Capistrano School District Update, June 22
Editorial staff

At an arraignment, the judge reads charges, and defendants enter a plea.

Community members expected former CUSD officials James Fleming and Susan McGill to respond at their June 15 arraignment by entering pleas – guilty, not guilty or no contest – to felony charges. Instead, they have until July 13 while their attorneys review recently unsealed grand jury findings.

Isn’t it interesting Fleming had earlier used a CUSD email distribution list to tell everyone he was innocent, but he couldn’t state the words “not guilty” on June 15? With his attorney fees mounting by the minute, what does Fleming have to gain by delaying his response?

Buying time would enable Fleming to plea-bargain – offer his knowledge of crimes and implicate others. For example, would the D.A. be interested in learning why the school district paid $50 million for a piece of property the owner-developer couldn’t give away? Would the D.A. like to hear about the real estate deal for the new administration center? Is the D.A. interested in problems regarding the $140-million high school next to a dump?

During criminal trials, those accused sometimes resort to the stupidity defense. Fleming could claim he was kept in the dark by his subordinates. His email claim of innocence conflicts with his assistants’ visit to the Registrar of Voters to compile a list of enemies unless Fleming says they misled him. After all, someone earlier convinced him a group of crazed parents were hacking into the district’s computer system.

As another point of view, one person following the case commented, “Fleming needs to study grand jury findings so he’ll know how to lie.” While he might spin his own web, the district has 4,750 employees, and Fleming is out of power. Prior to his resignation in August 2006, his influence was chilling. McGill risked her 25 years of CUSD service and promotions to defend the Flemingdom. She’s now charged with perjury.

Perhaps Fleming bought time to see if other CUSD administrators and/or trustees will be indicted. District Attorney Tony Rackauckas said on May 24 his office still has work to do. Last August, deputies from his office raided CUSD’s administrative building and seized computers and files. Despite taking its time, the Orange County D.A. has a solid conviction rate.

After taking the Fifth Amendment when called by the grand jury, Fleming might need to talk his way out of jail. That’s a worrisome matter for developers, old-guard trustees and high-level administrators who were part of a powerful machine for many years.

Council Should Butt Out
Staff editorial

Before the city’s July 19 budget workshop began, the Urban Land Institute gave an hour-long presentation with regard to business properties along Marguerite Parkway near La Paz Road. Pairing of the two subjects – private property rights and taking care of city business – took an ironic turn by the end of the meeting.

Without provocation from business owners, the city decided to stick its nose into one of the city’s few thriving retail centers that’s fully leased. The owners are independent, their tenants support the status quo, and residents patronize the stores. The PowerPoint presentation by the Urban Land Institute showing the center’s “problems” should have drawn laughs. Photos of the center showed full parking lots. The biggest concern among residents about the south portion of the center isn’t the “tired appearance of buildings” described by ULI. It’s finding a parking place close to Trader Joe’s.

Some of ULI’s comments were insulting. They remarked about the center’s “low-rent” tenants. The discount stores – Steinmart and Big Lots – are also apparently beneath ULI's tastes.

Surprisingly, Mission Viejo residents who shop at the La Paz/Marguerite center generally have most of their teeth.

Several council members commented about the “aging” appearance of the center. Perhaps they haven’t noticed this center looks a lot like the rest of Mission Viejo. Many homes are the same age as the targeted retail area. Buildings north of La Paz/Marguerite – including the Elks Lodge – have a similar look. Near Trabuco, the same can be said of the Jewish Center and nearby retail shops. All are private property.

An exception near the corner of Marguerite and Trabuco is the tennis center, which the city owns. This is what ties Part 1 and Part 2 of the meeting together. Comments from the audience were nearly unanimous to the ULI’s presentation: the city should keep its nose out of the private sector. Public comments during Part 2 – the budget workshop – were unanimous: the city should fix up the property it owns and provide public facilities for the public’s benefit. Residents understand the function of government, and council members evidently do not. Most residents in the audience agreed the city's Marguerite and Felipe recreation facilities are aging, deteriorating and in need of attention.

Having failed to take care of municipal property, the council would now like to tell private property owners how their buildings should look.

The ULI hit a particularly sour note with the recommendation of up to 450 apartments on top of stores, raising the ire of most residents who spoke. MacLean enthusiastically approved, saying he wants more housing in Mission Viejo.

Residents attending the meeting were amused by ULI’s comment a trolley line should be added for city transportation. With traffic being one of the city’s biggest problems, residents should envision cars backing up behind more slow-moving vehicles. The city is already served with a bus route, which has few riders.

Despite lack of support from most of those attending the meeting and no other input from the community, the council agreed to move the ULI’s recommendations forward by forming a task force. After voters dumped Sherri Butterfield and Susan Withrow in 2002 for pushing views opposite those of the residents, their in-your-face attitude is back.

In the November 2006 city election, the blog strongly recommended the removal of Lance MacLean and Trish Kelley from the council. With 59,563 registered voters in the city, only 12,191 voted for Kelley and 8,574 voted for MacLean. Unfortunately, ten candidates split the vote, and both Kelley and MacLean managed to stay in office. The next opportunity for voters to remove any of the current council members is November 2008.

The Buzz column, June 22

Councilman Lance MacLean is finally getting his electronic sign on the corner at La Paz and Marguerite. At the June 18 council meeting, the vote was 3-2 with MacLean, Kelley and Ury wanting the sign. Trying to jump back on the fence, Kelley split hairs by saying, “We’re not approving a sign tonight” – indicating the council merely is shopping for a sign. Does anyone believe that?

***

Truly a joke, Ms. Kelley said about the sign, “This [not an approved sign] will be a tasteful and subtle sign.” Perhaps Ms. Kelley doesn’t understand what an electronic sign is.

***

Those who are unaware of council members’ sense of aesthetics should go on a walking tour. Be sure to walk by ALL council members’ homes. Check the yards (where the grass should be), condition of exterior (paint, roof, gutters) and other maintenance. Does any home stand out as neglected, rundown, aging, etc.? With the council’s June 19 consensus to dictate the looks of private property, is any owner of private property above a review?

***

Ury supported the electronic sign and added it could replace the City Outlook newsletter. The latest edition of the newsletter was 32 pages – mostly drivel – and 500-plus words per page. The council should also order permanent seating at La Paz and Marguerite for residents who want to spend 10-12 hours reading contents of the City Outlook on the message board. Ury’s remark was ridiculous. A resident during public comments complained the council is creating a monument sign for itself. Check the signs on slopes and thoroughfares with all council members’ names prominently displayed. The council already has its own monument signs all over town.

***

As an update on cell towers and wireless facilities, the council on June 18 overturned the Planning Commission’s recent denial of an antenna near Olympiad Road and Alicia Parkway in Florence Joyner Park. MacLean, Kelley, Ury, Reavis and Ledesma unanimously voted in favor of adding the antenna.

***

The June 19 city meeting about the shopping center at La Paz and Marguerite drew criticism from residents regarding the city’s infringing on private property rights. A lone resident said he wanted the center to modernize its look, offering his own example as a property owner who updated his house. He misses the point. He updated his property as he wished, not as the government wished. Residents should note the recommendations include “up to 450” apartments on top of stores.

***

Noticeably absent from the June 19 meeting was 2006 failed council candidate Diane Greenwood, who promoted the idea of a “downtown” at La Paz and Marguerite with apartments on top of retail stores. Greenwood should have teamed up with Lance MacLean – two liberals in a pod – interfering with the rights of property owners and encouraging more traffic and urban decline at the location.

***

Not forgotten but getting there: the most amusing information about Greenwood emerged after she lost the race. If she returns for another round in 2008, her opponents will have fun. Among Greenwood’s campaign antics in 2006, her signs were placed directly in front of those posted by MacLean and Ledesma. When MacLean either touched or moved her sign from in front of his, she called 9-1-1, summoning two police cars to a street corner as if it were a life-and-death emergency. The person acting as if he were her campaign manager took photos of the scene, implying MacLean was about to be charged with a crime. The photos were splashed across a blog in a smear campaign. While The Buzz doesn’t support MacLean, it also doesn’t support wasting city tax dollars – for police calls and emergency services – on political tricks.

***

Three residents approached the public microphone at the June 18 council meeting to complain about multiple families – up to 17 people – occupying a condo. They asked what could be done about it. Councilman Ledesma turned to City Attorney Bill Curley for an answer. Clearly, an answer would not come from the attorney. Curley had been directed months ago by the council to follow up on what could be done. Curley answered on June 18 he’s been “busy” and has not followed through. Taxpayers are actually paying for this nonsense. The Buzz advises homeowners to document everything they find annoying, unlawful, unhealthy, threatening and otherwise unbearable about this multifamily boardinghouse. Include names, descriptions, incidents and dates, license plate numbers and any illegally parked cars. Then call the police. Have as many neighbors join in as possible, as the police like to say, “No one else is complaining.” Hell will freeze over before the council does anything helpful.