Civil Thinking

Local control is just that, Local!

2011-11-08T09:33:00.000-08:00

Should NMUSD micro-manage school sites or is local control best?

Tonight, the Newport Mesa Unified School District will consider a plan to fund 6th grade science camp district wide. This proposal is brought forward by School Board Member Katrina Foley. The issue at hand appears to be the lack of local funding at each campus for this program. The Daily Pilot has reported on this issue here.

Reading the story, we learn that each school came up with funding to pay the way for the students. In some cases it is completely parent funded and in other cases a combination of parent and local fundraising efforts. Board Member Foley proposes re-purposing funds from other activities to pay for this program.

As my friends and neighbors know, I am a strong proponent of improving the performance of the students in NMUSD. I have actively campaigned for bond measures, served on site committees, booster clubs and school foundations. Both of my sons are graduates of NMUSD schools.

Local School Site Control

I recently sent the members of the NMUSD board a letter outlining two primary concerns that I have for this proposal.

First, this program is a perfect example of local control. If the school site values this program, they will find funding for it. If, on the other hand, they would rather fund some other activity, that should be their choice. On top of that, the local school site may see little if any value to this program and decide not to fund it at all and reduce out of pocket expenses for the local parents and community. If the school board re-purposes funds solely for this program, then the school will no doubt spend those funds even if the program is not valued by the local site. After all, why give up the money?

Poor Governance

My second concern relates to the poor governance this choice represents. If the school board decides that extracurricular activities need alternative funding, then the entire issue should be studied and addressed. Taking these projects on one at a time in a piecemeal fashion will simply nickle and dime the taxpayers of this district to death. The precedent set by this action will move forward to every school board member's pet project or concern. The taxpayers of this district deserve better planning than this proposal represents.

Everyone Wants to Feel Good!

Sure, this seems like a great program to fund on the surface, but let's be real here. If the local school does not value this program, we should not be spending money on it. Yes, it is a "feel good" proposal. That does not make it a good proposal.

Costa Mesa's fiscal house needs some repair

2011-04-27T13:09:00.000-07:00

Costa Mesa heard from two ‘experts’ on our pension liability issue. The news, from either of them, is not rosy. They have their own opinions of what our financial liability is, as is the case with any projections, they have likely developed those opinions based on their own selection of assumptions.

The bottom line continues to be that we, as a democracy, in our nation, states, counties and cities have been far too generous in the good times and unwilling to face the facts that our economy is subject to downturns.

Costa Mesa has been working to remain competitive with other agencies when it comes to salaries and benefits. Unfortunately, we have not taken the prudent approach to squirreling away enough money when it was plentiful in anticipation of the day that it would not be; sort of a municipal version of the ant and the grasshopper.

So we all accept that we have this liability. There is still a great division of attitudes when it comes to a solution. What we do know is that regardless of any current actions we may take, that what we have previously committed to is substantial and will take a long time to dig out from under.

Will this problem solve itself over time if we just continue our city austerity program? That is one approach. I am sure the city employees and their association would like this to be the overriding viewpoint. The problem is that we can not be sure this alone will pull us out of a financial burden that is projected to last us decades even with continued economic growth.

There are some in our community that believe continued cutting of infrastructure support is diminishing our quality of life and will raise costs down the road.

Deferred maintenance bit our local school district in the bottom line. Their solution was to go to the voters for permission to float bonds. One of the promises made to gain voter approval is that they would guarantee minimum funding levels for maintenance to avoid getting into the same position again in the future.

The city council majority has floated a plan to outsource some functions in the city. This is certainly worth studying and I believe that a majority of the voters in Costa Mesa support this type of analysis. However, much to the dismay of many, the council decided to move ahead with layoff notices before they had any real evidence that this approach will in any way save any taxpayer dollars.

This is defended by the majority as necessary because of the six month layoff notice requirements that our employment agreements require in the case of outsourcing. The party line is that they needed to get the clock ticking or we would still be six month out when the outsourcing studies were done. Others in the community question the savings a six month lag would have cost us versus the negative reaction engendered by doing this before the facts were in.

The underlying motives of the council majority have been called into question as well. It is well known that the Republican Party, especially here in California, chafes at the control public employee unions have over legislative issue.

This control is a product of the massive political support the unions can bring to bear in the form of finances and boots on the ground. The unions have also done a great job of positioning their organizations favorably with the public. After all, who doesn’t like teacher, firefighters and cops? Who doesn’t want them to be happy and productive? I certainly do! That has translated into phenomenal success at the ballot box for union supported candidates.

So, why wouldn’t the Republican Party support any efforts to weaken the unions? Wouldn’t outsourcing services to companies that are not union organizations help accomplish that? You bet. Unfortunately, the 800 pound gorilla unions are not going away any time soon, even with outsourcing. The teacher and public safety unions will maintain their strength no matter how many janitors and mechanics you outsource out of union membership.

I would suggest that the real issue here is long term reform. Unfortunately, politicians with short sighted political goals never seem to be able to focus that far into the future. Couple that nearsightedness with the single-mindedness of purpose unions maintain that does allow them to strategize decades into the future and we the taxpayers just end up with inadequate defenses against run-away employee benefits.

I believe that the ship has sailed on the issue of past pension obligations. Short of some sort of legislative relief by the state or federal government, we are on the hook for what we have promised. I focus more on moving forward.

Our city needs to establish benefit packages that do not require the city to guarantee investment returns and funding for extended life spans. We need to be realistic with what we are paying. At the end of the year, we should have paid every employee what they have earned and contributed to their pension based on a mutually agreed upon schedule. We should only be on the hook for a finite amount.

How those funds are invested and how long they will meet the financial needs of those employees after retirement should not be the concern of the taxpayers. Let the unions manage those funds if that is what the employees wish. Alternatively, let the employees manage their own investments in 401K style accounts.

The bottom line is that all of these defined benefits programs, including those for public utility employees, and anyone else that reaches into our pockets need to be eliminated on a go forward basis. Yes, we will have to suck it up and deal with our past political leaders largess on our behalf, but at least we head into a future on more sustainable footing.

My Little Corner of Paradise is Feeling More Like a War-Zone

2011-04-18T11:44:00.000-07:00

So let’s recap…

Starting with the run-up to the 2010 November Election for City Council in Costa Mesa, we had:

Righeimer putting the unions on notice that their pension costs were too high and he was going to change that.
The Unions (employee associations) attacking Righeimer.
Righeimer stopping at a DUI checkpoint to tell the top cop on the spot that he was annoyed with the timing and location, casually mentioning that ge was a member of the city’s planning commission. Like the cops didn’t know who he was by that time.
Councilman Bever hanging signs up supporting Righeimer allegedly getting the “Stink-Eye” from patrol officers.
Councilpersons Leece, Foley and Monahan voting for a new agreement with employees that the OC GOP, while OC GOP members were in the audience giving her the “stink-eye.”
The OC GOP hitting Leece, who was also up for re-election and had previously received the OC GOP’s endorsement, with a negative mailer at the last minute.
Righeimer and Leece win in the election.
Foley, the lone Dem on the council, wins a seat on the NMUSD School Board and has to resign from the city council.
Steve Mensinger, a friend of Righeimer's, gets appointed to fulfill Foley’s remaining term on the council.
City Council votes to eliminate the joint helicopter program with Newport Beach.
Monahan and Righeimer recommend that something like 18 functional areas in the city be outsourced to save money.
The council voting to notice all 213 people in those positions that the would be laid off in six month as required by labor agreements and/or municipal code.
Notices being handed to those employees.
Before one employee received his notice, he dies from injuries sustained in a fall from the city hall roof, speculation is that he jumped intentionally.
Complete mishandling of the response to the employee’s death by members of the city council, including Monahan staying at a St. Patrick’s Day party at his Irish themed restaurant and bar.
Nick Berardino getting pictures of Monahan mugging it up in his party regalia, kilt and all.
The council conducting a not really, press conference where the city manager read a prepared statement and then they all filed out of the room.
The unions hiring a slick, pro labor, pro democrat consultant to put together a hit campaign against the council members, starting with Monahan.
A private firm comes back with an independent investigation of the “Stink-Eye” incident declaring that it was all in Bever’s imagination.
Some miscreant throws a brick through Monahan’s window allegedly referring to the throwers dissatisfaction of Monahan’s actions as mayor regarding the layoff notices and/or events surround the layoff notices.
Throughout all of this, outcry, angst, acrimony and anger published in local blogs on all sides as well as newspaper and council meeting comments.

I know I have left out many other items and details, but this should give anyone interested in a capsulated overview of the political events in my little corner of paradise.

The question I never hear being asked is: What is REALLY motivating all of this?

That question requires little more than to understand that Righeimer and his GOP supporters have found a wedge issue that they can use to reduce support for public employee associations, especially fire and police. This in turn could help reduce the influence these organizations have in the electoral process. In California, we all know that the public employee unions have bought and paid for a majority in the State Legislature. What could be more enticing than cutting those organizations ability to fundraise and campaign off at the knees?

What is the wedge? The GOP only needs to trot out a spreadsheet showing the compensation of those public employees and the combined compensation they receive. Average taxpayers in the city will gasp at the numbers and wonder how they ever got so high? The answer that the GOP wants you to hear is that the employee unions are greedy and only concerned about helping themselves at the taxpayers’ expense.

The unions, in turn, are fighting back with the slick anti-Monahan ads. Not really to turn around Costa Mesa’s plan to outsource, so much as to avoid a complete collapse of the union status of employees. You see, if more places follow Costa Mesa’s lead by outsourcing, what happens to all of those union employees? Maybe the get a job with the company that was outsourced to, non-union most likely, or maybe they are just unemployed. Not a pretty picture for union bosses that vowed to look after the employees’ best interest.

In any case, this is turning out to be a rather interesting spectacle. Gird yourselves my fellow Costa Mesans. I predict we are in for many months, if not years of fierce ideological battles.

Why do we put up with shifting revenue from one government entity to another?

2011-02-16T17:16:00.000-08:00

I am working with a potential new client, a county in California, and we are discussing sales taxes as applied to the proposed transactions. We are an IT company, so the sales and use tax rules are byzantine at best.

As we work through this mess I am haunted by a recurring thought: Why is the state charging other governmental bodies sales tax in the first place? As I see it, we, the taxpayers, pay taxes to, in this case, a county. When that county buys something, they then pay sales tax to the state. Some of those funds get cycled back to the county, some to a city, some to a special district perhaps.

What does this really accomplish?

I guess it employs extra people and that is good for the economy. Wouldn't it be better though if those people actually did something to improve life? Maybe we could hire a few extra cops with those otherwise recycled dollars.

In one sense, I guess it is just another income redistribution scheme. Counties that spend a lot of money send more to the state than those that do not. LA County probably sends the most.

I still can't help but think that the whole idea is just a waste of taxpayer dollars chewed up by personnel embroiled in processing the payments and compliance. Not to mention the non-productive time I am spending on this issue with our prospective client.

Can I and my fellow Costa Mesans get over ourselves?

2010-11-04T12:29:00.000-07:00

With the sincerest of apologies to Clement C. Moore…

Twas the night post election and all through our city
not a creature was mudslinging, no one was being witty.

The yard signs are disappearing in the slowest of manner,
as if sign purloiners no longer think that they matter.

I, nursing post election blues, had just settled down
for a relaxing slog through the blogs in my town.

When what to my blurry visioned eyes should appear?
But more consternation and rancor and smears.

We bloggers just can’t seem to get past all the facts
and insist on rehashing innuendos and attacks.

When most of Costa Mesans did not even vote
it hardly seems pertinent to react in this way
and yet here we are acting like children at play.

So I say to my neighbors and friends and acquaintances,
accept the results of our democratic quirk
And get with the program to make our city work.

How comfortable have you become wearing masks?

2010-10-10T16:58:00.000-07:00

“Why do you wear a mask? Were you burned by acid, or something like that?” inquired Fezzik. The Man in Black replied, “Oh no, it's just that they're terribly comfortable. I think everyone will be wearing them in the future.”

The above quote is from one of my family’s favorite movies, The Princess Bride. It seems to predict a phenomenon that, although not unique to the internet, is certainly broadly manifested in internet activity. That would be the use of made up names that mask the identities of many bloggers, commentators and broad categories of internet users.

I say it is a prediction as the movie was released when the internet was yet in its infancy. Way back in the mid 1980’s. Who even remembers that far back?

It is amazing to me how comfortable people have become wearing “masks” on the internet as well as interacting with those that wear them.

I have been on a one person crusade to reduce the use of internet pseudonyms. I frequently chastise people who hide behind fake names while commenting on matters of public interest. I could see that if a person were to share something of a personal nature, something embarrassing to himself or someone close to him, he may wish to reserve his identity. However, when engaging in public discourse that includes critiques of others and issues of the day, I contend that it would be most helpful to be able to understand, and verify, a person’s qualifications (or lack thereof) for the assertions that they make.

I also firmly believe that having your true identity known encourages a more civil discourse. Although I know several people that seem to care not if they are civil even when they are speaking to you directly and in person. I don’t believe that is the norm in our society. Certainly not in the circles I travel in. A disregard for feelings and facts does seem to be very common on internet sites that allow anonymous comments.

I have run across those that contend that a point should be able to stand on its own regardless of who is making the comment. That may be true on some occasions. In many cases, however, knowing the background of the one making a comment can lend heft to it as well as remove significance. For example, there was a blog site relating to gang and graffiti information in Costa Mesa. The information, if it were accurate, would be fascinating and probably useful to the community. The only problem is that the posts were made by someone who did not want to share their identity and therefore their qualifications for making the statements that they did.

Another argument has been made that I am just encouraging “personal attacks” by asking people to identify themselves. Quite the contrary is true. As stated above, I believe that most people will not engage in personal attacks when the participants know who each other is. Those that do, well, they will in any case.

So I encourage you all to join with me and to start using your real names when commenting on news stories and blogs. It may be “uncomfortable” at first, but I contend that you will feel a certain sense of honor develop. What more could the internet use than a shot of honorable behavior?

Costa Mesa has something for everyone!

2010-09-01T17:32:00.000-07:00

There is a lot going on in Costa Mesa right now!

So much is happening, that just about everyone should have an interest in one or more local issues. In no particular order we have:

City Council Races
School Board Races
Fairground Sales
Airport Expansion Issues
LED Billboards at Triangle Square
New Principals at CM High School and Estancia High School
An increasingly Wicked Assembly District Race
A Snoozer of a Congressional District Race (but stay tuned)

Almost all of these issues have been covered in the local media and/or local blogs. You can learn about many of them at Geoff West's Bubbling Cauldron Blog. Of course Martin Millard puts his own... well... queer spin on a few of these issues and other stuff. You can find his blog on your own if you really feel the need to do so.

The crux of all of this is that my neighbors in Costa Mesa have a sack-load of issues to pay attention to. My question is: Are they?

As I reflect back on my 34 or so years in Costa Mesa, there has been a boatload of issues that just sailed right by me. I have no real excuse for not paying attention. It was disinterest at best, narcissism at worst.

In the 70's I was busy going to school and working. In the 80's I was busy working and playing. In the 90's I started to pay attention, I guess having kids will do that to you. In the 2k's I really started to notice what was going on around me.

Most of this new found interest was inspired by my amazement at how things were, or more precisely, were not working at my two sons' schools. Some of this interest came from new friends and acquaintances I made as a volunteer in scouts and other organizations.

One of the dynamics of paying attention is that once I start digging into one issue, I start finding threads into many others. Some of those are historic. Others are more contemporary. In all cases, as I research these issues they start to suck me in like quicksand. I can start to see remnants of battle lines. I start finding evidence of alliances, betrayals, economic influences, good old boy (and in same cases girl) relationships.

For a small town, Costa Mesa has quite the rich recent history. This revelation prompted me to buy all three history books written on Costa Mesa. I will admit I have not read any of them yet, but they are high on my to do list. If you are interested they are:

From Goat Hill to City of the Arts: The History of Costa Mesa by Robert M. Wilson
"A Slice of Orange": a History of Costa Mesa by Edrick J. Miller
Early Costa Mesa by the Costa Mesa Historical Society

The real concern I have been having lately is where Costa Mesa is going, not so much where it has been. I had a chance to talk with Paul Freeman and David Wilson several years ago when they both worked for C.J. Segerstrom & Sons. David Wilson talked about the dynamics of Costa Mesa and that it was essentially built out from a developers standpoint. I had not really thought about Costa Mesa in those terms until he mentioned it. At that moment, it seemed obvious and I was a bit amused that I had not really looked at the city that way until he pointed it out.

So, where does our built out city go from here? I expect to be around for a while to see. Who knows, I might even proffer an opinion or two along the way.

Can the Boy Scouts of America still claim the moral high ground?

2010-04-20T18:00:00.000-07:00

I subscribe to several online sites that are designed to provide communications between volunteers in BSA. Most of the discussion center around the thorny issues of recruiting and retaining youth members, how best to deliver program and other pretty mundane topics.

On occasion, the topic of the BSA’s stance on requiring a belief in God and their refusal to accept homosexual volunteers and employees comes up. The typical context of these discussions is either the ability to recruit youth into an organization that some parents consider intolerant or some public event highlighting the issue.

I most recently posted a note on one board referencing an article about the California State Legislature voting down a resolution honoring the Scouts on their 100th anniversary. It appeared that the Democrat Majority in the state assembly did not look favorably on scouting. The Analysis that was developed centers on the BSA’s discriminatory policies and argues at length the inappropriateness of those policies as well as the inappropriateness of the legislature’s tacit approval via this resolution.

Some of the responses to the posting I made were a bit surprising to me. Several noted that the post was inappropriate on its face because the Boys Scouts should not be involved in politics. One post in particular was very aggressive in the support of the ant-homosexual policy, inquiring as to who would want a homosexual for a Scoutmaster.

Personally, I believe that Scouts should be engaged in politics. Not uniformed Scouts out campaigning for candidates or issues, but as individuals participating in our democracy. This is, after all, part of the character development we encourage through merit badges such as “Citizenship in the Community” and “Citizenship in the Nation.”

As for the comment regarding homosexual scoutmasters, I guess I never really considered that a concern. For example, we have youth sport organizations that do not have similar discriminatory policies. I don’t really see anyone checking the sexual orientation of the coaches. Perhaps it is the camping aspect of scouting that gives some pause at the thought of homosexuals in tents, in the wilderness, with a bunch of young boys.

I would like to point out several incongruities with that concern. First, we seem to have no compunctions about sending adult females out camping with our youth. Adult females are welcomed into scouting as volunteer leaders. Second, the presumption that homosexuality goes hand in hand with pedophilia is a bit warped. Third, any unit that adheres to the BSA’s Youth Protection Guidelines would not allow a single adult of any gender or sexual orientation to be alone with any youth. So I find the homophobic reaction to this situation quite odd.

So in the end I am left to ask myself, has the BSA adopted a policy that is increasingly causing it to be regarded as an organization that can not claim the moral high ground while the BSA itself is discriminating against any group? I am inclined to believe that is the case.

Election Day Voter Registration

2010-02-01T10:33:00.000-08:00

California State Senator Leland Yee, D-San Francisco is proposing legislation to allow election day voter registration in California. His stated motivation is to increase voter participation. In an article in a San Luis Obispo newspaper (link), The Tribune, Yee is quoted as saying “California currently ranks 41st in the nation in voter turnout… We need to find ways to increase participation in our democracy and allow all citizens the opportunity to vote. Same-day and Election Day registration simply makes sense.”

In the same article, San Luis Obispo County Clerk-Recorder Julie Rodewald expresses her concerns including whether or not the legislator will work with local elections officials to implement legislation that is workable at the local level.

Same day voter registration has definite supporters and detractors. Supporters tout the increase in voter participation promised by reducing the barriers to registering to vote in an election. Detractors continue to decry the rampant voter fraud that they believe is inevitable with a registration process that allows anyone to declare themselves a resident and vote.

My favorite example of alleged voter fraud was the case in Oregon’s Wasco County in the mid 1980’s. Allegedly, followers of guru Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh were accused of shipping in homeless people from around the country to take advantage of Oregon’s election day voter registration laws and create a friendly majority on the Wasco County board of commissioners (link).

Supporters of election day registration counter these criticisms with claims that current technology should allow people to establish their legitimacy as a voter and therefore eliminate any attempts to stuff the ballot box by registering thousands of newly transplanted voters.

One major headache that faces local elections officials is the problem of providing enough paper ballots for voters when they have little more than projections on voter turnout.

As a bit of background, Debra Bowen, our current Secretary of State has essentially restricted the use of electronic voting systems, commonly referred to as Direct Recording Electronic voting systems (DRE), in favor of paper ballots. It isn’t that local elections officials can’t allow voters in most counties to use DREs. The Secretary of State just requires them to hand count all of the paper receipts generated when using theses devices. This increases the labor costs and the time needed to certify the election. Many counties have opted for paper ballot systems with one DRE per polling place for handicapped accessibility requirements. All of this leads to the requirement of printing paper ballots. There are exceptions to this requirement, but not enough to mitigate the impact.

One possible solution would be for Bowen to relax the restriction on DREs for voters who register on election day. That wouldn’t really solve the whole problem, but it may lessen the impact.

This Week We Observe a Solemn Anniversary

2010-01-28T10:19:00.000-08:00

The Liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, January 27, 1945

In 2008 I had the opportunity to visit the Nazi death camp at Auschwitz-Birkenau. I was not sure what really to expect. Yes, I had read accounts and seen documentaries, but visiting a site of such horrific atrocities toward fellow human beings was uncharted territory for me.

The trip to Europe originated with plans by my oldest son's Sea Scout Ship to participate in a Sea Scout Camp at Satahanka Finland. So we had to pack camping gear along with regular travel clothing and supplies. I added the requirement that both my sons bring a sport coat, dress slacks, shoes and shirt with them in anticipation of visiting the death camps. In my opinion it was akin to attending a funeral. Dressing respectfully seemed to make sense.

We separated from the Sea Scouts at the end of the camp and headed to Poland where I had arranged a private tour. Our tour guide met us at the airport and we were off.

Several days in to our trip we were scheduled to visit Auschwitz-Birkenau. It was a beautifully warm and sunny day. We got up and dressed. By the time we arrived, it was so warm that the guys asked if they could leave the sport coats behind. I acquiesced, but kept mine anyway. I have to say that when we arrived at the entrance, I was shocked to see tourists in all manner of casual dress. Many wearing shorts, sandals, t-shits and the like. So much for my expectations of a respectful and solemn crowd.

At one point, I was approached by a couple from Norway. They apologize to me for being so casually dressed and commented that they were embarrassed seeing my sons and I dressed much more appropriately for the tour. At that point I now felt embarrassed that I made them feel that way, but we had a nice chat and I am happy to report that no major international incident erupted from that interaction.

After getting over our sartorial drama, we toured the camps. The tour guides were strikingly sterile when talking about the exhibits that chronicled the horrors perpetrated on those who came to the camps. They described in clinical detail the engineering involved in building the camps as well as some of the atrocities that occurred at different locations, including the gas chambers.

I have to say that I am still not entirely sure I have come to grips with that experience. To say it was overwhelming is an understatement. The entire concern about showing respect in dress and act was so overshadowed by the commitment made by the curators of the facility that it made my concerns seems silly to me.

The experience has had at least one effect on me. I now look at the political conversations about support for other countries and immigration in a different light. I am much less tolerant of those individuals that are too willing to engage in divisive speech toward any human being. It is that "them-vs-us" attitude that when taken to absurd levels leads to such horrific treatment of fellow human beings.

I have a quote that I heard in an interview with a Polish Rabbi on the radio, it went something like this:

"Too many good people are silent. The problem never is the evil person because society will always have evil people. The collapse of society happens when the good are silent."
- Rabbi Michael Schudrich, chief rabbi of Poland

BLOG Authors Critiquing Other BLOG Authors?

2010-01-27T16:41:00.000-08:00

For those of you that missed it, and it is understandable if you did, the new Daily Voice has taken it upon itself to critique local BLOGs, including this one. And, no, there is not a link here to follow, you will just have to find it yourself.

Their post is part of a broader rant on the LATimes and one of their websites. I guess I have stooped to their level in even writing this, but I couldn't help but make note of the arrogance. It is as if they think all BLOGs are a streaming news-feed. Sorry to tell you guys and gals, but some of us are gainfully employed in this down economy and are aiming to stay employed.

So to all one of my loyal readers: Thanks for occasionally stopping by to see what is on my mind. I know Facebook, etc., are enormously easier, but I just don't seem to fit in well there either!

Cheers!

Will the OC GOP Ever Support a Tax Increase on Anything?

2010-01-15T17:49:00.000-08:00

I ask this question because the 'T' word seems to be as bad as the 'N' word, or worse to some in the Republican Party.

But as a Republican, I am going to throw out a few tax ideas that may (but probably won't) change a mind or two.

We all hate criminals in our neighborhood, don't we?

Did you know that Costa Mesa, CA has some of the lowest cost housing for newly released clients of the California Department of Corrections in our area? It is true! We have more sex offenders and drug addicts living in hotels than a city our size should ever have to deal with. So how about raising our TOT? At least we might help pay for the additional police resources we need to deal with the social misfits being housed in our city.

Double and triple dipping public pension got your goat?

What about those amazing pensions that some of our retired and re-hired and retired again public employees have accumulated? Maybe we need a new income tax on public pensions that exceed $100k. A marginal tax rate of 98% sounds reasonable to me.

Just some thoughts. But then again, nah... any tax is bad, right?

The Newly Ignoble Nobel Peace Prize

2009-10-10T11:14:00.000-07:00

Obama’s selection calls into question the motives of the Nobel Committee and any future actions on his part.

I don’t know about you, but when I hear the term “Nobel Peace Prize”, I think of people like Mahatma Gandhi, or Mother Teresa. Sure, that may seem a bit too pious a group, but I don’t think of modern pop culture figures. This week, the Nobel Peace Prize was awarded to President Obama. I consider President Obama more of a pop culture figure than a world leader. He will become a world leader if he actually leads someone to accomplish something, which has yet to happen.

Not questioning the selection committee’s right to do so, only their motives.

So why would the Nobel Committee diminish the value of their coveted Peace Prize by handing it out to someone who only shows promise that they may be deserving some day? That is difficult to say. I personally believe it was a chance to manipulate the sitting President of the United States into acting a certain way as well as give him deeper credentials than he came to office with. He can now claim, amongst “Community Organizer”, the title “Nobel Peace Prize Recipient.” That isn’t quite the same as “World War II Hero,” but nothing to sneeze at, at least not until now.

It is this manipulative quality that gives me pause. Sure, the world political stage is awash in manipulative people and actions. We do no less when we use the American Bully Pulpit to coerce Israel and Palestine to the negotiating table. But we are at least honest about it. The Nobel Committee has held out their esteemed prize in the past to those that have done something meritorious. The inference being that Obama has done something to advance world peace.

The Nobel selection committee has essential started to meddle in US foreign affairs in a very unsubtle way.

What I really see is a committee that, by virtue of this award, is embarrassing Obama into doing something to actually earn it. Who knows what Obama will do to meet that challenge? I sure don’t. But what I do know is that we should insulate our President from this very kind of manipulative coercion. We can scarcely afford having a president motivated by a foreign body regardless of it being a governmental or private institution.

Congress should immediately take up debate on prohibiting a sitting president from accepting any awards.

It is for this very reason that congress should immediately take up debate on whether a sitting president should ever be allowed to accept any award or honor. Sure, after they are out of office, no problem. But while in office it should be forbidden.

Write your Congress Member and US Senator today and let them know how you feel about this. Do you want a star struck President, or one with his or her eye on what is best for our country?

Civic Motivation

2009-08-07T12:54:00.003-07:00

Is it really just about the money?

There has been a bit of discussion in our little town about compensation for boards and commissions. This all stems, of course, from the budget crisis that the entire State of California finds itself in. Reading articles, blogs and discussing with neighbors, I keep asking myself "Do any of these people REALLY do this for the paltry amounts we pay them?"

There are a lot of motivations for serving on a community board or commission.

My least favorite motivation for serving on a board is when someone offers to fill a position (or is recruited) as a means of developing name ID to run for higher office. Some feel that being in front of the public by serving on a board lets the community see who you are. My feeling is that if the community doesn't know you, you aren't involved in enough community activities and/or have not been in the community enough to adequately represent me and my neighbors.

I would hope that most are motivated by the specific board's mission. If you are particularly interested in the long term development of the city, offer your services to the planning commission. Open space and recreational activities are your thing? Put your hat in the ring for parks and rec.

But, if you think you are going to get rich by serving on one of these boards, you had better do your homework. Almost all civic activities take far more hours than the meetings themselves. The meager stipend you get is frankly just a token from the taxpayers.

So why pay any elected/appointed officials at all?

This is really the question I struggle with. If you are not filling a full time position, why are we paying you? There are plenty of volunteer positions within our city that people fill all the time and never ask for a dime. Quite the opposite as a matter of fact. Many of the people filling these possitions only get the job done by not only volunteering, but also donating materials, money, you name it! Why is the City Council, Planning Commission, Parks and Rec any different than the Costa Mesa Community Foundation, the Estancia TeWinkle Foundation , the Kiwanis or the Lions Club?

My proposal is that we drop the pay for all ellected or appointed positions and have people fill those possitions that have a passion for them, not a interest in pocketing chump change. While we are at it, drop the health care and retirement penefits that would accrue in any possible case for all of these possitions. I am not suggesting this to save money. They amount saved would be insignificant. I am proposing this as a way to attract people that WANT to represent us.

2009-03-25T18:09:00.001-07:00

Those aren't Fireworks! They are Birthday Candles!

Here in Costa Mesa, the issue of Fireworks is once again creating sparks. Over at the Daily Pilot, Steve Smith believes that the vendors need to take some responsibility for the "problems" created by fireworks sales.

Let us look at those "problems"

Every year, a vocal handful of complainers inundate anyone who will listen with tales of danger and near death experiences.

Every once in a while, some local columnist sets his trash can on fire.

Every year, some people who either live here or are visiting, take the opportunity to set off illegal fireworks.

Every year, some number of people that are enjoying legal fireworks, use them in a manner that is deemed less than optimal for safety.

Every year, some amount of debris is left behind.

As I opined in the blog at the Daily Pilot, the 4th of July is the celebration of the greatest nation on earth's birthday. When I go to local restaurants, I am frequently regaled by some obnoxious, if not unique version, of the Happy Birthday song. Do I send complaints about the noise to my local city council members? NO! I let those people celebrate.

That is exactly what needs to be done in Costa Mesa. Sure, we should prosecute illegal activity. Definitely we should wag a finger at the occasional trash can arsonist.

Leave the revelry alone! A big birthday party should be noisy!

Wendy Leece likens the city to a War Zone on the Fourth. She is all wet! She doesn't recognize a loud, smoky, smelly, bright, obnoxious celebration when one is right under her nose!

Time to Reconsider Long Term Fiscal Strategies

2009-03-05T09:18:00.001-08:00

In his post (link) today, Geoff West chronicles the courageous act of one of our public servants on the occasion of her having been presented an award. Officer Rene Meng took the podium and implored the council to not layoff her and other officers.

Kudos to Officer Meng for taking the most opportune time to make a statement that needed to be made.

These are difficult financial times. Remember, however, that the Republican majority on the dais has taken a "No New Taxes" pledge that the GOP has required to maintain any hope of a political future. This pledge, however, is toxic to our community because the majority has not shown the courage to reduce spending to an appropriate level thereby developing a rainy day fund for financial downturns.

With commerce down and unemployment up, now may not be the time to raise taxes on any sector of our community or reduce government spending, but it is certainly the short sighted actions of our elected leaders here in Costa Mesa, Orange County and the state that has worked to make the downturn even more painful than it should have been.

Our elected officials have the propensity for spending every dime they get, and not just on current projects, but on things like pension increases that we then have to pay for in good years and bad. Then they couple that spendthrift attitude with their inability to forge a coherent tax strategy that encourages growth, investment and education. This lack of leadership means that this state is likely doomed. Costa Mesa's leadership is just as myopic and short sighted!

Wake up people!

We need to elect leaders with courage and vision, not GOP and Democrat Party hacks that march to one tune. The GOP may have some good ideas as may the Dems, but being dogmatic about fiscal and social welfare policies does not, in the end solve our problems, it only makes them worse.

A new clock!

2008-12-21T15:18:00.000-08:00

You may have noticed the addition of the clock to my blog. It is there to remind me of the time in New Zealand.

Our two sons are in New Zealand on a tour with a contingent from the Orange County Council of the BSA. They also have participants from around the western US.

You can follow their adventures here:

http://newzealandtrek.blogspot.com/

Orange County Sheriff Sandra Hutchens and CCW

2008-11-14T12:33:00.000-08:00

What is all the excitement over CCW’s in OC?

In case you have not been watching the news or reading the papers, Sandra Hutchens, our recently appointed sheriff in Orange County has been upsetting the pro firearms community here.

As part of her plan to “clean up” the sheriff’s department after the departure of Mike Carona she has initiated a review the department’s CCW policy and of all of the Concealed Carry Weapons permit holders in the county.

She has effectively raised the bar for permit issuance. Under Carona, establishing that you carried enough valuable goods, be it video equipment, firearms, cash, etc. on a regular enough basis was good enough to get a permit issued to you.

Not a Carona CCW for Cash Scheme

The press seems intent on portraying this in the light of campaign donors to Carona. Although it is known that some people that were issued permits were donors to Carona’s campaigns, the majority of my acquaintances that have permits do not fit into this category. A search of the names of CCW holders made public by the sheriff’s department bears this out.

Then Why?

Her motivations are questioned by the pro CCW citizens of Orange County. Many believe that her disdain for CCW issuance comes from her career in Los Angeles County where getting a CCW requires that you are a judge or Hollywood star. Others think that she is just a Law Enforcement elitist that does not want anyone other than Law Enforcement Officers to have access to loaded firearms.

Whatever her motivation, she is making a change. What makes this more complicated was that she lead several members of the Board of Supervisors to believe that she was supportive of CCW issuance. I guess that she can claim that she did not mislead per se. She has in fact issued some new CCW permits since taking office. What she failed to mention was that she was not anywhere near as interested in broad CCW issuance as Carona was.

Is Hutchens Violating the Second Amendment?

Let me be clear. This is not a Second Amendment issue. Some pro gun rights residents have complained that Hutchens is infringing their Second Amendment rights. That is a false and misleading argument. California state law gives local law enforcement, either the chief of police or the county sheriff broad discretion when it comes to CCW issuance.

So if this is not a Second Amendment issue, what is it? It is simply a local government policy issue. Some counties in California issue CCW permits to any resident that claims they would like to carry a gun for personal protection purposes. Our newly appointed sheriff does believe in as generous a policy as that. For some reason, the residents of Orange County do not have the same level of respect for their ability to appropriately handle the responsibility of carrying a firearm as those of other counties.

Keeping Guns Off of the Streets

Many gun control advocates would support her. They believe that it is important to keep guns off the streets. They predict cases of armed shootouts over fender benders and “High Noon” type encounters outside local bars.

What we learn from the 39 states that have “shall issue” CCW laws is that a small minority of the population actually takes advantage of the ability to obtain a permit. Something like 2%. That is hardly a heavily armed citizenry walking the streets.

Gun Control Advocates Missing Their Chance

More importantly, you would think the pro gun control members of our community would be pro CCW. In order to get a CCW permit, not only must you be finger printed and pass a background check, you must also complete a training course that includes a practical demonstration of your ability to properly and effectively handle a firearm as well as an understanding of the laws that control the use of firearms in California. All of this takes many hours of classroom time, many hours of practice and several hundreds of dollars above and beyond the $400.00 to $3,000.00 or more investment in firearms, holsters and ammunition.

This is quite a hurdle to carrying a gun in and of itself. Add to that the fact that local law enforcement now KNOW that you have a firearm and the likelihood that you will actually use it in anything less than a life and death situation becomes so remote that the probability is impossible to measure. If you don’t believe me, ask the sheriff’s department for a list of CCW permits that have been revoked for cause. Good luck finding any.

Bottom Line

The bottom line here is that allowing you and your neighbors the ability to arm themselves only after an extensive investment of time and money and a demonstration of the skills and knowledge necessary to do so in a responsible manner is far more comforting that having you and your neighbors decide to just carry a gun around not really knowing what the legal consequences are or having shown that you are responsible and safe enough to do so.

I would much rather have well trained armed neighbors than well meaning, but untrained armed neighbors any day. You don’t think your neighbors are armed? One estimate from the NRA states that there are guns in over half of the households in the US. What makes you think all of those guns are safely tucked away in locked containers instead of being carried around?

Veterans Day

2008-11-11T09:46:00.000-08:00

Veterans’ Day, November 11th, 2008

Many kids have the day off from school.

The banks are closed.

Mail will not be delivered.

Freeway traffic is uncharacteristically light for a typical Tuesday.

Some will have put up their American Flag and maybe even a flag in honor of POW’s or a branch of our armed services.

All of these are reminders that this is a special day in the United States of America.

We, as normal citizens are reminded frequently these days of the price we pay for freedom. We also see frequent reminders of the horrific price paid by our military personnel in while defending our rights as American Citizens.

What we don’t frequently see is the price paid by family members of veterans that are disabled, suffering from emotional or mental distress or, even more troubling, deceased.

When a member of our Armed Services is killed, that Marine, Soldier, Sailor, Airmen or Coasty leaves a hole in our society. That hole is there every day for those closest to him or her. Every day they wake up knowing that this hole will never be filled in again as long as they live.

This day should also be a reminder to all of us that many of our friends and neighbors have also paid the ultimate price by losing a loved one while in service to our great country.

If you are interested in helping your neighbors and fellow Americans that have given all of us the greatest sacrifice, there are many great organizations that you can contact.

One organization I would strongly suggest you check out is the American Widow Project. You can find their website here:
http://www.americanwidowproject.org/

Please take a moment to visit their website. Read about the organization. Learn a little about how the widows of your servicemen are dealing with the greatest sacrifice they could be asked to make.

And remember to put your flag up.

Training in Thinking Along Civil Lines

2008-11-10T10:45:00.000-08:00

Observing the Election Process

While attending the Costa Mesa City Council Candidate Forums, I was impressed with the amount of time many of the candidates spent learning about the city prior to and during their campaign for local office.

Bill Sneen met with just about every department head in the city. Jim Righeimer has been active on the planning commission. Lisa Reedy is involved in her local HOA. Chris Bunyan has spent time on citizen ride along with the CMPD.

And these are just some very limited examples.

What struck me at that time was how much effort each one of the candidates were expending each learning some of the same things.

A New Idea?

The more I thought about the discovery and learning process each of these candidates had been going through, the more I started to think about a way to orient citizens that were interested in holding positions on committees, or running for city council or school board.

The idea I have been kicking around is a series of public seminars on running for local office tailored to the City of Costa Mesa and the NMUSD.

Not New, but Specific!

This is hardly a new idea I am sure. A quick search of the internet pops up may other entities that have been providing workshops on running for office and related topics. Th goal I was thinking more specifically about was running for office in Costa Mesa.

The format that I envision is one of inviting a guest speaker once a month to talk about their area of expertise in the city. Some members of our community can provide historical perspective. Some can provide technical details on filing for office and managing campaign finances. In all cases, experts would have an opportunity to reach a group that they can interact with and answer questions for.

Who, What, When, Where and How?

Of course the devil is in the details. The first question is if there is any interest in such an endeavor. The second is where to hold seminars and who would agree to be guest speakers. I will continue to discuss this concept with others and see where it leads. If it sounds like something you would attend as either a guest speaker or attendee, please let me know. I would love to hear from you.

We Are Having an Election in Costa Mesa!!

2008-10-27T17:27:00.000-07:00

But if you didn't already know that, you must be living under a rock somewhere.

Here is a snippet of our ballot.

We get to vote for three council members and have nine to choose from!

I have gone to all of the candidate forums to date. Every one of the candidates I have talked to are certainly committed to their causes.

Probably the most troubling trends is the continued growth in campaign expenditures. For a city our size, an obscene amount of money is being spent to support and/or oppose candidates.

I find that most interesting because local control only goes so far. For instance, even though we can't fix the immigration problems facing this country we can try to make immigration a local issue and Allan Mansoor has certainly done that, but in all honesty, even he would have to admit that without changes at the federal level it is akin to tilting at windmills.

The city council can certainly hold sway over future development in Costa Mesa, but we are a built-out city. Ask any of the developers and that is what you will hear. So that leaves us to focus on micro-development issues like combining parcels and other small development projects.

The city council has some influence over fees and other forms of revenue generation, but that is mostly left to the voters to decide, even if the council wanted to increase taxes, which by the way, none of them do.

We have the 55 Freeway debacle. The council has some influence there. Although I would argue that the voters in Costa Mesa have a better chance of getting things done as a collective mob than any one or group of council candidates does.

Banning ranch has been a popular topic, but again, our influence is limited. Some strong negotiations by the council with Newport Beach might improve our lot, but I doubt much. We don't have the money to buy it unless we partner with several other entities. So I guess the council could provide some leadership here too.

The real areas that the council can make an immediate and long lasting difference in is some local quality of life issues. Things like adding park space, improving traffic flow, improving police coverage to help suppress crimes of all types, make sure the roads are safe, well lit, clean and cared for.

Then there is the budget and collective bargaining agreements. I am not sure when the employee union agreements are up again, but I would guess some time in the next four years.

This all brings me back around to the question of campaign expenditures. Again, I have opined that there are obscene amounts of money being spent for city council seats that seem awfully inconsequential. Why is that? I would think that in a major presidential election the focus of big money donors would be higher up on the ticket.

Before you vote, ask yourself why the top candidates feel the need to raise so much money and what they have promised, explicitly or implicitly, in return. Look at the independent expenditures on behalf of candidates. Does any of that make sense to you? It doesn't to me.