Thursday, February 16, 2017

Genis After Andranian's Scalp! Bad Move!

As  has been widely reported by Costa Mesa Mayor Pro Tem Sandra Genis and several others for a week, at the previous Costa Mesa City Council meeting last Tuesday she made a mistake when marking her nomination forms in the selection process for the three commissions - Planning, Parks and Recreation and Senior.  She marked her forms backward - lowest number to highest instead of, as the instructions said very clearly, from highest to lowest.
When City Clerk Brenda Green subsequently tallied the totals the only one of Genis' that was correct was the one in the middle of each calculation - the third position in the case of the Planning and Parks and Recreations Commissions and the fourth for the Senior Commission.
Since her mistake Genis has been seeking a solution that would correct her mistake.  Short of firing all the commissioners and re-starting the recruitment process there seems to be no legal way to accomplish this.
At the City Council meeting on Tuesday, February 21st - next week - New Business #2, HERE, is her request to remove Stephan Andranian from the Planning Commission and launch a recruitment effort to fill the position.
This makes absolutely no sense, particularly when you consider that the new Planning Commission has already been sworn-in, held their first meeting and chosen officers - Andranian was selected as Chairman!  
Genis made a mistake.  She now has made a second one by trying to "fix" this by asking her fellow council members to join her in removing Andranian for no reason other than her error.  This only exacerbates this situation, creates uncertainty and confusion in the community and casts an even larger shadow over her judgment.

The council should reject her request, allow the Planning Commission to remain as chosen and certified earlier this week.  Genis made a mistake and will have to live with it.  She should not be allowed to make this second one.
And, by the way, what about her votes for the Parks and Recreation and Senior Commissions?  Certainly her mistake on those nomination forms had an impact on the results.  What about those?  Is she going to request similar action regarding those commissions?  I certainly hope not!
More on the balance of the agenda for the council meeting Tuesday later.  Right now we're busy battening down the hatches in anticipation of the coming storm.  Keep your powder dry.

Labels: , , ,


Anonymous Casual Viewer said...

How legal was it to put someone on the planning commission who applied for the parks commission? No lack of intrigue in Costa Mesa.

2/17/2017 07:47:00 AM  
Blogger Honeyman said...

Agree 100% Geoff. Walked amd voted for Sandy and I have lost respect for her with this move.

2/17/2017 10:10:00 AM  
Blogger Anna Vrska said...

I fully support Sandy. She should get a chance to rectify her error. The process shouldn't have been so convoluted to begin with.

Also, using such a culturally insensitive phrase as your title (scalp taking, really?) is disappointing. Geoff, you're way better than that.

2/17/2017 10:25:00 AM  
Anonymous Eleanor Egan said...

Did you know two different ballots were distributed to Council members? Did you know three got one ballot, while two got a different ballot? Did you know the voting method used (ranking instead of the required majority vote) was contrary to official Council policy?

Did you know one appointed Planning Commissioner never applied for the Planning Commission until after all the interviews were completed? Did you know the public was not informed that a new name was added to some of the ballots, and could not comment on that person as a Planning Commissioner?

How is this vote legal?

2/17/2017 01:31:00 PM  
Anonymous zennymoon said...

Have to disagree, she made an error, acknowledged the error, I call this transparency. There are many things that went wrong with that vote. Stand by to stand by. This is not about any candidate, this is about accountability and accuracy. Potstirrer painted an unattractive picture of angst and revenge....let's stone the honest person? Let's examine a few facts. Navarro Woods applies for P&Rec, is selected has an interview occurrng Jan. 24....Planning Commission has interviews Jan 31. An email to city on Feb 3 asking to be concidered for Planning. and voila on the appointment list. Please peruse the instruction sheet from City Manager Hatch. The voting strategy, a new procedure, was unclear and possibly othe council members missunderstood, but alas won't admit it. Sandy knows no other way than be open....more problems in this will reveal themselves. Sorry Honeyman, she acted swiftly and honestly, what about the equity to other candidates? I believe Me. Andranian is an hinirable man, but would want a fair accounting of votes.

2/17/2017 01:59:00 PM  
Anonymous lovemygarden said...

I have seen the actual ballots used by the council persons to vote. I have also seen ballots used by companies to elect officers and board of directors during their annual meetings. Comparing the two, the ballots used by the City were grossly inadequate.

The instructions on the City form are at the bottom of the page, not at the top. On the typical company ballot, the instructions are at the top and the important information is in large boldface type and maybe all caps. The City form’s instructions appear to be more like footnotes, rather than instructions.

It is easy to me to see why Ms. Genis could interpret the instructions the way she did. While I don’t want to excuse her mistake (she should have been more careful), I believe that she should be given the benefit of the doubt, her vote recast and the results should be retabulated. As noted by Eleanor Egan, two different ballots were used by the City. How did that happen? That seems to be another mistake altogether.

I have nothing against Mr. Andranian and I don’t think Sandy does either. I wouldn’t characterize a revote as trying to scalp him, but you’ve got your opinion and I’ve got mine ;-) I know there are some who think he will solve all the problems created by the sober living homes. However, he is only one person on the Planning Commission, which is an advisory panel. The City Council has the ultimate say on that issue and I suggest that those who are concerned with the sober living homes send the Council their comments.

2/17/2017 03:18:00 PM  
Anonymous Byron de Arakal said...

This entire episode has been extraordinarily unfair to Stephan. He is an honest, fair, down-the-middle guy who's served Costa Mesa with honor, integrity and distinction. He should remain on the Planning Commission.

2/17/2017 06:43:00 PM  
Blogger Honeyman said...

Agree with Byron. If some asshole like Sesler got on the PC because of this error, I could understand. Andranian seems like a reasonable and good member. Sandy is wrong here.

2/17/2017 06:56:00 PM  
Anonymous Ken Nyquist said...

A Stanford graduate, that is a planner with all of those complicated documents and rules, can't read the directions. Whoops...I read the plans mirror image. Thought that way was downhill. Don't pack your own chute Ms. Genis.
I had a couple of private Facebook chats with Mr. Andranian years ago and he was sharp. . Andranian should stay on the PC. I agree with Geoff. Move on...

2/17/2017 08:53:00 PM  
Anonymous big boy pants said...

Mr de Arakal it appears the episode has been hugely beneficial to Mr. Andranian and totally unfair to Theresa Drain. Andranian wouldn't be a Planning Commissioner had the correct votes been cast. I would expect someone with those qualities you give Andranian to resign knowing he wasn't suppose to be there except for a mistake and allow the person who this really is unfair to to take her rightful seat. That would confirm integrity and honor. But I am against Council trying to fix this. I think it's up to the honesty and integrity of Mr. Andranian to fix this and make it right.

2/18/2017 01:56:00 PM  
Blogger Anna Vrska said...

Well said!

2/19/2017 12:40:00 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home