Negotiation And Compromise Prevail

BIG DOG FLEXES...
New Mayor Steve Mensinger flexed his muscles and showed off the new speaker timer system last night as he went about changing the rules of the road for comments at future council meetings.  Brad Zint, diligent reporter that he is, beat me to the punch with his Daily Pilot coverage, HERE.

EFFICIENCY OVER FAIRNESS?
The issue was the final item on the brief agenda, but Mensinger seemed determined to run an "efficient" meeting.  The first time he said that word I began to worry about thoroughness and fairness being lost to efficiency.  That's still going to take some watching at future meetings.

ONLY ONE PUBLIC SUPPORTER
During the 50 minutes it took to vet Mensinger's proposal - which included changing the start time of future council meetings to 5:45 from 6:00, providing 40 minutes for Public Comments and limiting council comments and suggestions to 3 minutes per member -  a dozen members of the public spoke to the issue.  Only one, prodigal son Ken Nyquist, who made the 275 mile round trip down from Joshua Tree to address the council last night, was supportive of the plan.  All the others had problems with one or more of the elements of the changes.

WIDE RANGING CONCERNS
Complaints ranged from the inability of some speakers to drive from work, cook dinner for their families and still make it on time for Public Comments.  Others complained about the current speaker card system, which requires that anyone wishing to speak fill out a card before the first speaker begins.  Still others felt the council members should not be restricted to 3 minutes.  Others took exception to Mensinger's characterization that the Public Comments needed to be wrapped up so the council could address "The People's Business".  Several reminded him that Public Comments ARE the "people's business".

COUNCIL MEMBER CONSTRAINT NOT CODIFIED
Katrina Foley, as described in Zint's article, balked at the three minute limitation.  The council eventually agreed with her.  All committed to make their comments as brief as possible.

WHAT THEY ENDED UP WITH...
So, no 3-minute limitation for council members.  No requirement to submit speaker cards for Public Comments PRIOR to the first speaker beginning.  Speakers may submit their cards any time during that 40 minute period from 6:00 to 6:40.  Those who wish to speak but couldn't do so in the prescribed time may do so at the end of the meeting.  Speakers will still be limited to 3 minutes.  And, yes - future meetings will begin at 5:45.

HERE'S THE TEXT...
Here's the text of the ordinance without all the "Whereas" language.  I lined through the changed language as I understood it:
1.    The order of business and item matter descriptions for City Council meeting agendas shall be as follows:
(a)    Closed Session (as required) 
(b)    Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag 
(c)    Moment of Solemn Expression 
(d)    Roll Call and Call to Order
 (e)    Closed Session Report 
(f)    Announcements
(g)    Special Presentations 
(h)    Public Comments (up to 6:40 p.m., may be extended by the Mayor
or majority vote of the City Council) 
(i)    Council Member’s Reports, Comments and Suggestions (3 minutes
each, may be extended by the Mayor or majority vote of the City
Council) 
(j)    CEO Report
(k)    Consent Calendar 
(l)    Public Hearings 
(m)    Old Business 
(n)    New Business
(o)    Items Removed from the Consent calendar
 (p)    City Attorney’s Report 
 (q)    Adjournment

2.    The City Council will hold regular meetings on the first and third Tuesdays of each month at 5:45 p.m. If there are closed session items, the regular meeting will convene at 5:00 p.m. for consideration of those closed session items. Following the deliberation in closed session, the regular meeting will reconvene at 5:45 p.m.

3.    Members of the public desiring to speak during the Public Comments period will be asked to submit their speaker card at the beginning of the regular meeting prior to the first speaker.

4.    Members of the public desiring to speak on a consent calendar item will be asked to submit such a request on a speaker card prior to the start of the Consent Calendar period.

5.    A member of the public who timely submitted a speaker card but did not have an opportunity to speak during the Public Comments period will be given the opportunity to address the City Council at the end of the meeting.




NEGOTIATION AND LISTENING PREVAIL
So, the Big Dog got most of what he wanted and the public got a win, too.  No restrictions on council comments; ten more minutes at the beginning of the meeting for Public Comments - which may permit most of those intending to speak to do so - and the elimination of Righeimer's onerous, heavy-handed speaker card system.  We're going to have to adapt to the earlier start time, but, all things considered, it turned out OK.  Now we'll see how it actually works.

YOU BETTER FINISH ON TIME!
Before we leave this subject, up top I mentioned the new speaker timer system.  Well, according to those who actually do step up and speak, it's better than the previous system because it gives you a digital countdown so you can time your presentation better.  Good thing, too, because if you exceed the time permitted the new tone that sounds to let you know is loud and obnoxious - like a ship horn bearing down on you in the middle of the night!  It's kind of like aversion therapy - speak too long and you'll get an auditory slap on the wrists, except this tone is more like a punch in the face.

 HELLO, STEVE!  ARE YOU THERE?
As an aside, I had to chuckle when, in the middle of one of Righeimer's long rants, Mensinger's cell phone rang and rang.  We should make the dais a "phone-free" zone for the duration of meetings.  No wonder he has a hard time concentrating, for goodness sake!

NEW HOTEL, MORE DEVELOPMENT
There was other business, too.  New Business #1, the addition of the BLVD Hotel to the BIA was addressed quickly and approved.  #2, the screening request for a development at 2068 Maple Avenue received a thorough vetting before it moved on.  Former Development Services Director Don Lamm was the consultant on the project.  It will be back, before the Planning Commission, as the developer tries to shoehorn in 4 units on a tough-to-build-on lot.

BUFFOONERY ON PARADE

The Public Comments segment last night brought some drama of it's own.  The first speaker was our old pal, Tea Party Tom Pollitt, who used his three minutes to mangle his presentation of support to Righeimer and Mensinger in the recent arrest of two Private Investigators for crimes they allegedly committed against the Mayor Pro Tem and Mayor.  He mischaracterized the role of the activist organization, Costa Mesans For Responsible Government (CM4RG) as a "union organization, and mispronounced council woman Sandra Genis' name - referring to her as "McGuiness" several times.  And, he had the temerity to "apologize to Righeimer and Mensinger on behalf of the taxpayers of Costa Mesa" for the alleged events.  What nerve!  He has no authority to apologize for me to those guys for anything somebody may or may not have done.  He and his pals have assumed the mantle of a lynch mob.   The guy is really a dolt!  And to think that he actually ran for a seat on the Orange County Board of Education last spring!

MENSINGER AND THE DG PATH...
Perhaps the most interesting speaker was activist Cindy Black, who used a part of her time to read emails received as a Public Records Request regarding the Decomposed Granite path in Fairview Park that is still under investigation by US Fish and Wildlife.  The emails she read portrayed Mensinger as a major participant in the establishment of the path.  It apparently was his multiple requests to Director of Public Services Ernesto Munoz that launched the chain of events that resulted in a path wide enough to drive a truck on through vernal pools protected by the Federal Government.  In the correspondence she read that path was referred to as "Steve's Path".  It's my understanding that USFW will be moving forward briskly on this subject in this new year.  It's possible that the city will incur significant sanctions for our shoddy stewardship of that site AND it's possible that those responsible may have some personal legal liability, too.  We'll be watching this closely.

HARLAN ANDERSON HONORED
At the beginning of the meeting Mensinger made two (2) Mayor's Awards.  The first was to retired Boys and Girls Club stalwart Harlan Anderson.  A very nice video was played and he was presented with a proclamation praising him for his dedication to the youth of our community through several decades of service.

A NEW RESTAURANT
The second presentation went to a new Westside restaurant, the Boathouse Collective.  I don't recall this ever being done before, but my mind may be slipping.  Anyhow, the video showed a "hot new spot" on the Westside surrounded by industrial sites.  It's another of those "green" businesses that are being touted these days.

MEDICAL MARIJUANA SESSION TO BE CANCELED
Finally, we expected this meeting to be adjourned to a Study Session next Tuesday at which good old Mary Jane - Medical Marijuana - would be discussed.  As it turns out, that meeting will be canceled and a Special Closed Session will be held instead.  Nobody's talking about the subject of the closed session - yet.  Who knows - maybe US Fish and Wildlife is coming to slap cuffs on some folks?  Nah, I don't think so, either.  By the way, this issue generated just about the only strife on the dais last night.  Righeimer went on one of his rants about the Medical Marijuana issue and Foley followed-up by correcting the record.  She described Righeimer's summation as "factually and legally inaccurate".  During the discussion she referred to him as "Mr. Righeimer" and he immediately corrected her with a "Councilman Righeimer".  She replied with "whatever".  Actually, it should have been "Mayor Pro Tem Righeimer".  Want a little smile? 

A friend contracts that title as "M-P-T", which, if you try to say it, can come out "Empty"... Somehow, that seems very appropriate and I smile when I think of it.

Catching Up

VIDEOS TO WATCH...
Catching up on some interesting video now available to us for viewing after the fact.

COSTA MESA BRIEF CANDIDATE VIDEOS

Our "pal", Barry Friedland over at Costa Mesa Brief, captured the discussion by 2nd District Supervisorial candidates Allan Mansoor and Michelle Steel at the Newport-Mesa Tea Party confab last Thursday evening.  Each segment is just under 30 minutes long, but are certainly worth viewing - especially if you are searching for information to make an informed decision in the Primary Election in June.  You can watch the Mansoor segment HERE and the Steel segment HERE.  There are two other candidates running for that office, but apparently neither were invited to this event.  In fact, when I asked Tea Party Tom Pollitt about it earlier in the week, he had no clue

 about other candidates.  Then, again....

BARRY'S DOING A GOOD JOB
I must give old Barry credit.  He's providing excellent video coverage of important events in the City.  His coverage, for example, of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District Town Hall last month at which the proposed Organics Recycling program was explained, is quite good.  You can watch that one HERE.

HATCH ON CITY TALK
There's a brand, new City Talk segment available for viewing on the City website, HERE.  Host Dane Bora asks City Chief Executive Officer Tom Hatch a variety of questions about the current state of affairs in the city.  Viewing this clip will be thirty minutes well-spent.

In wrapping up the segment Bora asked Hatch a series of four questions.  The last one went like this:

Bora - "If you could grant one wish for Costa Mesa, what would that be?"

Hatch - "A more, ah, civil discussion about, ah, about, ah, moving this community forward.  We're doing some great things.  We have a lot of great people who care deeply and love this town.  Ah, we, ah, our tone and approach is, ah, is, makes it hard.  And, we have such strong opinions, and change is difficult and so, I hope we have more of a civil discussion moving forward." 

WHAT WAS HE THINKING?...
I've replayed that segment a couple of times.  I'm sure Hatch is correct - a more civil discourse could make it easier to move forward.  I found myself wondering just who he might have been thinking of as he haltingly uttered those words.  Was he thinking about the cadre of concerned residents who take time from their lives to study important issues, then present themselves before the City Council and other official bodies to offer their questions and views?

Or, might he have been thinking about some current elected officials who sometimes veer from the path of civility when addressing folks speaking to them, and other council members, as well?

Or, might he have been thinking about those of us who write critically about issues and events in The City?

Or, was he contemplating all of the above?

AN EARLY NIGHT TOMORROW?  WE'LL SEE...
Tomorrow's City Council meeting, which gives the appearance of being relatively brief, may surprise us.  Much depends on how many speakers take the time to exercise their right to address concerns with the council - even though Mayor Jim Righeimer continues to fine-tune his obstructionist moves to keep that from happening.  I'm predicting a departure by 10:25 p.m.  We'll see.

Progress And Angry Frustration Mark Charter Meeting

THE "DOCTORS" AT THE HELM
Nearly two dozen visitors observed as the Costa Mesa Charter Committee, facilitated by Dr. Kirk Bauermeister and Dr. Mike Decker, met again Wednesday night to continue the long, slow march toward having a document ready to present to the City Council by the end of February.  And the stress of their task is beginning to show.

The items discussed last night were:

• Outsourcing
• Sale of City-Owned real estate
• Unfunded Pension Liability
• COIN

JEFF ARTHUR ON PENSION LIABILITY
The agenda was juggled a little to accommodate a presentation on our current Pension situation by Jeff Arthur, Chairman of the Pension Oversight Committee.  Arthur presented a group of slides explaining pension jargon and some significant numbers.  As of 6/30/12, our unfunded pension liability is at $228,000,000.  He showed charts, none of which are suitable for duplication here, showing the growth of the obligation, and also mentioned some possibilities the Charter Committee may wish to consider for inclusion:

• Prohibit retroactive benefit increases
• Council supermajority for increases
• Vote of the people for increases

He also suggested that the City review PERS status annually and have PERS provide 30 year projections.

NOTHING TO BE DONE...
The committee discussed Arthur's numbers at length and speculated about things that might be done in a Charter and acknowledged that there is NOTHING they can do about the current unfunded liability.  They came up with a statement requiring voter approval for any increase in pension/other retirement and post retirement health benefits.  It's unclear just how that might be implemented, so it will be discussed further at the next meeting - on February 12th in Conference Room 1A at City Hall at 6:00 p.m.

OUTSOURCING
They moved on to Outsourcing.  Bob Ooten, current member of the Costa Mesa Sanitary District Board of Directors and a man with decades of experience managing operations with the Orange County Sanitary District presented his views on the value of Outsourcing earlier during Public Comments.

Following a lengthy debate the committee came up with the following language for the Charter on this issue:

The City may enter into a contract for any services unless limited by the constitution of the State of California.  The City shall periodically review its existing operations and services to consider whether said operations and/or services may be performed as, or more, efficiently and effectively by a third party.  Any contract entered into pursuant to this provision shall be ratified in accordance with the procedure set by the City Council. 

SALE OF PROPERTY
They briefly spoke about the Sale of City-Owned Real Estate and left the following statement to be discussed further, if necessary:

The sale, conveyance or exchange of any real property owned by the City shall require supermajory approval of the City Council.

ENUMERATED POWERS
They also briefly considered the following language for the Charter:

All powers of the City shall be vested in the City Council except as otherwise provided in this Charter.


POLLITT FLIPPED OVER "COIN"
The then moved on to COIN, Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger's much-ballyhooed and as yet untested scheme to improve transparency in labor negotiations,  and a discussion of whether it should or shouldn't be placed in a Charter.  At this point the tensions between some members that had been building began to manifest themselves.  Sharp comments between Harold Weitzberg and Kerry McCarthy and Weitzberg and Tom Pollitt marked the discussion.  Frequent references to "the unions" rankled Weitzberg and the comments seemed more political than helpful.  At one point Weitzberg corrected Pollitt's remark that a "union-backed council" approved recent pension increase decisions - reminding him that the council majority that approved those changes was not "union-backed".  Pollitt lost it!  His face turned beet red, he slammed his fists together, jumped up, turned briefly toward Weitzberg, then spun on his heel and stormed angrily into the small kitchen room and slammed the door behind him.  He returned about a minute later, apparently calmer, but left the meeting promptly after it ended shortly thereafter.  That was the worst moment of all the meetings so far and doesn't bode well for future meetings.

MORE ANGRY COMMENTS
Member Bill Fancher also complained to Decker and Bauermeister about being ignored, and that it took 20 minutes for him to be recognized to make a statement or ask a question.  I didn't see that happening, but he might have thought it did.  Again, another tense moment.  Clearly, the stress of this process is getting to some of the members.  Only Mary Ann O'Connell was absent tonight.

TIME TO TIGHTEN FOCUS
I suspect the next couple meetings could get interesting as the committee begins to tighten up the language they've created.  They've almost finished their agenda and appear to be on  schedule for that end of February date to present their work product to the City Council.  We'll see on February 12th.

SANITARY DISTRICT BOARD TO CONSIDER ORGANICS RECYCLING
Off to the Costa Mesa Sanitary District meeting Thursday at 5:30 in the Neighborhood Community Center, 1845 Park Avenue (Lions Park) to hear the Board discuss their Organics Recycling scheme and see if they actually vote on it.  It's possible they will commission more community outreach meetings like the two already held to further gauge community sentiment for this costly, inconvenient change in the way our trash is handled.

Doing The Molasses Back Stroke Again

 HEARING THE "SKATERS WALTZ" IN THE BACKGROUND
Around and around they went last night, circumscribing pirouettes, big crossing arcs and tightly-focused spins like Olympic figure skaters until they eventually reached something resembling decisions.  Yes, it was another fascinating meeting of the Costa Mesa Charter Committee - their final one of the year.

ONE MORE TIME...
Facilitated by Dr. Kirk Bauermeister and Dr. Mike Decker, the committee charged by the City Council several months ago to come up with a Charter for the city that might have a better chance before the voters next November than Jim Righeimer's disastrous document did a year ago.

BETTER SLOW THAN SLOPPY, BUT...
To say the progress has been slow vastly understates the pace at which this group has been operating.  Don't get me wrong - better slow and steady than fast and sloppy, but sometimes those of us who attend these meetings want to scream out in frustration as the same conversations happen over and over and over and over again.  You get the idea, right?

DUMPING PROPERTY TAXES?
First item on the agenda, HERE, was member Hank Panian's proposal - in the interest of property tax equity - to phase out the collection of Property Taxes, HERE.  Panian - by far the senior member of the committee - was also a member of the very first attempt at converting Costa Mesa to a Charter City back in the 1970s.  He is a revered educator in our city and a highly respected volunteer in the community.  When he speaks, folks listen.  He was supposed to make his pitch at the last meeting, but it was pushed out until last night because the committee stretched things out at that one, too.

NO RESOLUTION - NEED MORE INFORMATION
I read Panian's report and thought this idea would go down in flames with very little discussion.  I was wrong.  The committee listened courteously and asked excellent questions of Panian and Interim Finance Director Steve Dunivent.  Eventually, after nearly forty-five minutes, it was agreed that the committee needed more specific information from the staff before proceeding.  That's kind of how the whole night went, as it turned out.

BUDGET RESERVES
Next up was the discussion of City Budget Reserves, HERE.  Dunivent opened by telling the committee that he was making a presentation to city staff on some new budget policies which would mean:
1) A specific requirement for 1% of the General Fund Revenues to be used to replenish Reserves and
2) Between 5 and 7.5% of General Fund Revenues must be used for Capital Projects.

WRONG, AGAIN!
When I heard that I thought the committee, with very little discussion, would probably wait until that proposal was fleshed out by the staff before tackling any overture for Charter language on the issue.  I was wrong - again.

OH, MY HEAD HURTS!
Nope, once again they waltz around with this issue to the point that my head was spinning, circling back on previous statements and positions for nearly an hour.  Eventually they decided to - wait for it - carry it over to the next meeting.  By this time I was joining attorney Yolanda Summerhill in seeking divine intervention, but it didn't come.

COUNCIL COMPENSATION - AGAIN
Next up was the issue of Council Compensation, HERE - which had been thoroughly flogged at the last meeting.  Again, I thought that, since this issue had been pretty well wrung-out previously, it might result in a rapid resolution last night.  Wrong, again!  In baseball I'd be "out" by now.

QUESTIONS, QUESTIONS AND MORE QUESTIONS!
Round and round the discussion went.  Is a council member an employee?  If so, must he be treated as such under labor laws?  We thought we agreed last time to pay them a flat stipend and let it take care of any medical/pension choices they might make!  Should a council member even have a pension?  On and on and on....  It was decided that there needed to be input from Human Resources on the personnel elements of this question.  Most committee members opined that council members shouldn't have pensions, but the issue is long from resolved.  I had to smile when committee member Tea Party Tom Pollitt - maybe the strongest advocate of Jim Righeimer's Charter on the committee - said in frustration, "Why don't we just use General Law?"  That's a refrain many observers have muttered to ourselves as this painful process has unfolded over the many months the committee has met.

UNFUNDED PENSION LIABILITY
Because of the lateness of the hour Bauermeister proposed shoving the Unfunded Pension Liability issue, HERE, off to the next meeting since the Pension Oversight Committee expects to have important recommendations at that time.  That also should have been simple, but member Gene Hutchins - for whom the Unfunded Pension Liability has become his own personal crusade - stretched out what could have been a one-word answer (yes), into another fifteen minute discussion of the issue, including using a bottle of water as a prop.

MEASURING PROGRESS CAREFULLY
So, three hours later and four agenda items put on pause until the next meeting.  That doesn't mean there wasn't some valuable discussion last night - there certainly was.  What it means to me, though, is that Bauermeister's expectation that the committee will actually have a viable document to present to the City Council by his target date of February 26, 2014 is extremely optimistic.  The committee is scheduled to meet four times between now and that date, including that meeting.  We'll have a much better handle on it following their next meeting on January 8, 2014.

AMIABLE ADVERSARIES
An observation: The committee, despite the circular path they take on almost every issue, has remained civil and generally followed the rules of decorum they established in the very beginning.  I've been impressed with the quality of some of the arguments, on both sides of issues.  Maybe "argument" is a little too strong.  "Debate" may be a better word.  There is a core group on the committee that is obviously well-prepared for this task and have the logical, analytical thought processes and oratorical skills to craft and deliver a coherent message.  Yes, there are clearly very divergent views among the members, but it's not unusual to have folks who appear to be polar opposites agree with each other on important issues.  I'm encouraged by that fact.

WAIT AND SEE...
Until they get down to the end - when the language of the final document is hammered out - I'm still not sure whether they will produce a document the voters will accept.  After all is said and done, the goal is to produce a document that will improve the governance of our city by trading state-mandated safeguards and controls we enjoy as a General Law city for more local control that the public will buy into.  With the recent legislation that took the Prevailing Wage issue off the table, the single-biggest reason for even considering a Charter form of government is now gone.  And, there is absolutely no assurance the council will agree with their proposal, either.  We'll see..

Police Claim Rejected And More

GOOD NEWS - A SHORT MEETING
Well, the good news is that the Costa Mesa City Council meeting ended really early last night!  We were out of there shortly after 8:00!  Sandy Genis hammered the meeting adjourned at precisely 8:11 p.m. - Mayor Jim Righeimer and Mayor Pro Tem Steve Mensinger had recused themselves from the last two items trailed from the Consent Calendar because both dealt with the lawsuit they've filed against the Costa Mesa Police Officers...

BAD NEWS - MAYOR DISPLAYS HIS MEAN SIDE
The bad news is that, during this abbreviated meeting, we had reaffirmed for us that our mayor may be the most vindictive partisan political hack ever to occupy a chair on the dais.  In my memory only Eric Bever showed such signs of petty, peevish and downright mean-spirited behavior, but he doesn't come close to Righeimer in that regard.  Nope... old Eric is a choir boy of perfect decorum compared to the carpetbagger who now sits on the throne.

LATE START, STILL FINISHED EARLY
I expected this meeting to be a brief one, and it was despite getting a late start.  When they finally called the meeting to order it was 6:15 - a little long considering they had 90 minutes to wrap up their five-item closed session.

CMPOA CLAIM REJECTED, 3-0
When asked for a report out of the Closed Session contract City Attorney Tom Duarte reported on two items.  Number 4 on that agenda was the claim placed by the Costa Mesa Police Officers Association requesting that the City cover its legal fees in the lawsuit filed by Righeimer and Mensinger.  Since both men had to recuse themselves from any involvement on that issue, the remaining council members - Gary Monahan, Sandra Genis and Wendy Leece - voted unanimously to reject the claim.  Duarte also reported that the council, on a 4-1 vote, agreed to authorize litigation against Civic Center Barrio organization.  So, more litigation is in the city's future... no surprise.

MADAME SCARECROW PRESENTS...
During the Presentations segment the ever-vivacious Charlene Ashendorf gave a report to the Council about the success of the Scarecrow Festival - a part of the 60th Anniversary celebration.   She provided a brief history of similar events in the region's history.  Apparently the first such festival in 1938 drew over 20,000 visitors.  This year, which we're told will be the inaugural event, 32 scarecrows were fabricated and displayed.  She told us plans are already underway for the 2014 version, and referred to the rousing success of a similar event in the small Central Coast community of Cambria, where 500 scarecrows dotted the landscape during the month of October.  Kudos to all her team members for a job well done.

DOING IT BECAUSE HE CAN
When the agenda turned to the Public Comments Righeimer attempted, quite ham-handedly, to explain why he, on his own initiative, recently chose to change the rules and - as a direct result - disenfranchised many people who had attended previous meetings to speak to the council only to be shut out because he arbitrarily decided to place restrictions on the number of speakers in the beginning and to trail the remainder to the end.  At the last meeting, that meant five speakers who couldn't wait until 11:30 went home without having a chance to speak to the council.  It's clear that Righeimer thinks that is the sole arbitor of who can speak and when they can speak.

RIGHEIMER VIOLATING THE LAW
Sandra Genis opined that Righeimer's action violated state and municipal law, and quoted chapter and verse to him.  He arrogantly then instructed CEO Tom Hatch to just put the issue on the agenda so they can resolve it, knowing full well he has the votes.  Poor guy, now he'll just have to deal with the bother of following the rules - not something he does very well.

LOOKING FOR A LITTLE GRACE
The Public Comments segment began promptly at 6:30 and Righeimer named off 10 people who had turned in speaker cards.  Wendy Leece beseeched him to have the grace to permit more speakers if the first ten finished before 7:00.  And, in fact, that's what happened - thirteen speakers managed to address the council in that half hour - and most took the opportunity to criticize the new method of managing the comments segment.

FINALLY, SHE GETS TO SPEAK!
Fairview Park Citizens Advisory Committee member Anna Vrska, who has been shut out at the last meeting twice, asked for some clarifications and offered suggestions for the change.  She was the first of nine speakers who addressed the issue during the first segment.

HOMELESS TERRORIZING SENIOR CENTER
Senior Center Executive Director Aviva Goelman address the council on the on-going and growing problem of homeless folks infesting the grounds of the Senior Center.  It is so bad now that young children who attended church there last Sunday were approached by homeless men and threatened with razor blades if they didn't bring food for them.  Goelman told the council that many activities have shown a severe drop off in participation - like the ballroom dancing tonight, which has dropped from around 50 participants down to fewer than a dozen because of the fear of the homeless folks.

FEAR AND INTIMIDATION - REALLY?
Tea Party Tom Pollitt, who had been handing out bootlicking leaflets to arriving audience members praising the council for their "accomplishments" - most of which had already been scheduled before his pals took office - rose to complain about intimidation and bullying.  I had to fight back a smile as he said that because his pals are the primary offenders of bullying.  He praised Righeimer and Mensinger for "putting their lives on the line" as they bravely lead the city.  What a load of crap!

CAN'T FUNCTION? - STEP ASIDE!
If those guys are so traumatized by the events as they allege in their lawsuit - if they cannot earn a living, as they allege in the lawsuit - then they should step down from their council positions and permit people who are actually able to function to be seated in their places.  Anyone paying attention realizes that nothing has changed with those guys.  They continue to make boneheaded decisions - just as they did before their lawsuit - and will undoubtedly continue to do so down stream.

WHAT ABOUT EARLY-RELEASE CONS
Resident Scott Morlan spoke about a recent meeting of Speak Up Newport at which the Newport Beach Chief of Police address the issue of the early release of state prisoners.  He apparently has hired new staff to deal specifically with that problem.  Must be nice to have a council that will agree to that kind of staff adjustments for critical issues - we here in Costa Mesa have exactly the opposite issue. We have a council majority that is so clueless about what it really takes to provide a safe city that they refuse to let the City hire more officers on a timely basis.  Morlan asked just what Costa Mesa is doing in anticipation of the increase in early-release convicts in our community.

AN ACTIVISTS WHO'S WHO...
Among the other speakers who chastised Righeimer for his abuse of the comments segment were Robin Leffler, Cindy Brenneman, Jay Humphrey, Greg Thunnell, Perry Valantine and Beth Refakes.  Each address other issues, too, but their anger was palpable on the mayor's abuse of his authority simply because he doesn't like to hear complaints from the residents of this city.

DEVELOPERS OVER RESIDENTS
During Council Member Comments Righeimer led off by explaining that Chief Tom Gazsi has a plan for the early-release convicts and he requested a report at a future meeting.  He then, again, launched off into a tirade about why he chose to split the public comments and also to trail any "pulled" consent calendar items.  As we listened to his sputtering fusillade of rhetoric it was very clear where his allegiance lies.  To him, it's much more important that developers not be required to hang around too long to present their schemes to the council.  His choice is to make the residents - the voters - wait to air their grievances.  I'm VERY sure this behavior and his arrogant disregard for the rules will become part of the campaign dialogue in the coming months.  He stated that he wants to be sure the BUSINESS of the city gets done - he emphasized that word, hence the caps.  Yep, business is more important to him than the residents of this city.  Laughter erupted throughout the auditorium as he said, "This process works great!"

HAT TIP  TO SANDY....
During her comments Genis addressed the need to move forward for a permanent facility for local Veterans, then addressed recent comments from the speaker's podium that were tinged with ethnic intolerance, describing that behavior as unacceptable.  When she mentioned my blog entry about the 150th anniversary of Lincoln's Gettysburg Address I thought Mensinger and Righeimer's heads would explode.  I smiled...

LEECE DEFENDS OUR 'BASIC HUMAN RIGHT'
Leece addressed some of the concerns by earlier speakers, including Goelman's concerns about the safety at the Senior Center, Pollitt's comments about bullying and Morlan's concern about early prison releases.  She then launched into a dialogue about Righeimer's scheme to transform the Public Comments segment, describing them as an abridgment of our "Basic Human Right" to be heard.  She then discussed her decision to vote to deny the claim from the CMPOA, indicating it was a tough choice, but the correct one.

'SHOCKED AND APPALLED!'
Righeimer then - even though he'd already had his turn to speak - AGAIN launched off into a rant about the lawsuit, stating over and over again that he was "shocked and appalled" at the silence he hears on the subject.  He said, "The silence is deafening!"  He has obviously already convicted his "enemies" before ANY evidence has been presented and before ANYONE has been charged with a crime.  From where I sit, it seems that many members of the community - while concerned about the charges being alleged - have the maturity to wait for the legal process to run its course before making judgments.  Clearly, the mayor has a HUGE problem communicating with the community.  That "silence" he perceives should be telling him something...

MONAHAN ACTUALLY TALKED!
 For the first time in months Gary Monahan actually had a few things to say tonight.  He first expressed concern about the coyote problem and invited everyone to contact him on his private email address, gary@skoshmonahan.com, if they've had problems in their neighborhoods with coyotes.  He then told us that local radio station KOCI, 101.5 FM is gathering cash and toys for the Toys for Tots campaign.  He also congratulated Newport Harbor High School for remaining in the football playoffs and promised to wear a USC cap since the Trojans defeated Stanford last weekend.  (Genis pointed out that she, in deference to the Trojans defeat of her Stanford Cardinal, was wearing Trojan colors)

HALF THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS ARE "PULLED"
Then the Consent Calendar was considered and more than half the items were pulled, either by the council or public.  The remainder were passed and the pulled items were trailed to the end - again, delaying the process for residents with concerns.

TRAFFIC IMPACT FEES STAY THE SAME
Righeimer then jumped right into Public Hearing #1, the discussion of the Traffic Impact Fees.  After a ten minute discussion the staff recommended action was approved on a 5-0 vote.

MARK YOUR CALENDARS
Then Righeimer finally recognized that he, once again, forgot the CEO report, so turned the meeting over to Tom Hatch.  He announced three future study sessions that might be of interest to the public.  They are as follows:

12/10/13 - Homeless situation

1/14/14 - General Plan Update

2/25/14 - Mid-Year Budget Review

NEW INFORMATION DIRECTOR ON BOARD
Hatch then introduced the new Interim Information Technology Director, Steve Ely.  Those who follow these things realize that he will immediately have a full plate to deal with, since the entire city government complex, including public safety venues, will be undergoing significant technology upgrades, both in hardware and software and a whole new internet backbone.  I spoke with him after the meeting.  He comes from Xerox and apparently has strong credentials.  He's going to need them.

RECEPTION FOR THE NEW FIRE CHIEF
Hatch also mentioned that our new permanent Fire Chief, Dan Stefano, will report for work on Monday, December 2nd and there will be a reception for him before the council meeting on the 3rd from 5-6 p.m. in Conference Room 1A.

A NEW RECORD!
Old Business #1, the new Fire and Building codes, took a record 30 seconds to consider and pass!

KOKEN'S FOIL SOLUTION
We then reached the "trailed" segment of the Public Comments and the remaining three individuals who were shut out earlier had a chance to speak.  The irrepressible Terry Koken led off, not with a song as he sometimes does, but with an invention he made to help deflect whatever external beams that are affecting certain council members - a foil device that he offered free of charge.

MORE CLARIFICATION
Sue Lester asked for clarification of the process of determining who gets to speak during Public Comments and asked that someone confirm that Righeimer and Monahan, who were absent from a recent meeting, had received the critical training on governmental ethics.  Nobody responded.

TRAILED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS
The trailed items from the Consent Calendar involving the tract map, the bike grant application, new public safety computer systems and the two items involving our new investment strategy were all dispatched promptly on 5-0 votes.

'SMASHING GENIS IN THE FACE'
Then as the end of the meeting approached, the remaining two items from the Consent Calendar were to be heard.  However, Righeimer and Mensinger recused themselves because they involved the lawsuit they filed against the Costa Mesa Police.  Before they departed, though, Righeimer again went on a rant about this situation and said, "I will vote on the contract.  A judge will decide and I will vote!"  He compared this situation to one where a developer might "smash councilwoman Genis in the face" after she'd expressed her view that she wouldn't support the project.  She would then sue him and she couldn't vote on the project.  He used that analogy twice before he and Mensinger sauntered out of the chambers.  I thought his comments were, at the very least, in poor taste - nothing new for him.

FINAL VOTES...
Monahan, Genis and Leece voted 3-0 on Item 14 - the new salary structures for the police - and voted to receive and file item #2, since it was only a reading folder item and was rendered moot by their earlier closed session vote.

CLOSING WITH A SMILE...

The meeting ended on an amusing note when, following those votes, someone asked if they should bring Righeimer and Mensinger back, Genis exclaimed, "No!", then gaveled the meeting adjourned.  I smiled.

MOUNTAIN OF PAPER!
Silly me... I forgot to mention something else interesting from last night's meeting!  As I gathered the staff reports from the foyer of the auditorium I notice a big stack of papers clamped together near the bottom of the shelf.  I grabbed one of the piles, then later asked City Clerk Brenda Green what this was.  I could already see the complete text of the lawsuit filed by Mensinger and Righeimer and his wife.  She told me that it was ALL the correspondence they had on the lawsuit and it was provided because the council has decided that if a majority of the council members have the information then the public should have it too!  Well, this pile of paperwork weighs in at just over 3 pounds and is at least three hundred sheets thick, most printed on both sides!  I suppose sometime between now and Christmas I might find a day or two to read it all... Ugh!