Thursday, October 21, 2010

Bever's Dereliction Of His Duties

In the midst of a very heated and contentious campaign, Costa Mesa City Councilman Eric Bever - who is not running this time around because he still has two years left on his second term - has become a major player in this year's elections.

Bever, who has been described here many times as a clown, municipal court jester and buffoon, continues to demonstrate for the readers here and elsewhere just why those terms of endearment are so accurate as he elbowed his way into the political spotlight.

In recent weeks, while the city is trying to negotiate it's way to a balanced budget with the employee bargaining units, Bever has been obstructionist, at the very least, and guilty of dereliction of duty, for sure. For those of you dictionarily-challenged, here's a current definition of the word, "dereliction" - deliberate or conscious neglect; negligence; delinquency.

Despite the fact that balancing our municipal budget is by far the most important issue facing our city council, several weeks ago Bever announced from the dais that he was boycotting any future negotiations with the bargaining units, apparently feeling that such serious issues should wait until the new council is seated - several months away! Even worse than his threat - he actually did it! He simply either does not show up for the meetings or leaves when the issue comes up on the agenda.

In the meantime, the budget crisis continues to fester like a boil in need of lancing. His obstructionist playmate, carpetbagging Planning Commission Chairman and council candidate Jim Righeimer, has conjured up a vendetta with the Costa Mesa Police Department for his own political gain. First Righeimer took on the bargaining units at the first candidate forum when he looked their representatives straight in the eye and told them he was coming after their salaries and benefits because THEY were the cause of the city's fiscal distress. He emphasized his attack at each subsequent forum and during interviews with local media.

Then, some think, he orchestrated a confrontation between himself and the police at a DUI checkpoint that delayed his arrival at a local high school football game. An interesting point not previously made, though, is that the location of the checkpoint was not on any route from his Mesa Verde home to the high school - it was in the other direction. And, he couldn't have been in that much of a hurry because he, alone among more than 3200 other drivers in that traffic snarl, chose to leap from his car, strut across the McDonald's parking lot and confront the officers conducting the checkpoint. That dust-up caused an "investigation", conducted by the Costa Mesa City Attorney, Kim Barlow. When she finally gave her "report" it was incomplete. She had not even seen witness statements delivered to her that afternoon and which were relevant to the incident. She determined that Righeimer had not committed a criminal act. Swell, but did he misuse his authority as a planning commissioner? There was certainly not enough transparency in that little fiasco.

Perhaps the worst part of this tactic of Righeimer's, in which Bever is an active accomplice, is that it may do irreparable damage to the relationship between the leadership of our city and our public employees, particularly the public safety staff. That rift may be best exemplified by what occurred at the last council meeting. Costa Mesa Firefighters Association President Tim Vasin looked Bever straight in the eye and used three minutes of public comments time to demand an apology from Bever for his public statements about the employee organizations. I didn't attend the meeting due to illness, but watched it on television. I stood and cheered at home when he stepped away from the podium. You can watch Vasin's comments by clicking HERE, then sliding the track bar to about 29:00 on the timer.

In the next step of this campaign, Bever and his long-time Westside Improver buddy, Christian Eric - he of the Colonel Sanders beard - said they felt "intimidated" by a couple Costa Mesa police officers when they were observed putting up Righeimer campaign signs on a fence surrounding an empty lot on the Westside of town a week ago. They accused those officers of giving them the "stink eye", for goodness sake. It's like a couple little kids running to their mother saying, "Mommy, mommy - Jimmy frowned at me! Make him stop!" What infantile behavior! In case you have not seen the press conference they held recently, you can view Orange County Register columnist Barbara Venezia's clip of it below. Invest six minutes of your time to watch this piece.

I thought it was astounding that they somehow managed to convince Orange County Supervisor John Moorlach to participate in this farce. He recently co-authored with Bever a scathing indictment of the municipal salaries published in the Daily Pilot. I was surprised to see him lined up at the press conference with Righeimer, Bever, Eric, their lawyer Mark Bucher (Righeimer's brother-in-law) and their current acolyte, Jim Fitzpatrick - apparently a bully-in-training. It was also interesting to observe another of Righeimer's running buddies, attorney and planning commissioner Colin McCarthy, adding his two cents worth of advice from the assembled few observers about how an investigation should be conducted.

I thought it was ironic, too, that Bucher could actually utter the word "intimidation" and keep a straight face. You will recall that he recently sent a letter to me and members of the police association warning us not to mention three forbidden topics when writing about Righeimer. He told me that to do so would be defamatory and subject to legal penalties. Does that sound just a little bit like "intimidation" to you? Yeah, me, too. Then Righeimer goes right ahead and discusses those issues shortly thereafter. I took that to mean that all bets are off - that it's OK for me to mention those issues because he has already done so. Bucher and Righeimer can't have it both ways. They can't forbid me from discussing those issues, then go do it themselves.

Back to Bever. It's hard for me to imagine how any voter who has actually cast a ballot for him can feel any comfort knowing that the future of this city is, at least partially, in his hands. Since his early days on the Planning Commission he has demonstrated a tendency to fancy himself a comedian, attempting pathetic quips that invariably fell flat. He seldom does his homework and frequently attempts to quick-pitch the procedures by calling for votes before a discussion and public comments have been taken. I suppose you could attribute those traits to simple boredom or stupidity - maybe both. However, his overt boycotting of his duties is dereliction, pure and simple.

I've begin to hear rumblings about a recall effort to remove Bever from office, but I doubt it will happen. Such an election would be very costly. So, for two more years we will be subjected to his petulance, capriciousness and his unfounded smug arrogance on the dais. We will continue to suffer the embarrassment of having such an irresponsible buffoon on our city council. In 2012 he will be able to retire from public life and and no longer infest city hall with his erratic and obstructionist behavior.

Labels: , , , , , ,


Anonymous Keepaneyeonfitzpatrick said...

Yeah Fitzpatrick is just as bad as Righeimer. Fitzpatrick loves to show up and business' and residences and "flash" his planning commission business card like it's a badge. Many in town have commented on his bullying tactics. So, yes, I agree that Fitzpatrick is a bully- in-training. I thought about calling the city manager and attorney to warn them of mesinger and Fitzpatrick.

10/21/2010 07:44:00 PM  
Anonymous OCLonghair said...

Do you know what is cheeper than a recall? How about 25, 50, 100 people showing up EVERY meeting; council, planning, arts, parks ect...

I mean it, get a volunteer list and calendar. Each volunteer shows up for a meeting and speaks for his/her three minutes on how Mr. Bever should step down and save money on his recall. Do the math, every meeting would last til the wee hours in the morning.

If Costa Mesian's are serious about getting Bever off the council, tie up the council until he leaves.

Good old protesting

10/21/2010 08:07:00 PM  
Anonymous octellthetruth said...

So what? The city is broke. Still waiting for the CMPA plan to maintain their comp plan in spite of that.

10/21/2010 08:44:00 PM  
Anonymous folkinhippy said...

i guess this is what happens when people vote their fears of an illegal alien under every bed and behind every bush rather than on the merits of whats good for city. its also what happens when the part establishment becomes so entrenched in a municipality. we should reject any candidate that is obviously being groomed by outside forces to run for higher office and their slate members. here's to a return to residents putting the city first before their party.

10/21/2010 09:46:00 PM  
Anonymous Mike McNiff said...

I'm honored to say Bever once accused me of bullying for saying bad things about him in some e-mails - 'juvenile bullying' to be exact. He's so completely worthless, but I knew that years ago.

10/21/2010 10:37:00 PM  
Anonymous Rob Dimel said...


You are clearly uninofmred. Last year CMPA opened their contract voluntarily, and took 104 hours of furlough per officer, voluntarily. That amounted to a 5% pay cut for each officer (some argue cost savings for the city,not a pay cut). That saved just shy of 1.1 million dollars.

The CMPA and PD staff agreed to keep vacant 15 open officer positions (that's a lot for a department of this size...CMPA represents 136 sworn officers. In case you are math challenged, that's greater than 10% of the sworn staff). That amounted to about 2 million in savings. Let's re-cap, shall we? We are up to 3.1 million in cost savings over the last two years. 136 employees can not bridge the entire budget gap. It's insane for anyone to believe we can.

The CMPA is currently in negotiations with the city, and has a plan that is a significant cost savings to the city on the table. I can not comment on any details. the ball is in their court, let's see how they play it.

Please inform yourself, and be fair with your comments. You use the word "truth" in your screen name, please post your comments as such.

10/21/2010 11:51:00 PM  
Anonymous OCLonghair said...

I was watching Barbara's report and was wondering if the fences that Righeimer signs were being attached to are the ones shown at the beginning of her report. If so, did these gentlemen get permission from the owners? Is this city property? Were the police "stinky eyeing" these men making sure no one was breaking the law? Did the police take pictures to document possible vandalism?

Is it "stinky eyeing" when police have their front view video cameras on when pulling over a vehicle or is this to protect the officers from law suits?

10/22/2010 02:39:00 AM  
Anonymous Peter Anderson said...

Dimel, you clearly do not have enough work to do if you spend your days posting on blogs. Where were you when the young child was hit by an illegal alien driver in Mesa Del Mar recently? Once again, a furlough is not a cut. If I don't work, I don't get paid. That is not a cut. Real pension reform can only come when you guys realize what everyone else in state has; that 3% at 50 is not sustainable. We cannot take a talented and healthy workforce and push them into retirement at 50 with six figure salaries for life and free healthcare. We simply can't afford that world anymore. They are rioting in France because the government is making state workers work UNTIL 62! 2.5% at 55, period. Got on-board. I would love to see Dimel defend the outrageous pension packages. Do we really need nearly 1/3 of our police force making $200k a year? Is that sustainable?? Costa Mesa is becoming the next City of Bell and no one is even noticing.

10/22/2010 08:14:00 AM  
Anonymous folkinhippy said...

illegal alien fear is what gave us this council in the first place. nice.

you heard the man, dimel: when is costa mesa gonna do something about the huge wave of children being mowed down by illegal immigrant drivers?

10/22/2010 09:15:00 AM  
Anonymous Rangers Fan said...

Geoff, thank you for having a place for candid discussion about issues in this City. I disagree with Peter; we will not become the City of Bell because we have bloggers who keep our politician's honest. Like them or not, blogs like the Bubbling Cauldron and CM Press force transparency.

The problem with this entire pension discussion is that it has become personal--it is Righeimer vs. the Police. The broader financial issues are getting swept under the rug.

My police sources tell me the current PD proposal will be similar to the fire proposal-short-term savings for the City without addressing the real issue--retirement.

I believe our Police and fire should be highly paid. We need to keep talent. However, it is the retirement that is killing us. They need to contribute to their plans and we need to raise the retirement age. At the current rate, we will reach a point in which nearly half of our City budget will go to Police and Fire retirement--not salaries, not fire trucks, RETIREMENT. There will be no money for roads, equipment, doggie poop bags, etc. Officer Dimel, it is simply not affordable. We love you guys, but the pension deal that Gary Davis snuck in back in 1999 is coming home to roost. We just can't do it anymore. You need to work longer and you need to contribute something to the retirement. This needs to be a collobarative effort. I hope that after the election everyone will sit down and address this.

10/22/2010 09:33:00 AM  
Anonymous McEvoy's Dirty Money said...

Dirty money from the police and fire. They each spent $6,000 on McEvoy's mail pieces through the phoney "Costa Mesa First" PAC. Geoff West gave them $500. I thought McEvoy wasn't accepting contributions because he wants to stay clean. I guess McEvoy just gets his PAC to do his dirty work. McEvoy is just as dirty as every other politician in this City. What a joke! Hope the Daily Pilot picks up on this.

10/22/2010 10:46:00 AM  
Blogger The Pot Stirrer said...

McEvoy's Dirty Money, you're correct... I DID contribute $500 to Costa Mesa First, with the check earmarked specifically for the campaign to promote Measure L, the increase in the TOT that is on the ballot. McEvoy did not solicit ANY participation by the Costa Mesa First group in his campaign - he was surprised when the mailer appeared at the candidate forum. Don't try to paint him with the same brush as guys like Righeimer... more on that in a separate post. You're welcome to post here - we readily welcome opposing view, even from biased fools...

10/22/2010 10:53:00 AM  
Blogger Unknown said...

Peter Anderson your post just proves how uninformed you are. You try to compare the United States to France and that is laughable. French citizens pay higher taxes and they are very socialist in many aspects. Because of their hitory and those views, changing a social contract in their country is a major issue worthy of the rioting that is occurring. Before you go spouting off on your rant, try to understand history.
You bring up the story of the child who was run over. Maybe if we had 15 more officers on the street it wouldn't have happened? Or, just maybe it was not preventable by police any more than any other accident is. You forgot to add in the overtly racist comment about illegal immigrants in your argument. I guess that will be in your next post.
Finally, police officers do not make $200,000 a year. Those figures that have been posted are for total liability for the city. It includes unused sick time and vacation time. The officers don't get paid for sick time they do not use, it just accrues and is useless. It is unfair to include those numbers in total compensation because it inflates a salary that is median at best.
You have no idea what you are talking about and it shows in your post. Please do us all a favor and don't go spouting off "facts" that you read on the OC Register or heard from Righeimer. They both inflate numbers and are nothing better than shock artists at best.

10/22/2010 10:54:00 AM  
Blogger The Pot Stirrer said...

Rangers Fan, thanks for your thoughts. Wouldn't it be nice, though, if the guy at the CM Press actually permitted a discussion of issues? What you get there is a one-way street - he's on "send" all the time. "Receive" is not part of his lexicon. And, don't you find it just a little off-putting that he has become a source for anti-police hate? Thanks for participating in the discussion here.

10/22/2010 10:56:00 AM  
Anonymous OCLonghair said...

WOW Dirty Money, you have the scoop on everyone.

Who knew that when a political action committee chooses to support their choice for a candidate it makes that candidate "Dirty".

I guess my decision to make my own McEvoy sign an post in my own yard makes Chris "Dirty".

I'm running out right now to pull that symbol of filth down.


10/22/2010 11:00:00 AM  
Anonymous Kent Morrow said...

Maybe Allan Roeder will run for city council.

10/22/2010 11:05:00 AM  
Anonymous Rob Dimel said...

Peter: I respond here on my personal time,not while I am at work. I think it's fair for me to voice my opinion on my time. Where was I when that child got hit? I'm not sure. I suppose that if I was off-duty, any crime that happens automatically becomes my fault, because I choose to spend some free time expressing my 1st amendment rights? How about we keep the debate on point, shall we?

We are nowhere near the City of Bell. Those guys were straight up crooks. They were the city management and they were not the police department. I can assure no one at the line level is making 200k per year. They can call total comp whatever they want, crunch the numbers, bend the numbers, inflate the numbers, but in the end, it is not salary.

I agree, if you don't work, you don't get paid. However, being FORCED to take 10 1/2 days off without pay, where I would not have taken those days off otherwise, is a pay cut. I had no choice,I couldn't afford it, my wife was out of work.

Tell me where "everyone else in the state" has recognized 3 @ 50 is unsustainable? Are you able to cite ANY agency in the state that has flatly given up 3 @ 50? I know of a couple that have proposed a two tier system. New hires come under the new formula, existing employees are under 3 @ 50.

I defend the pension like this: very few officers go out at 50 with a full service retirement. Most go somewhere in their mid 50's. Officers are coming on later and don't hit their 30 year service level to get the full service retirement until later. Full service retirement is actually unobtainable at 50 for police officers. You can not get hired until 21. you MUST work 30 years to get the service retirement, so after the 51st birthday would be the earliest one could retire. I came into PERS at 28, I am not eligible to obtain a full service retirement until 58. It's simple math.

30 years is a long time to work a job. It's especially long to be a field police officer. Not everyone can be a detective, lieutenant, captain or chief, where you don't have to work shifts and you get to drive a desk. That's just reality.

I agree that the pensions need to be looked at. That is what is specifically addressed in the proposal with the city from CMPA. Whomever Ranger's Fan "police sources" are, either don't exist,or they were not paying attention during the presentation.

The sad part of all of this is, that yes the retirement issues need to be addressed for the future of the city financially, and the overall health of the PERS system. Most of our membership (if they are well informed) will understand that. However, when someone (anyone) points a finger, and in a very bombastic manner says they are coming after your pay and pensions, it does not open an air of reasonable discussion. It's picking a fight.

10/22/2010 11:45:00 AM  
Anonymous Rob Dickson said...

Rob Dimel,

Again, thank you for your posts and for engaging in this conversation - even if you are doing it with a bunch of anonymous posters.

One thing that jumped out at me about your last paragraph - you said:

"...points a finger, and in a very bombastic manner says they are coming after your pay and pensions, it does not open an air of reasonable discussion. It's picking a fight."

I have been at every forum except the Costa MEsa United forum, which I missed due to work - but I watched that one later. I have not seen the bombastic finger pointing that you claim. In fact, Mr. Righeimer clearly stated that he believes that the current MOUs and agreements are unsustainable, could lead to the city to bankruptcy, and that we need to "sit down" like adults and work on the issue.

That isn't picking a fight, that is making a statement. The CMPA responded with the website and moving billboard, and now with mailers. They have recently switched from the personal to the policy, which I applaud - lets keep this about the issues.

At the first candidates forum, he said the following:

"...the world has changed in the last 24 months, changed massively, and we have to look at the agreements the city, that we have made over time, with everything that we do. Its just the way it is. And we have here in the room the people from the police and fire department, lets just stipulate, we love our policemen, we love our firemen, they're great, but we cannot have a budget that is unsustainable, and sit there and have perfectly able and working employees retire at 50 and 51 years of age, at 98% of pay, to be retired for maybe more years than they worked. We have to sit down and rework those agreements, they are completely unsustainable. They were done in the year 2000 before the bubble burst on the stock market, there was tons of money in pensions and everybody just went crazy and said I want mine. The reality of it is here, is that we continue to talk about cuts that we need to do in the City and the reality of it is, its like where's the money? The money is in the personnel in the City. We have, even with a $20 million dollar budget, we're still a $100 million dollar City. We have to sit down, like adults, and work through this issue, it is absolutely unsustainable."

He starts at 19:58

I genuinely support the CMPD and CMFD, and I'm not going to rehash my prior comments, but I wanted to put this into context. All of the forums are on the City website. I strongly suggest that everyone commenting watch them.

10/22/2010 01:24:00 PM  
Anonymous Pensionreformnow! said...

Sgt. Dimel, the subtleties cannot be lost. All of that other stuff that you don't care about (vacation, sick time, etc.) all goes into your pension. When you retire at 50, all of that stuff factors into the salary to base your retirement on. If your base pay is $150k, but the other stuff pushes you to $200k, CALPERS pays your retirement based on the $200k, not the $150k. It makes a HUGE financial difference.

I agree on a two-tier system. Will the PD's current proposal that the Council is allegedly considering contain a two-tier system? I bet not. Fire's did not. Why not?

10/22/2010 02:10:00 PM  
Anonymous Undecided said...

I'm surprised to hear that Police and Fire Associations gave McEvoy's group $6,000 each. Is this true? Can someone look it up? I liked McEvoy because he wasn't accepting support. This may change everything.

10/22/2010 02:54:00 PM  
Anonymous octellthetruth said...

Mr. Dimel: You did not have to insult me with your math challenged comment. I have thanked you for your service and have been polite in my posts. I realize you and your colleagues are frustrated with these negotiations and the fact that Righeimer may win because the strategy used by the CMPA leadership has backfired, but that comment was inappropriate.

10/22/2010 03:20:00 PM  
Blogger The Pot Stirrer said...

Undecided, on October 4th the Costa Mesa Police Officers Association contributed $6,000 to Costa Mesa First. On the 5th the Costa Mesa Fire P.A.C. contributed $6,000. Also contributing to Costa Mesa First was Katrina Foley, $250.00 on October 5th, Bruce Garlich, $250.00 on the 10th and this writer, $500.00 on the 8th. Total contributions so far to Costa Mesa First are $13,000.

Costa Mesa First spent $8,000.00 on mailings to support Chris McEvoy and Measure L and has outstanding unpaid bills of $8,400 for literature supporting Measure L, city, water and sanitary district candidates.

My contribution was earmarked specifically to be used on Measure L promotion. Keep in mind that McEvoy did NOT request this assistance and didn't know about it until after it happened. Hope this helps your decision.

10/22/2010 03:22:00 PM  
Blogger Marquis said...

There's a fundamental disconnect from logic whenever someone blames "the unions" for the fact that some union members now seem to be overpaid. The disconnect is that every union contract had somebody on the other side agreeing to it. I don't remember any knock-down, drag-out contract battles with picketing cops or threatened strikes, so those contracts were agreed to by both parties, with full knowledge and disclosure of all their terms and without much of a fight. In Costa Mesa the people who agreed to the terms of the contracts we can apparently not afford anymore are the City Council. Gary Monahan has been on the Council for ten years (term limits notwithstanding), Alan Mansoor for eight years, and Eric Bever for six years. Yet they now assume absolutely zero responsibility for the contracts. How can that be? Did the unions just negotiate with themselves?

Eric Bever has made a career out of doing nothing. That used to just be an assumption based on no visible results, but now Mr. Bever has made the public declaration that he will actually do nothing.

John Moorlach really owes us better than this tripe. Once considered a pragmatic man of the numbers, he now comes off as just another irresponsible ideologue. Moorlach and Bever conveniently omitted some important numbers from their piece. Let's start with how Costa Mesa's supposedly outrageous police and fire compensation compares with other cities. In fact, it's in the middle. So how do those other cities, which Moorlach and Bever cite as examples of how non-salary city funds are used effectively, manage to make ends meet? If in fact several local cities actually pay their cops and firefighters more, why is Costa Mesa the only city in Orange County running at a deficit? Could it be because the City Council has bungled the overall finances by doing nothing for the last several years? Moorlach and Bever say no, and blame only the unions. Moorlach and Bever point out that 89% of the city's budget goes to employee expenses. Maybe Bever, Mansoor and Monahan should have thought about that earlier, when they agreed to the contracts that contributed to the deficit.

So now Bever, Moorlach, and Righeimer seek to make our cops and firefighters the sole villains in a budget deficit that was created by the abdication of fiscal responsibility on the watch of Bever and his council troika mates. Like most Costa Mesans, I like my cops and firefighters and think that they're doing a good job. I don't begrudge anybody's right to try to get the best deal for themselves in a negotiation. Instead of conducting a principled negotiation to find a middle ground, Bever, Moorlach and Righeimer just declare war on the cops and firefighters while stating that all other options are useless. If the demands are unreasonable or unaffordable, then they should be negotiated away. That's what the City Council is elected to do. They didn't do it when they could have and now Bever has flat out declared that he's not working on it. For all that, they give themselves a pass and actually state that it should be kicked down the road to the next council.

Costa Mesa is still a small town. It may have over 100,000 people, but it requires small town governance and administration by people who actually try to consider the town as a diverse whole. Instead, we've let ideologues control the agenda and fiscal responsibility didn't happen to be on their agenda.

10/22/2010 03:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Curious George said...

Be careful, Mesinger might pull out a gun and wave his flunky Carona badge at you!!!

CM Press and transparency in the same sentence, RIGHHHHHHHHHHT!!!

10/22/2010 04:31:00 PM  
Anonymous Trying to Understand said...

So, since this blog has become the harping piece for our union cops and fireman, will one of you PLEASE defend the 3 at 50 boondoggle that you get. Explain how we can afford it going forward because I just don't get it. Maybe you're smarter than me, but as one commentator stated correctly earlier, CALPERS has said that 3 at 50 is not sustainable. I found that much with a simple Google search.

10/22/2010 04:37:00 PM  
Blogger The Pot Stirrer said...

Trying to Understand, please try to understand this.... my blog is a place where these issues can be discussed - both sides of them. It is not a "harping piece". I suspect you're not able to counter the positions presented in opposition to yours which frustrates you. I don't have to even try to justify 3@50 to you - that's a question you should be asking of the current and past councilmembers. Ask lame duck Allan Mansoor, or Bever or Monahan or Leece or Foley. Go back a few sessions and ask Linda Dixon or Libby Cowan. Those are people YOU and I elected to represent our city. If they failed to do so to your satisfaction, take it up with them, not me.

Rob Dimel has done an excellent job of presenting the facts. Let's hear yours...

While we're at it, here, I just received a nice, long comment from "Anonymous" which went straight to the trash can. NO MORE of those, please. Make up a pen name and fire away.

10/22/2010 04:54:00 PM  
Anonymous Mike McNiff said...

Marquis comment should be required reading for all registered voters...

10/22/2010 07:10:00 PM  
Blogger Gericault said...

One glaring difference was displayed at the "Feet to the Fire" Forum, with both Newport and CM council candidates sitting side by side. One group writes the checks to the GOP and one group asks for the money.
Sadly,the ability to govern without restraints and with a head above the fray , wasn't on display with our city candidates. At one point Jim Righeimer turned to Ed Reno and mouthed "hear that?, when Wendy Leece said she met with Union leaders. Jim was "chewing at the bit" just to "run and tell" on her. Now Wendy didn't take money from the Unions.....but obviously she is in trouble for just talking with them. Even as the Mayor Pro Tem .
This is seriously getting to a level of insanity.
Jims comments "that this election is NOT about Costa Mesa" was chilling to hear spoken at a open candidates forum. That is the whole point.
It is EXPICITLY about Costa Mesa......and if you want to make it about something else , than run for a higher office......Oh Yeah....he already did that.
To Rob D. , I will vote for you before i vote for a GOP activist.
I know you care more about this city than what the"Party" dictates.
If ever you want to meet , just tell Geoff, we'lll cruise the Westside. Looking for a house? , I can connect you with a good inside track.We can talk about all that we agree on, instead of tearing the fabric of what holds our city together.
We make the change in our community and we can't wait for others to do it for us. Grab a hammer and come on over.
This I can tell you.....Chris McEvoy has accepted neither money nor permission for the bi-partisan group of citizens supporting his candidacy. Was it Union money?.....I couldn't tell you, because no promises, litmus tests,or acceptance were required. Chris owes no one, nothing.
Chris McEvoy is free and clear to make his own decisions.
Thats why I support him.
That cannot be said for others, and attacks in that vein ,by the very rules you now condemn, just expose how compromised we've become.
Costa Mesa First......

10/22/2010 09:14:00 PM  
Anonymous Rob Dimel said...

OCtellthetruth: Sorry, I didn't mean to step on your toes with the "math challenged" comment. It wasn't meant to be a cutting remark. I myself AM math challenged. I cringe when my kids ask for math homework help, and of course defer to mommy. In any case, I apologize.

Rob Dickson: You are correct, in that Mr.Righeimer has not literally pointed his finger. Not at the forums anyway. However, he has been very bellicose in his demeanor, especially in the media. I would submit the whole DUI checkpoint debacle was staged, at his time and choosing. Prior to that event, he had already been saying that he wanted to come after public safety pay and pensions. Neither the police or fire associations had said "boo" about it up to that point.

He forced that issue and essentially made it the first skirmish in a battle of his choosing. When that incident made the press. the police association commented about it, but to my recollection, the comments were substantive to the incident at the checkpoint. When he was questioned about it, Mr.Righeimer said the association was just upset with him because he was asking tough questions about pay and pensions. Never once did he publicly recognize that he forced the issue that night. He created the tempest in a teapot. That seems to be his very nature. Push the buttons, pick the fight, then blame the other party.

He could have the best ideas on the planet, but I just don't like his lack of tact or discretion. We don't need a bully on our council, who will badger the other council members. From all I have read and, or heard, that has been his M/O on the planning commission. I just think he is the wrong guy for the job.

I have been a lifelong Republican, and I just don't want to claim this guy.

I do however appreciate your support of me and my colleagues. We have always worked to have a great relationship with the community. There will always be a few that hate us no matter what. But it's nice to know the average resident appreciates us. Thanks again.

10/23/2010 02:42:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home