Sunday, November 13, 2016

Election Report And Planning Commission Agenda

Although Registrar of Voters Neal Kelley and his staff worked hard, as of 5:00 p.m. Saturday, November 12, 2106 there were no changes to our local races.  Based on a quick peek at the Registrar of Voters stats, his staff processed 10,000 Vote-b-Mail Ballots Returned at the Polls, leaving a total of that group of 174,174.  The next report is scheduled for Sunday, November 13, 2016 at 5:00 p.m.  I'll check back after that time and advise you of any change.

The Costa Mesa Planning Commission meets Monday, November 14, 2016 in City Council Chambers at City Hall beginning at 6:00 p.m., as I mentioned in an earlier post.  The full agenda may be read HERE.
This will be an unusual meeting because a third of the items on the agenda are scheduled to be "continued" to a Special Meeting on Monday, November 21, 2016.  According to City Staff last week, all non-sober living issues on this agenda will be continued so the commission may concentrate their efforts on the sober living items, so let's dispose with those four items first.
Each of these items will be continued.  Even though each of these staff reports indicate that nothing will be done on these four items, I'm told that comments on these items may be permitted, but that no deliberations will be held on them at this meeting.

Public Hearing #1, HERE, is a design review and subdivision at 166 Rochester Street involving the demolition of a single family residence and replacement with two larger single family residences.

Public Hearing #2, HERE, is a variance request to allow a detached accessory structure to be located within the rear yard setback and more at 321 Rochester Street.

Public Hearing #3, HERE, is a zoning application for a minor conditional use permit for two reserved parking spaces at 3033 Bristol Street, Suite A.

Public Hearing #12, HERE, is a General Plan Amendment, Rezone, Master Plan and Tentative Tract Map for a 28-unit common interest development at 440 Fair Drive.
The following remaining agenda items all involve actions on Sober Living Homes and will be heard on Monday:

Public Hearing #4, HERE, appeal of the denial of special use permit to operate a sober living home at 1180 AugustaStaff recommends denial.

Public Hearing #5, HERE, appeal of the denial of special use permit to operate a sober living home at 653 Joann Street.  Staff recommends denial.

Public Hearing #6, HERE, appeal of he denial of special use permit to operate a sober living home at 647 Joann Street. Staff recommends denial.

Public Hearing #7, HERE, is a Planning Application for an all-male sober living facility with two attached condominium units serving 11 occupants, including one resident house manager, at 165 E. Wilson Street.  Staff recommends approval.

Public Hearing #8, HERE,  is similar to #7, above.  The same operator requests an all-male sober living facility  within 3 existing units, serving 13 occupants, including one resident house manager at 2041 Tustin Avenue.  Staff recommends approval.

Public Hearing #9, HERE,  is a Conditional Use Permit to operate a sober living home serving 14 women at 166 E. 18th Street, including an appeal of denial of reasonable accommodation.  Staff recommends denial.

Public Hearing #10, HERE, is for two (2) conditional use permits to operate a sober living facility serving 28 persons, including appeal of denial of reasonable accommodation for a land use requirement at 269 and 271 16th Place.  Staff recommends the denial of one and the approval of the other.

Public Hearing #11, HERE, is very similar to #10 above.  It involves two conditional use permits for a sober living facility serving 28 people at 351 and 357 Victoria Street.  Staff recommends approval of one and denial of the other.
As you can see, this could be a very long evening, even with a third of the agenda being continued for a week.  It's going to be very interesting to see how the commission deals with these items because they are just the tip of the iceberg.  Many more such items are stacking up, awaiting hearings.  I suspect the council chambers will be full of attorneys representing these applicants, and I anticipate public comments on them to be numerous.  And, I wonder how this will play out from a staff standpoint, since we have no permanent leadership in the Planning organization - only consultants hired to fill holes in the organization due to departures among the senior ranks.  We shall see.

Labels: , ,


Anonymous big boy pants said...

One of the best things about the local election results should be watching Planning Commissioner Tim Selser get the boot. That guy is one of the nastiest, weasely slime bags on that commission. As a member of the Pension Committee he misrepresented the truth on pensions more than anyone. I laugh when he tells Wendy if she wants to learn more about the pension issue to come to their meetings. Many of those guys had no clue that our city employees didn't participate in social security. They allow most of the social media sites they post on to falsely misrepresent that CalPers is like a supplementary retirement like a 401k when it is their primary retirement like social security. CalPers replaced our city employees social security. Not their 401k's. Tim Sesler by the Pension Committees very own reports has lied about the 2008 enhancement to CalPers claiming it immediately with one vote raised the unfounded by $20 million dollars. Their own handouts and presentation showed the unfunded rose $4 million dollars. He has claimed that past liberal bought off Councils are to blame. That is such a lie. Anyone can check those facts to disprove Tim Seslers lie. In 2010 our fire department received their 3@50. Gary Monahan was the deciding vote to pass that. Not some liberal bought off council members. Gary, a staunch conservative, could have with one vote denied that enhancement. In 2008 our general city employees received their 2.5@55 retirement enhancement. Conservative Mayor Erik Bever and our newly elected conservative Council Member Allan Mansoor not only voted for that enhancement but Mayor Bever praised city employees for picking up the costs. Yes you heard that right! In direct opposition to Tim Selsers lie the general city employees and the city had 2 cost analysis done and the city employees agreed they would would pay those cost out of their paychecks to receive that enhancement. Tim Sesler and some other liars always say the unions paid off council members. The truth is so different from the lies of Tim Sesler and his bunch. I beg the current council to give that liar, that divider and that little weasel Tim Sesler the boot. And Wendy stay away from that inept Pension Oversight Committee until maybe it gets revamped too with some people who will try and do something to further mitigate the pension issue and not use it as a political weapon to demonize the city employees.

11/13/2016 09:19:00 AM  
Anonymous Steve Chan said...

The Planning Commission should be purged in it's entirety if that is at all possible.

The City's voters responded to poor planning policy with measure Y. They signed petitions, got in on the ballet convinced voters citywide in the general election to pass the measure with a mandate margin.

Commissioners Matthews and Andranian, and Chair Dickson, should hear from you if you signed the Y petitions and/or voted for the Measure. Each of them is highly complicit in carrying out the policies that are now soundly repudiated.

Call, or email them, and urge them to vacate their seat to the voters will. Their contact info is located at the Costa Mesa City site web address:

Sesler and McCarthy terms end in February. However, they would all do the city a great service be leaving the dais immediately.

11/13/2016 07:30:00 PM  
Anonymous Where's My Coffee? said...

Big Boy, I couldn't agree more about Sesler. He is just nasty on every level, and needs to go. He is what gives attorneys a bad name. And he is directly followed by McCarthy and Dickson. They are completely following Rig's requests. The whole bunch is simply "ducks in a row" from the Righeimer regime. Dump em' all.

11/14/2016 07:57:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home