions at 5:00 p.m. in Council Chambers, they will tackle the issue of a possible Business License Fee increase.  You can read the staff report, including attachments showing comparisons to local communities and the current system compared to the proposed plan HERE.  I find myself wondering if anyone in City government has spoken with the "big dogs" in town - the Segerstroms, Ikea, the new SoCo Collection and representatives from the Harbor Boulevard of Cars?  At the top end, the fees would increase from $200 per year to $10,000!  Yes, the discussion will be lively.

JIM RIGHEIMER'S CHARTER - AGAIN
Then, beginning at 7:00, the council will hold the second and final public hearing on Jim Righeimer's Charter.  The staff report is HERE.  There seems to be no new information - it's the same old unacceptable Charter that Righeimer crafted by himself to meet his own personal political goals.  It is almost certain that he will use his time during this "hearing" to vent his spleen about the recent Vista court decision and to use the recent Stockton bankruptcy and the possible similar fate for Mammoth Lakes to frighten the voters into supporting this bogus document.  I put that word, "hearing" in quotes because this council may "hear" this item, but they won't be "listening".  NOTE:  I used this image of Righeimer and Bell's discredited City Manager, Robert Rizzo, not to imply that Righeimer is dishonest - I don't know if he is or not - but to demonstrate the mischief that can happen with a poorly-crafted Charter.

 MORE TO COME LATER....
There's much more to say about things that happened during my brief holiday hiatus - the dramatic jump in violent crime and the new council candidates, for example - but I'll do that in another post soon.