Well-Fertilized Politicians Grow Like Weeds
Editorial by Bo Klein

Voters of Yorba Linda recently passed a citizen-initiated referendum that will require a public vote on major building and land-use projects in that city. The Yorba Linda initiative is similar to several efforts attempted in the city of Mission Viejo by its own activists. One such activist is now a council member, Trish Kelley, and another one cloaked to resemble such an activist is now Councilman Lance MacLean. However, neither successfully achieved a victory as an activist with respect to giving power to the people.

Frequently, the seeds of discontent grow where the incumbent politicians cease to hear voices from the heart of the community – the activists. When this occurs, as is happening in the current election cycle, the activists plant new seeds in the minds of voters. New politicians succeed as the incumbents are left to rot on the vine. Once strong, tall and potentially effective, the incumbent politicians had the opportunity to produce bounty for their community. The incumbents instead spread the manure way too thick, and the potential crop spoiled.

To understand what went wrong with the incumbents, take the very concept of a voter-approval referendum for major projects. The point made in such referendums is that the incumbent politicians don’t listen to those they’re supposed to represent. They have either lost an ear for the message or they never intended to listen. Kelley and MacLean, respectively, represent these aspects.

Planning commission meetings, sad to say, are rarely witnessed by vast numbers of community members. When a particularly offensive project threatens residents, they attend meetings and voice their opinions. Their objections may temporarily delay a project, but developers know how to counter several times to thin the herd of activists and discourage other community members. Once the residents have stated their objections, they assume the commissioners and city council members will listen and adhere to their wishes. Rarely is that the ultimate outcome.

What actually occurs in all the political maneuvering is an old pitfall: “the king knows best.” Our homegrown politicians from our own turf perform in office like seedlings fed with rich developer and city staff fertilizer. They grow humongous egos that become like weeds permeating and entangling the sensible thought process of city government. At this point, the formerly well-liked and respected activists who are now council members have become the Halloween house of horrors. It’s time to remove the weeds for a fresh crop of leaders in November.

Watching the Mission Viejo Foundation
Letter to the editor

The unaudited financial statement of the Mission Viejo Community Foundation has been made public. The statement through Dec. 31, 2005, provides the following information. Management fees (code word for salaries or payments to someone else to run the organization) are $46,000.00 from June to December. We do not know if salaries have been charged for the full six months. Outside service expenses are $7,437.34, with printing and copying at $6,872.42. Travel expenses are $806.58 with conference fees at $2,204.89.

Total expenses were $69,561.30, and total income (additions) was $260,776.75. The ratio of expenses to income is approximately 26.75 percent of total revenue. If one were to project the above through June 30, 2006, the ratio would be approximately the same or slightly higher using the “City Outlook” total of $360,000 and doubling the management fees at $92,000. Other expenses have not been included.

Roughly one of every three dollars is going to overhead and expenses. Any future contributions could be projected at the same ratio. If any slowdown of contributions occurs, the ratio will rise significantly as time passes.

The important number in the statement is $317,000 in pledged receivables. This number likely includes the city’s future grant of approximately $200,000, which has not been officially approved by the council. When all non-city donations are subtracted by offsetting expenses and salaries, the net donor to the foundation is the city. If the non-city donations trail off, the city will become a net-loss donor. To explain it differently, if the city had given the money directly to the Murray Center, the funds would be 1 for 1 instead of .70 to 1.

James Edward Woodin
Mission Viejo

Dining Out in Mission Viejo
Letter to the editor

I’ve asked for coverage of Mission Viejo’s business community, and I’d like to encourage support of local businesses. As an example, here are a few places I’ve found worth recommending.

After reading the blog about Moxie Java, I went there (Mission Foothill Marketplace, east of Marguerite on Los Alisos). The coffee is great, of course, and the people are very friendly – employees and customers as well. I had a wonderful American espresso, and I noticed the menu, which has breakfast sandwiches that sound delicious.

Another spot in the same center is Ennios, a great Italian restaurant next to Vons. I went there with several friends, and all of us gave it rave reviews. Someone really knows how to cook! I’ll bet most people in north Mission Viejo don’t know it’s there.

Another place with wonderful food is the former Stubrick’s restaurant, at 28241 Marguerite, which is near Avery. The name of the restaurant is now Sid’s, but it still has beef stroganoff, which is delicious. Sid’s serves hearty meals, and something unique on the menu is a side dish of carrots. Children would eat their vegetables if Mom had this recipe. Sid’s has a sign on the wall, “Don’t tell nobody,” and I’m telling everybody.

Marilyn Grein recently wrote in SVN about PM Bistro (on Marguerite near Trabuco), and it deserves another mention. As an example of the menu, the pork loin with Grand Marnier sauce is incredibly delicious and served with mashed potatoes and other vegetables. Mission Viejo is lucky to have this new French-style restaurant.

None of these places has a waiting line, and they’re quiet and very reasonably priced. If friends come to my house and want a great meal, we’ll be dining out.

Nadine Harder
Mission Viejo

Should Mission Viejo Have a Dog Park?
Letter to the editor

Should a dog park be built within the city of Mission Viejo? The City Community Services Commission currently has an ad hoc citizen committee exploring the feasibility of creating such a park.

Among city dog owners (our family has two Miniature Schnauzers) there are undoubtedly many who will view a dog park as a highly desirable addition to the city park system. But a number of questions need to be answered and obstacles overcome before a dog park becomes a reality.

For example, is there a suitable site location in the city for a dog park? What size acreage should the park be? Should there be separate enclosures for large and small dogs? What kind of fencing is required? Should it have night lighting, restrooms (for owners), a swimming pool (for dogs) or off-street parking?

Also, should there be an upper limit on the total construction and maintenance costs of the park? Should the city taxpayers bear the financial burden or should the city explore a business partnership with pet stores and veterinary clinics to share in the costs?

I firmly believe that to be fiscally responsible, this proposed project must undergo a complete and accurate cost-benefit analysis to determine the level of need and potential use, as well as the cost to the taxpayers.

These and other issues will be addressed by the committee over the next several months. Citizens are encouraged to express their opinions to city hall or at future committee meetings.

Michael Ferrall, Ph.D.
Mission Viejo
Member, Community Services Commission and ad hoc Dog Park Committee

Writ of Mandate Hearing for CUSD Trustees
News brief

Neal Kelley, Orange County Registrar of Voters, announced in December 2005 that 35 percent of more than 177,000 signatures submitted to recall the Capistrano Unified School District Board of Trustees were invalid. A watchdog group, Capo for Better Representation, reviewed the invalidated signatures and documented numerous errors on the part of the Registrar's office. If these errors had not been made, the group contends the recall election would have been certified. An ex parte demurrer before an Orange County Superior Court Judge was held to review the findings on June 27. A writ of mandate hearing is scheduled for Tues., July 11, in Department C20 in Santa Ana. Judge Michael Brennar will hear the case. 

July 4th Street Faire and Fireworks
Mission Viejo’s Biggest Celebration of the Year

Mission Viejo’s Activities Committee estimates 20,000 people will attend this year’s extravaganza on July 4th. The Street Faire opens at noon on Olympiad Road, and the fireworks display starts at 9 p.m. Vendor booths on Olympiad Road between Marguerite Parkway and Melinda include music, food, beverages and many other offerings with more than 100 vendors participating.

The Mission Viejo News Blog will be represented in three areas along Olympiad Road. At the east and west entrances to the Street Faire, blog staffers and other community members will register voters. Inside the gate, come to Booth 99 for another voter registration opportunity, along with art and crafts, glitter cards and glitter “tattoos” for children. Meet some of the political candidates who will run for city council in November.

The Street Faire on Olympiad is at the north end of Lake Mission Viejo. Cross streets are Marguerite Parkway and Olympia Road. When coming from the I-5, take the Alicia Parkway exit and continue east. Turn right (north) on Marguerite, and park as close as possible to Olympiad Road. Parking is also available in Youth Athletic Park (off Olympiad near Marguerite). Those attending the Street Faire may also enter from the east side at Olympiad and Melinda.

The Meaning of the Fourth of July
by Michael Ferrall, Ph.D.

As we celebrate the Fourth of July with fireworks, backyard picnics or a day at the beach, it is also important to reexamine the meaning and the effects of what began on July 4, 1776, and why we celebrate this day.

Yes, the Fourth of July represents a historical celebration of the colonial citizens’ revolt against rule by the English monarchy and a celebration of the “founding” of the United States by the subsequent drafting and implementation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Indeed, these were profound events. But they represent an even more fundamental evolution of the nature of human society, namely, the evolution of Western civilization and the rise of what is called “Classical Liberalism.” (Not to be confused with modern, or current, “liberalism.”)

The Declaration of Independence, the revolution itself, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the creation of the United States represent a momentous historical shift in the nature of human life and in the level of political and economic freedoms available to humans on this planet.

Classical Liberalism” embodies the rise of representative democracy and capitalism. As Thomas Jefferson was writing the Declaration of Independence in June 1776, Adam Smith’s book, The Wealth of Nations, was being published in England.

The Declaration of Independence, the Constitution and the Bill of Rights represent the culmination and implementation of more than 200 years of evolving political thought in the Western world. The Wealth of Nations, likewise, represents a modernized perspective on economic law: that is, property rights and the fundamental relationship of property ownership to personal freedom.

In the 2000-plus years prior to 1776 (with the exception, perhaps, of B.C. periods of ancient Greece and the Roman Republic) human beings throughout the earth had no political or economic freedoms at all. In this world, political and economic power was controlled from the “top down” by an assortment of kings, queens, emperors, lords of the manor and the like. The common person was expected to serve those who had power. A typical person or family had little control or protections over their lives. Slavery and various forms of servitude were common everywhere.

Classical Liberalism – based on the philosophical notion of individualism – turned this old, un-free Western world upside down. The concept of individualism suggests, and even requires, that individuals can and should control their own political and economic destiny.

Representative democracy says that kings and queens are not only bad, they are not necessary. Instead, individual citizens can control the government from the “bottom up” through elections, and government powers will be limited and specific. Under capitalism, property ownership makes individuals free and independent. Free markets allow the buying and selling of goods and services, and they result in an ever-increasing level of economic well-being for everyone.

In addition to the ideas expressed by Jefferson and Smith, earlier philosophers like Milton (“Areopagetica”), Thomas Hobbes (“The Leviathan”), John Locke (“The Second Treatise on Civil Government”), Charles Montesquieu (“The Spirit of Laws”) and Jean Jacque Rousseau (“The Social Contract”) were among the other major contributors to the ideas embodied in Classical Liberalism. James Madison and Alexander Hamilton (“The Federalist Papers”) explained the nature and meaning of the newly written U.S. Constitution and the importance of representative democracy and its relationship to capitalism.

In terms of legal authority, representative democracy was to be a moderating alternative to the extremes of monarchy, where the king has absolute control, and anarchy, where the absence of law and order was the problem.

In the American system, the federal government was given limited areas of authority – national security and economic stability. The U.S. Constitution gave Congress the power to “maintain a navy,” “raise an army,” build forts, train soldiers and “declare war.” It also gave Congress the economic power to “coin money” and regulate the value thereof; “regulate commerce” with foreign nations and between the states; collect taxes and borrow money, protect patents and copyrights; and establish post offices and roads. Above all, Congress was to provide for the “common defense” and the “general welfare” of the “United States” (the nation, not individuals).

To further limit the power of the new government, the Constitution employed the principles of “federalism” (dividing federal and state government powers); “separation of powers” (separate powers for the executive, legislative and judicial branches of government); and “checks and balances” (the three branches could check the power of each other).

Individual liberties were enhanced further with the addition of the Bill of Rights, which protected citizen’s religious beliefs and practices; freedom of speech, press and assembly; the right to criticize government leaders; and the right of due process in protecting life, liberty and property.

In the capitalist economic world, competition would encourage creativity, inventiveness and hard work, which would benefit businesses, workers and consumers alike. Individuals could educate themselves, develop job skills and choose an occupation. They were free to start a business, sell their labor and accumulate property and personal assets, all of which would be protected by contract and property right laws established by government.

While representative democracy and capitalism greatly expanded political and economic liberty for the common citizen, these liberties were only one part of the “social contract.” Along with these liberties, citizens had responsibilities to fulfill. They were, for example, expected to vote and obey the laws; and economically, they were obligated to sustain themselves and their family and not be a burden to others.

Yes, we have had significant changes to this early system over time, both good and bad. Voting rights, for example, have been extended to all citizens age 18 and older; and the United States, along with Great Britain and France, in the mid-1800s, used their political systems to ban slavery within their countries.

However, on the negative side, with the rise of the “welfare state” government, power has grown far beyond that originally intended, often limiting economic liberties; and non-elected judges and bureaucrats have greatly expanded their lawmaking power at the expense of voters and elected legislators. Also, there are authoritarian and Marxist types among us who constantly attack the basic elements of democracy and capitalism. Fortunately, strong defenders of the basic principles of Classical Liberalism still exist who oppose them. As political and economic freedom has expanded with the unfolding of Classical Liberalism, the world as well as Western civilization, has been profoundly impacted. No culture in the history of the earth has created a level, or degree, of personal liberties equivalent to those put into place by the “founding fathers” more than 200 years ago. We should be forever thanking them. We should also hope that the rest of the world would some day realize how much their lives would benefit by accepting the same philosophy.

About the author:
Dr. Ferrall teaches graduate and undergraduate courses in law, government and politics at California State University Fullerton and California State University Long Beach. He lives in Mission Viejo.

The Buzz column, June 27

Turnover at Saddleback Valley News has been rapid for city editors and reporters. As good news, Maria Hsin, the affordable housing advocate pretending to be a news reporter, left SVN. Those who chatted with Hsin at City Hall said she lives in L.A. County, which would shed light on a lot of things, including her apparent disdain for master-planned communities.

***

A Mission Viejo resident is among candidates emerging for the Capo school board election this November. While she probably wouldn’t like an early release of her name in the Buzz, the excitement is difficult to contain over a viable candidate with a business background.

***

Residents who attended Councilwoman Trish Kelley’s recent campaign fundraiser said the turnout wasn’t impressive. Despite a donation from the infamous developer, Steadfast, the total may have been below expectations. Because Kelley’s grass-roots supporters have steeply fallen off, she’ll need cash to compensate with mailers and campaign collaterals. Kelley’s political consultant, Donna Varner, is apparently no longer associated with the campaign, which could be an indication fundraising didn’t go well.

***

Council candidate Diane Greenwood filed her intent to run for city council, but is she still in? Her would-be supporters say maybe not. Greenwood carried Councilman Frank Ury around on her shoulders throughout his 2004 campaign. When she started a community group (No Overhead Powerlines by Edison), he put his name on it as “co-president.” And how did Ury repay Greenwood’s tireless campaigning and loyalty? As soon as she filed her intent to run, he recruited someone else, essentially running for the same seat. Ury has been leading his new pup, Justin McCusker, around to political events to get endorsements from good ol’ boys. Watch for mailers paid for by special interest in San Diego County.

***

What’s happened to Ury’s fan club? A year ago, four people were praising him at every council meeting. Ury was the “leader who would take the city to the next level with his business acumen.” Just what was “the next level”? With Ury’s leadership genius, he and fellow-genius Lance MacLean led the city straight into a lawsuit after putting themselves on an ad hoc housing committee and voting for Steadfast’s high-density housing project.

***

David Smollar, Capistrano Unified School District’s director of communications, finally received an overdue mention that he’s no longer at CUSD. Smollar vanished, and all references to his name were immediately removed from the district’s Web site. His five years of service – whatever that entailed – were mentioned on June 26 with the announcement of his departure.

***

All did not go well for the Registrar of Voters on June 27 at the ex parte demurrer before Orange County Superior Court Judge Michael Brenner to review the CUSD recall findings. The RoV’s attorney argued the non-profit group of CUSD parents filing the suit didn’t have legal standing to file. The judge disagreed and denied the RoV’s demurrer. The writ of mandate hearing is on, although the date has been delayed from July 6 to July 11. 

***

Among other problems for the RoV during the June 27 hearing, the attorney for the recall group mentioned that RoV employees informed signature collectors they could fill in part of the information (address, city) for those signing the recall petition. According to the RoV on June 27, it didn’t happen. Here’s the problem: numerous signature gatherers called the RoV and got the same information … and they’re back, telling names, dates and exact quotations. One such person said after the hearing, “When the Registrar of Voters starts its defense with an obvious lie, it’s going to be interesting.”