Council Shenanigans Update
Editorial Staff

During the Nov. 19 meeting, the council continued discussing Sunrise’s plan to build housing on what is now the Casta del Sol golf course. Councilmen Lance MacLean and Frank Ury supported the option of forming a special assessment district whereby neighboring residents could vote to tax themselves to keep the golf course. Opposed were Trish Kelley, Gail Reavis and John Paul Ledesma, who voted to eliminate a special assessment district from the list of options.

The online video of the council discussion is worth viewing as an example of why residents either don’t or shouldn’t trust this city council: [Video clip removed from the City of Mission Viejo website]

With almost no one in the audience, the council discussed a variety of issues concerning the plans of Sunrise Assisted Living to buy the Casta del Sol golf course. Sunrise hasn’t officially presented its proposal to request rezoning for the southern end of the property and turning the remaining 63 acres into a city park. However, council members say Sunrise has approached them individually.

This blog has revealed Council Members Frank Ury, Lance MacLean, Trish Kelley and Gail Reavis have accepted campaign donations from Roger Faubel, who serves as the public relations agent for Sunrise. Only Councilman John Paul Ledesma hasn’t accepted Faubel’s money. Ledesma led the charge against a special assessment district on Nov. 19.

At a previous meeting on Nov. 5, residents who live in communities adjacent to the golf course (Casta del Sol, Finisterra on the Green and Cypress Point) filled the council chambers and voiced their objections to Sunrise’s plans. The council directed city staff to gather information, including how the city might purchase the golf course. On Nov. 5, MacLean suggested a special assessment district to fund such a purchase.

At the Nov. 19 meeting, the city staff made a brief report with 11 scope-of-work issues. The list includes: 1) use restrictions of the current golf course, 2) golf course financial data and trends, 3) property value as a golf course or alternative uses, 4) identification of alternative uses of the property, 5) yearly maintenance costs as a city course and funding issues, 6) security issues as a golf course and alternative uses, 7) voter initiative options [that could prevent rezoning], 8) statistics on neighboring residents, 9) option of a special assessment district of surrounding neighbors, 10) lighting issues, 11) identification of related consultant costs.

Ledesma made a motion to eliminate item No. 9, a special assessment district, from the options. He said he didn’t support it and mentioned some neighbors on fixed incomes who can’t afford a tax increase. Kelley seconded his motion, and Reavis agreed. After the 3-2 vote (Ledesma, Kelley and Reavis in favor; MacLean and Ury opposed) eliminating item No. 9, the council voted 5-0 to identify financing mechanisms for the property, including the cost to acquire and maintain it.

During the discussion, MacLean’s message to residents seemed to be “Trust us to decide for you.” He said it was foolhardy to eliminate the possibility of a special assessment district.

Ury mentioned having “very strong opinions” about the city buying the golf course. He advocated for considering the special assessment district by claiming the council could “do better work” by having more information.

City hall insiders have said MacLean and Ury are likely to support the developer’s quest to buy the golf course and rezone it for housing. The developer would need only one other council member’s vote to rezone the property.

MacLean and Ury have a history of leading past discussions on behalf of developers. MacLean has advocated for more affordable and high-density housing. Both MacLean and Ury pushed for Steadfast’s housing at Jeronimo and Los Alisos, against strong objections from neighbors and other residents throughout the city. All five of the current council members voted on behalf of Steadfast, and all five accepted campaign donations from Steadfast.

The only resident who made public comments on Nov. 19 about the golf course said the solution is to find two council candidates to replace those who will be up for reelection in 2008, Frank Ury and Gail Reavis. The speaker cited a history of the current council’s adversarial positions against residents, particularly on zoning issues.

Extension to 241 Toll Road not Needed
by Dale Tyler

Once again, the cries of “Save the Toll Road” are echoing through the Mission Viejo council chambers. Our TCA appointee, Councilman Lance MacLean, is trying to convince us that the toll road will be a viable escape route for Orange County residents fleeing a disaster, such as the fires we had last month.

To rebut this point, I provided the following comments to the City Council at their November 19, 2007, meeting.

Regarding item #23 on the November 19, 2007, Agenda:

The proposed extension of the Foothill Eastern (CA-241) Tollway as proposed is a very poor use of resources. Despite the claims of TCA board, this road will ruin one of our truly great parks located near San Onfre State Beach.

In addition, the phony claims of providing an emergency route for Orange County residents have now been proved false. During the fires last month, the I-5 was closed through Camp Pendleton. If the 241 extension had been built, it would have provided no help for those wishing to evacuate the areas stricken by fire. In fact, the I-5 through Camp Pendleton is likely to be the choke point for any southward evacuation, with the 241 only adding to this congestion.

What is really needed is more east-west connectors north of San Clemente to serve the new areas of Rancho Mission Viejo. If the 241 was completed to Cow Camp Road and then a six-lane or wider extension of Cow Camp to I-5 at the 73 was built, this would provide a much more useful transportation improvement. Most of the land to the east of San Clemente and San Juan Capistrano is National Forest and, thus, not available for future development. Extending the 241 past Ortega/Cow Camp Road provides a route very few people would need, mainly serving Rancho Mission Viejo residents en route to San Diego. This is not enough traffic to justify damaging the San Onfre State Park.

Finally, the non-compete agreement the TCA is demanding will actually cause more congestion on the I-5 and prevent new east-west connectors from being built. The 241 extension past Ortega highway will provide less mobility in south Orange County, not provide any useful emergency evacuation alternatives and will likely damage a wonderful State Park.

Let's stop the stupidity and not extend the 241!

CUSD Update
Editorial staff

Last week’s blog included an article about interference from the county GOP in city elections. The article didn’t address school board elections, but it should have.

Steven Greenhut mentioned the topic in his OC Register column [“GOP cowers at taking a stand on Carona,” Commentary,” Nov. 24]. The County Republican Central Committee recently involved itself in the Capistrano Unified School District turmoil by deciding old-guard CUSD trustees should resign. The trustees – all Republicans (Marlene Draper, Sheila Benecke, Mike Darnold and Duane Stiff) – admitted to Brown Act violations.

Last week, the Central Committee discussed a similar resolution, which had evolved from its original demand for OC Sheriff Mike Carona to resign. As a matter of comparison, CUSD trustees weren’t facing criminal charges, but Carona is under federal indictment for corruption. Carona backers continue to argue he is innocent until proven guilty. The county GOP resolution was first watered down and then rejected by its members.

Even if Carona’s backers want to claim the school district issues and the Sheriff’s situation aren’t parallel, CUSD residents should be aware that the same political operatives have irons in both fires. The power clan at the county level includes Scott Baugh, Mark Bucher, Michael Schroeder, lobbyist John Lewis and writers at the “Red” county blog. These folks live outside the Capo district, including Mark Bucher who allegedly directed financial backing to the three challengers who won CUSD seats in 2006.

Involved CUSD parents know that Trustee Ellen Addonizio is a true reformer who gathered recall signatures in 2005. She’s qualified to serve on the board, and she has stellar credentials as a CPA. Throughout the past year, she’s led the charge to reform the district, often as the sole trustee who questions CUSD staff members and demands accountability. She beat an incumbent, Sheila Henness, by a wide margin in the 2006 race.

Two other board seats were up for election in 2006, and both geographic areas already had genuine reform candidates in the race prior to intervention from county players. The real problem involves the agenda of the county’s power club: district reform doesn’t seem to be among their objectives. As a result of outside interference, two candidates with no previous reform involvement ended up on the board. They beat candidates who were passionate about reform but lacked financial backing.

Mission Viejo blog staff members will continue to encourage potential CUSD candidates for future elections who have no ties to the county’s incestuous power club. Bloggers will point out any candidate with such financial backing or political association. When candidates have been chosen from afar on the sole basis of their political loyalty to the county power club, they have lacked basic qualifications (including financial knowledge, business background and relevant work experience). The result is ineffective presence on the board and the inability to address administrative mismanagement and incompetence.

The Buzz Column – Nov. 24

Public comments during the Nov. 19 council meeting addressed the ongoing congregation of day laborers near Los Alisos and Jeronimo. A resident of Lake Forest suggested the Mission Viejo council should stop the law-breaking by reporting it to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Why does it take a resident of another city to remind the Mission Viejo City Council to enforce laws? The city pays the Sheriff more than $1 million per month, and residents (and city visitors) repeatedly are at council meetings to ask for law enforcement. Residents can bypass political buffoonery by calling ICE directly: 1-866-DHS-2-ICE or1-866-347-2423.

***

It was interesting to hear the news that Mission Viejo is the nation’s safest city of its size at about the same time an OC Register story covered gang activity in Mission Viejo. Here’s the politically incorrect truth: a large portion of crime in this area – including gang activity – is due to illegal immigration. According to the Dept. of Homeland Security, ICE arrested 3,563 gang members and their associates in Fiscal Year 2007. Under Operation Community Shield, ICE has arrested more than 7,655 gang members, charging 2,444 with crimes and 5,211 with immigration violations. Mission Viejo is a safe place because of the nature of its law-abiding, peace-loving residents. If council members would stop rezoning commercial property, which enables their developer friends and financiers to build future homes for illegals, Mission Viejo residents could rest easier.

***

A Mission Viejo resident making public comments at the Nov 19 council meeting cited the council’s voting record of undermining the city’s Master Plan, making way for more electronic signs, ignoring the wishes of residents regarding high-density zoning, placing parks and recreation centers on the open market for cell towers and destroying the city’s visual environment. The solution is not to promote council clones such as some of those who challenged incumbents in the 2006 city election. Two of the top three challengers were Diane Greenwood and Bill Barker, who were largely undistinguishable from Lance MacLean and Frank Ury. Both Greenwood and Barker benefited from developer dollars, with Greenwood promoting the rezoning of commercial property at Marguerite and La Paz.

***

Mission Viejo has likely spent more money to avoid building a dog park than the city of Laguna Niguel spent to build one. According to some dog-park enthusiasts, the cost of Laguna Niguel’s Pooch Park with chain-link fencing, wood-chip groundcover, shade structures and double-gated entries was $75,000. The annual maintenance cost is $6,000. Several years ago, a Mission Viejo city staffer gave a PowerPoint presentation at a council meeting after he spent an enormous amount of time researching the subject. Recently, Mission Viejo blew another $40,000 to work up concepts for two inappropriate locations. Despite a criterion that the park shouldn’t be near homes, the city geniuses have settled on two sites (adjacent to Alicia Park and Oso Viejo Park), which border residences. To state the obvious, the city staff doesn’t want a dog park, and it has spent approximately five years thwarting the efforts of those who do. Mission Viejo has estimated the cost of its dog park at $1 million, and it already owns all the sites being discussed.

***

Consider Gertrude Stein’s remark, “Money is always there, but the pockets change.” With the homebuilding market drying up, how will council incumbents fund their reelection campaigns? The need for housing hasn’t diminished, and residents should watch for developers who will instead focus on building apartments or other types of rental units. Keep in mind that Steadfast’s original plan for the parcel at Los Alisos and Jeronimo was a 800-unit apartment project, 100-percent welfare housing.

***

Buzz readers have asked for an update on Modjeska Ranch Animal Rescue’s recovery from the Santiago Fire. One of the Mission Viejo volunteers reported that approximately 80 percent of the animals (including horses, goats, cats, dogs, pigs, birds and iguanas) have returned to the shelter. Some animals with health issues, including respiratory problems, are still at veterinary hospitals or in foster care. Newcomers at the shelter include llamas that lived on a nearby property, which lost its structures in the fire. Modjeska volunteers also credit the shelter’s owners with having an emergency evacuation plan, enabling them to get all the animals out safely before the mandatory evacuation.