Contrary to the impression given by Councilman Lance MacLean at the Nov. 21 council meeting, Mission Viejo residents don’t need the council’s approval to ask school districts about use of their facilities. Anyone can call Saddleback Valley USD (or any other district) to ask about individual use, group use or any question concerning joint use between the city and the district. It has always been that way. Additionally, residents have never needed an intervention of the city or a councilman to rent or negotiate use of space for individual or group needs.

***

Parents of special children in Capo USD are forming a support group. One parent said, “We’re discovering our strength in numbers and learning from others who have children with special needs. The district would rather fight parents with a lawsuit than provide special education.” The special ed. group, Parent to Parent Support Group, will meet on Sat., Dec. 17, 9 a.m., at the Dana Point Community Center, 34052 Del Obispo, Dana Point. Children are welcome. For more information, call (949) 249-0629.

***

Steadfast is coming back with its housing plan for the parcel next to Unisys – 10.5 acres at Jeronimo Road and Los Alisos Blvd. The next showdown is Mon., Dec. 12, 7 p.m., when Steadfast presents its Draft Environmental Impact Report to the Planning Commission in city hall council chambers.

Steadfast has been quiet but not idle since its last attempt to force housing into the commercial zone. As part of its “public relations,” Steadfast sent mailers into nearby neighborhoods, offering a “free” lunch to anyone who would listen to a one-sided sales pitch. Some neighbors dubbed the meetings “lunch and lies.” A few residents took the bait, including two who wrote remarkably similar letters to Saddleback Valley News. Steadfast’s housing project would be costly – more traffic, overcrowding, demand on city services and destruction of what should be a prime commercial zone. All residents should rail against the intrusion of more high-density housing. Steadfast has been rejected by planning commission and council majorities for two years. What has changed? Steadfast has given thousands of dollars in “campaign donations” to some council members.

***

What's the basis of the flap over the city project of painting addresses on curbs? The city manager "exercised his authority" by approving a contract with a curb painting company at $1.60 per address. But wait, that would cover only about 9,000 of the city's 33,000 dwellings under the city manager’s $15,000 contract authority. Evidently, the contractor would paint 9,000 curbs . A contract to cover all the city's homes, whether it runs for one, two or more years, would exceed the city manager's limit of $15,000. In addition to the appearance of deception, the curb-painting project avoided the city's competitive bidding process. Any contract could be brought in, without bids, "under the city manager's $15,000 limit" with a similar approach, e.g., $500,000 for street paving, 100 feet at a time. The function of city staff is not to do end runs around policy and/or the council.

***

A seemingly objective visitor from out of town attended the Oct. 17 council meeting. His observation: “Trish Kelley and Lance MacLean have absolutely no business sense.” Many residents share the visitor’s view of Kelley and MacLean as the city’s weakest links. Kelley’s approach as mayor has been to appoint ad hoc committees for practically everything, often appointing herself and MacLean.

The ad hoc committees – two council members at a time – go off to meet, gather info and decide on an outcome. The outcome, not the process or alternative choices, is then presented to the council as a recommendation. This practice shuts out the public from the process, creating closed government and diminishing accountability. The outcome of the ad hoc process is a decision but not necessarily a solution. The traffic mess along Crown Valley is an example where ad hoc committees paved the way. The result was a decision that inadequately addresses the current problem, and the worst is yet to come with additional housing development from the ranch.

***

Look out for the “Outlook.” Is this city newsletter a source of information or propaganda? An Outlook article months ago said the city foundation had raised $400,000. Wasn’t the $400,000 a two-year grant given by the city to fund the foundation’s startup? In the fall issue, the Outlook states, “… almost $200,000 has been collected to date.” This amount refers to the same $400,000 grant from the city, with $200,000 being half of the two-year grant. In the winter issue of the Outlook, the foundation made no claim about raising money, and the grant was finally mentioned. Residents need a translation of the director’s compensation (more than $9,000 a month, plus expenses) – how many hours does he work, and what does he do? A resident at the Nov. 21 council meeting asked for an update on the foundation. The city should provide meaningful, truthful updates without anyone having to ask.