Saturday, August 11, 2012

Why You Can't Trust Righeimer With His Charter

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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. 

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.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,


Anonymous Local Control said...

Council Member Righeimer,

Thank you for all your hard work , the work of the Council and Staff, to deliver Costa Mesa an opportunity for local control with a vote in November.

I don't know why the opposition is so angry about this. They must not know or trust Costa Mesa voters. I think their angst to compare Costa Mesa to the City of Bell is telling.

I think it displays a lack of confidences in the CM4RG candidates. They do not think they can win a majority.

I think they know the Charter will pass and their candidates will not be acceptable to the voters. They know Monahan and Righeimer were #1 in the votes last races.

Sadly, when people get angry, they tend to make posts like the one offered here. This post would not be accepted by the Daily Pilot.

No doubt, more anger to come.

Hang in there. Cavalry comes in November.

8/11/2012 08:49:00 PM  
Blogger just wondering... said...

Excellent Geoff! You outlined the situation very well. And, sadly, it still only a drop in the bucket to the underhanded, sneaking and lying he's done.

Thank you for helping to expose him.

8/11/2012 09:36:00 PM  
Anonymous Mary Ann O'Connell said...

You are dead on! Now we need to reach the disengaged before havoc is upon us.

8/11/2012 09:45:00 PM  
Anonymous Tom Egan (man of few words, sometimes) said...

An excellent summary, Pot Stirrer!

8/11/2012 09:59:00 PM  
Blogger Tori said...

Local control ..Haha. Those of us who have been around the charter block and know who is really orchestrating it (not local BTW) know that what you are seeing are the same talking points and manipulations that we underwent. We beat their butts here in Auburn. You have to get your publicity out. You guys are right that you are all immersed in this and you need to announce like you did, that this is the most important event in 60 years for the CM residents. You all have more tools than we did and you are doing great. Hope you are getting the help and funding you need. You can defeat this. These guys also need to exit the dais at the same time as the charter is voted down. GOOD LUCK

8/11/2012 10:51:00 PM  
Anonymous Robin said...

If this council wanted Local Control they would have given the locals control of writing a charter that was right for Costa Mesa! I'm not going to be so presumptuous as to call what the election results will be, but I see the definite likelihood that these guys have overstepped the boundaries of what Costa Mesa will allow. I hear from a lot of former councilmember supporters. We shall see what we shall see.

Meanwhile I'll just remind the readers here "Local control is best achieved when city council power is narrowly defined" Nope, this charter doesn't do that. And “A charter works best when it imposes tighter restrictions on local government than state law does.” That’s the only way to get smaller government, but, nope, this proposed charter doesn’t do that either.

Another important thing to remember in November (or October for absentee voters) is that the councilmen’s version of a Charter still provides for no-bid contracts AND purchasing. Those words were removed from the Ballot summary at the Thursday Emergency meeting, but the provision allowing for that was NOT removed from the charter resolution, which also grants the City Council the power to set the amount for those contracts and no-bid purchases at will.

At Thursdays Emergency “fix-our-latest-goof-and-cover-up-the-no-bid problem” meeting, councilman Righeimer tried to imply current policy would be followed, and the dollar amount involved would be low. No limits remotely like that were adopted into his proposed charter, although residents asked for that protection repeatedly. The proposed charter does not prevent this or a future council from setting that amount anywhere they like or awarding contracts to anyone they like without competitive bidding.

The famous abuses in Bell and Vernon were not limited to council pay. Features identical to this led to some of the greatest abuses.

Costa Mesans aren’t dumb! Voters are not comfortable with giving up power or expanding elected official’s power. What control does the council’s charter promise the voters? Once every 10 years they might listen to us and decide if a review commission is needed.

I'll wager the locals want more control than that!!!

8/12/2012 12:16:00 AM  
Anonymous Residents for Local Control said...

There definitely is a place for "no bid" (a misnomer)contracts and purchasing. It is a fact of live in governments all over and in private business. Yet you through hissy fits. The key is the amount of dollars that can be approved without a bid. If you have to bid everything out you go "too slow" and cannot run the City. The CEO should be absolutely able to use his discretion say up to 50K or 100K and not go for bids. This is just another shiny object(ion)from the complainers. As for council having too much power with a charter: now people in Sacramento make decisions for us. We can't vote these people in or out. Locally we the people have the power of recall or voting them out. I am not comfortable with having a union run Sacramento make decisions we can do here locally. As for all the possible illegalities that could happen here: they can and do happen now in Sacramento with union paybacks. Let's move the power to us, the LOCAL people, to do oversight. And those of you who go door to door and believe what the residents say to you: LOL. They want to get you off their doorstep, they say what you want to hear and then vote differently. You are naive if you think differently. Concerning the supposed "lack of support" for councilmen and charter at council meetings: "we" agree with them and don't need the boos, coughing, and catcalls from the "responsible ones" in the audience so we stay away from council meetings and vote in October. It's over in October.

8/12/2012 05:52:00 AM  
Blogger Joe said...

Great post, summary of what's going on. In just the last year, thousands of Costa Mesans have come to see and understand the ocgop takeover you describe. Everyone in this city owes you a debt of gratitude for the many hours you've put in observing, analyzing, and reporting.

8/12/2012 07:38:00 AM  
Anonymous Pollster said...

Anyone else think the "supporter" posts here are sounding more and more desperate? Where are all these "thousands" of Righeimer supporters? I count 5 or 6, like Pollit the Tea Bagger, Mathews the planning buy-in boy, and Fitzy the boot-licker.

It seems like most of the educated people are opposed to this regime.

8/12/2012 07:59:00 AM  
Anonymous tomato/tomatoe said...

Let's see, an OCGOP takeover or a CM4RG takeover? That is the question to be decided? Or perhaps it is individuals who agree with the OCGOP vs. individuals who agree with CM4RG and not actually any "takeover" at all being attempted, just people with like minded viewpoints joining others with similar viewpoints? It is not fair to call it a takeover by OCGOP and call the slate of CM4RG as something else.

8/12/2012 08:09:00 AM  
Anonymous X Marks The Spot said...

Geoff, GREAT POST!!! It's funny how one man can slither into our local politics and thinks he owns the whole City. This man has done nothing good for the City and it's obvious that this charter is bad for the City, and that's why he pressing so hard for it.

As far as the Bankrupt angle--this City has plenty of money hiding in little coffee cans buried at City Hall.

8/12/2012 09:05:00 AM  
Anonymous resident for change said...

yes pollster, they not only sound desperate, they know they are going down big time. Who can argue with such a sane person as Robin? As pleasing to listen to as Sandra? As polite as Foley? As intelligent as Weitzberg ? We will kick the OCGOP outta here this election, slow things down, stop development, raise taxes and fees for needed income to reward our employees, and listen to the people who come to speak out at council. We can take care of PEOPLE, not roads and youth sports. We only have three senior living projects going, we can make it four. bye bye boys!

8/12/2012 09:20:00 AM  
Anonymous VICTORY IS OURS said...

The defeat of this Charter in November will no doubt become a lesson in the OC GOP textbook for what NOT to do. The bumbling idiots they put in charge of Costa Mesa have proven how stupid they really are. Total amateurs. This Council has made fools of themselves and fools of the OC GOP. As far as I'm concerned, the real "Dream Team" CM4RG, will be experiencing the thrill of victory in just a few short weeks!

8/12/2012 09:47:00 AM  
Blogger valan2 said...

Pot Stirrer --

Nice assessment of where we are and how we got here. Thanks! One of the most telling indicators of what's happening was the Council's vote to remove any mention of no-bid contracts (a shorthand term, but an accurate description of the powers the charter would confer upon the Council) from the official summary of the proposed charter. When they don't want the voters to know, you have to ask why!

Tomato --

The difference between CM4RG and OCGOP is that CM4RG is a Costa-Mesa-based organization, whose interests are limited to Costa Mesa. CM4RG is not part of a county-wide, state-wide, or national organization with political interests and agendas far beyond what's best for Costa Mesa and Costa Mesans.

8/12/2012 10:27:00 AM  
Anonymous tomato/tomatoe said...

valan: I am a long time resident of CM. I am a Republican. I like the OCGOP platform. Individuals like myself also live here in CM. There are also individuals who live here, the 3M's, who are running for office. I know Riggy is OCGOP. So what? Don't know if Mensinger and McCarthy are or not. However they have a good platform too. They will have a good chance at getting OCGOP endorsement if they apply. So what? This is not a "takeover" by OCGOP, it is people who align with it. Same with cm4rg. We are all locals! Oh the associations of PD and FD will spend on cm4rg and they are not locals. the ocgop will spend on 3M's too. so some outside pholk will be involved but the candidates and the voters are locals only.

8/12/2012 01:47:00 PM  
Anonymous Robin said...

All right, I have to take this bait. I get pretty annoyed when people start in on the GOP this or that. Whatever side they are coming from, I have to take issue. This is not a partisan issue. It’s not a GOP take over, a lot of my friends and I are Republican, same core values as most Republicans, and we don’t agree with the council majority or their charter or the local leadership. We’re still GOP. Several of us withdrew support from the central committee years ago after their refusal to allow an audit of the books and the beginning of "orders" that we were all supposed to follow in lock step. We wanted to know how our money was being spent. “Trust Me” only goes so far. Still no luck, still under Scott Baaugh’s control. That’s when the ‘take-over” took place and it’s not representative of all GOP members at all! Right there is an example of a Republican group morphing into a big local government structure with a capitol B. Bottom line, a lot of Republicans are going to vote in this election, and they aren’t all going to vote the same. We’re not all Baaaaa sheep.

Yes there is a political agenda here, but its not a party line agenda to those who look closely. It is a political agenda with ambitious council members and candidates financed by outside interests including what I refer to as a narrow faction of the Republican Party. It also includes intense pressure from Kevin Dayton and Jim Righeimer’s other friends from the ABC (Associated Builders and Contractors), including a cut and paste charter that includes boiler-plate ABC language. Nationwide, the ABC donates to whoever they see may favor their agenda and fund their members’ building projects. Across the nation, they give as much money to Dems as to R’s, actually a higher portion of the millions they spend goes to Democrat incumbents. Locally, they’d like to sell it as a Republican agenda because there are more registered R’s in CM. And they hope we won’t look too closely. But it’s cynical and disingenuous.

I don’t see the councilmen’s program line up with GOP values, I see too much tendency toward ‘Nanny state” control both through some of the local party leadership, the City Council actions, and in the provisions of this charter that make it a vehicle for big local government with the heavy handed micromanaging control that a well written charter would free us from.

We’ll see lots of money thrown at CM from outside interests: The ABC lobby, that small (but well–funded) GOP faction, labor groups, Dems. I’d like it if all the outside influences would go home and leave Costa Mesa alone!

Now I’ll get off my personal soap box and speak for my favorite non-partisan grassroots community group: The advantage of CM4RG is we aren’t taking any special interst money. We want to keep the focus centered on Costa Mesa. We are from all parties and all walks of life; both of the major parties are pretty evenly represented in our membership plus a contingent of NPP (Decline to State) and others make up a diverse group with common goals: We want to see 3 new Council Members on the Dais December 1st who aren’t beholden to special interests and who will put the residents first. We don’t want a charter that puts more restrictions on us than Sacramento does.

8/12/2012 01:58:00 PM  
Anonymous Disgusted Republican said...

This is a great article, Geoff! Keep telling it like it is. The 3Ms, the Rigster, and their minions are worried about what is coming down the pike at them!!! And you can just bet, since they are so desperate to keep a death grip on Costa Mesa and their covert agenda, their campaigns will be dirty, dirty, dirty.....Here's a challenge to them...can they keep their campaigns civil?? Above board?? Honest??? Factual??? Truthful?? Ethical??? No way, their campaigns will be OCGOP driven. And if they actually did, they might as well throw in the towel, because there is nothing good to say about themselves that is the truth (except that they are married and have families - but what's that got to do with anything?)!! I will bet there is no high road in their campaigns.

I am a Republican and conservative by choice, but there is no way in hell that I'd ever vote for any of the current Costa Mesa ocGOP slate. They ONLY have their own self interests and their pet special interest groups in their sights; they do not, nor never have had, any interest in representing the people of Costa Mesa, and they have proved it time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time and time again!! I believe in the voting for the BEST people for the job, regardless of political affiliation, and I am not alone! Anyone who votes solely based on party affiliation is nothing but a lemming incapable of thinking for themselves, thinking intelligently!! I believe that's how Hitler came to power, Nixon came to power....

8/12/2012 03:08:00 PM  
Blogger valan2 said...

Robin --
I agree that this is not a Republican vs. Democrat issue.

I also agree, based on ample evidence, that there are at least two types of Republicans: those who support the proposed charter and the 3 M's, and those who don't.

I take the reference to "OCGOP" as referring to the Scott Baugh Republicans. That's the part of the OCGOP that represents an outside influence in this Costa Mesa issue. Those are the Republicans who support the charter, the 3 M's, ABC, etc.

That's where Scott Baugh, Dana Rohrbacher, et al, and their funding machine represents a political intrusion into a non-partisan race in Costa Mesa.

I agree that I would like to see all outside influences and interest groups - ABC, national unions, Democrats and Republicans - stay out of the Costa Mesa debate.

We certainly can't prevent them from participating, but CM4RG, for one, has pledged not to accept support from unions or employee associations. Notwithstanding the Councilmen's attempts to convince the public otherwise, CM4RG is not affiliated with or controlled by the unions, any more than the Council is controlled by the unions the Council keeps insisting are "in charge."

8/12/2012 06:16:00 PM  
Anonymous Little Wisconsin said...

We invited Paul Ryan to come to Costa Mesa. We support him and asking him to support us.

That will help in votes and fundraising.

Fingers crossed.

8/13/2012 07:03:00 AM  
Anonymous Point of Order said...

Wow, been away a while, come back to find nothing has changed on this blog. Owner still lets posts go through as long as they are against the Council or the supporters. Even makes some off color comments themselves.

This is the only place left that allows this.

Do you think the blog owner had issues in high school and is now seeking revenge? There are worse ways, as we have seen, so maybe I should not complain.

This week I will try and use the same language as allowed here to describe the blog owner, this Robin gal, Gericult, etc.

Let's see if it gets through ... perhaps others could also as a test of this blog as we head into an election season.

8/13/2012 07:35:00 AM  
Anonymous Mark C said...

Geoff, based on "Little Wisconsin" and "Point of Order" I would say you are clearly getting under the local Junta's skin. I would say under the Republican's skin, but I am a Republican and to call them such is an insult to true Republicans everywhere.

Keep it!

8/13/2012 09:09:00 AM  
Anonymous Honeyman said...

I love it! You can sense how scared the M-squad is with all these phony posts, fake identities and such. My question is, whose minds or opinions do they think they are swaying or are they simply playing with themselves? Nothing beter to do? No more cars to wash?

8/13/2012 09:09:00 AM  
Anonymous Costa Mesa's Not Wisconsin said...

We invited Paul Ryan to come to Costa Mesa. His silly extremist ideas, especially the abolition of Medicare and Social Security, will only alienate more seniors and other voters from ocgop and help get rid of the extremists on the city council.

8/13/2012 10:05:00 AM  
Blogger just wondering... said...

I believe one of Riggy's assignments to his minion (shall remain nameless) was to muster as many posts and upset the apple cart as much as he can, because thats the only job they could assign "you know who".

Yes, I also see the posts becoming more and more strange and desperate. Maybe the part of babysitter is becoming too much for him.

8/13/2012 11:39:00 AM  
Anonymous Get it straight! said...


Are you kidding?

You wrote:

"That's where Scott Baugh, Dana Rohrbacher, et al, and their funding machine represents a political intrusion into a non-partisan race in Costa Mesa.

I agree that I would like to see all outside influences and interest groups - ABC, national unions, Democrats and Republicans - stay out of the Costa Mesa debate."

On this same blog - pro-Charter posters took Monahan to task for implying that the police and fire union anti-charter mailer was from Costa Mesa's PD and FD organizations, because obviously it was from outside organizations!

Get it straight.

FACT - long before Scott Baugh called Costa Mesa "ground zero", the unions had proclaimed it so. There is plenty of video out there from the CA Democratic Convention proving that Big Union money will be pouring into Costa Mesa from everywhere else to try and defeat any council member candidate who doesn't fully support union labor MOUs that harm residents, as well the Charter.

Your group - CM4RG - is their willing proxy. Your ludicrous hypocrisy is laughable.

8/13/2012 11:41:00 AM  
Anonymous Republican? Hardly. said...


Please point to ANY example of ANY Republican platform or statement of values that champions union labor policies and prioritization of government worker pensions over basic government services, or government sector over private sector and outsourcing in ANY jurisdiction ANYWHERE in the United States - excluding the military.

8/13/2012 11:44:00 AM  
Blogger Tori said...

When the ABC and GOP declare ground 0 just who do you think is going to respond. Of course Unions are going to come in to protect the wages that allow middle class incomes and purchase of health care. Middle class benefits communities. People spend money. Duh.

8/13/2012 03:39:00 PM  
Anonymous Local Control said...

Oh Tori, you and others really fall for stuff.

Newport Beach has outsourced more jobs in the last couple years.

Unions don't want to see Costa Mesa succeed as they stated it publicly. So of it happens in Costa Mesa, it becomes a model elsewhere.

Oh, Tori, Newport Beach also has a Charter.

See how it works

8/13/2012 07:32:00 PM  
Anonymous Disgusted Republican said...

LC... Yes, you are right; NB has a Charter. Have you actually looked at it? Read it? Compared it to what is trying to be foisted on CM? Theirs is a real charter with a citizens oversight committee and the input of the citizens of NB and much research and time put into it. This thing pasted together by Mr. "Rig it MY way" had NO citizen oversight committee let alone any citizen input. Why is that? It's a huge red flag for anyone with an ounce of intelligence and independent thinking (not sucked into the OCGOP doctrine hook, line, and sinker). If he wasn't trying to get rid of the city employee, FD and PD associations and their pension programs ALL TOGETHER, he NEVER would have come up with pushing ANY charter on CM and its residents in the first place. That's why there was never any citizens committee included in the process. Hello???!! The charter contains only topics he is interested in: no-bid contracts, out sourcing, pensions, etc, including the lame (and I'm sure OCGOP directed) no real estate taxes in CM other than the standard DTT. That's ridiculous since any new tax or fee would have to be voted on by CM voters and if there were a need for something like that In the future and the voters saw that need it's their right to vote on it (just like increasing the city business license fees which is a legitimate and very reasonable way to raise more revenue for the city, but four cc members - in yet another instance of conflict of interest- took that decision away from CM voters). There's not much of a charter to read - a grand total of what 9-10 pages? Which covers only what Rigenheimer Is interested in. Go on and compare it with the NB charter. The Righeimer "charter" is an embarrassment. The number of important issues left out of this thing is incredible. One very basic item is having an independent auditor every year go through the city's books and give an accounting. No where is this mentioned in the "Rig it MY way" charter. Yet in the NB charter, with citizen input, it's right there In black and white! What does this say about these 4 cc members' claim of presenting true city transparency? Just another example of lip service only from these "stellar, upstanding, community oriented" -NOT- 4 cc members!! They are only interested in their own agenda which is furthering their own political careers particularly Righeimer. Sort of like the state senator Blakeslee from San Luis Obispo. I'm sure the OCGOP has a covert "strategic plan" with/for the "Rig it MY way" man too!!
. (btw I am no "union lover" but these associations deserve to be dealt with respectfully, certainly NOT the way Righeimer and his puppets have been treating them. )

8/14/2012 12:44:00 AM  
Blogger valan2 said...

"Get it straight" hasn't got it straight. I fail to see how I'm a hypocrite because someone else (Young Democrats) did something I said I disagree with (get non-Costa Mesa interests involved in Costa Mesa politics).

The mere fact that I, or a group of which I'm a member, have the same opinions about which CM Council candidates are the best or whether the proposed charter is good or bad, doesn't make me their proxy. No more than the fact that a racist may happen to support certain Council members makes those Council members, or their supporters, racists.

8/14/2012 09:41:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home