Easelgate Update
Editorial Staff

Reaction continues after a controversial letter to the editor appeared in the May 30 Saddleback Valley News. Mission Viejo resident Evelyn Olson claimed she saw someone vandalize the city’s photo display while 500 easels were still standing. Readers doubting her story are unanimously asking why she didn’t call the police. The letter from Allan Pilger in the June 6 Saddleback Valley News suggests more dialogue is warranted.

After reading Olson’s letter, city activists called the Sheriff’s Dept. to ask if anyone reported vandalism. An OCSD representative answered on May 31 that no one reported any vandalism. Additionally, Mission Viejo Chief of Police Lt. Steve Bernardi told a blog staffer on June 1 that he hadn’t heard anything about vandalism. He added that the easels may have been damaged when the display was taken down. In the May 23 SVN, city administrator Keith Rattay acknowledged “some of the easels broke.”

Two weeks ago, an activist requested information from city hall for the complete costs of the photo display. This would include disposable cameras, photo development and enlargement, lamination and mounting, signage and all costs for easels – materials, cutting the wood, sanding, assembling, painting, transport and other labor. Activists already have some of the costs, but it will be interesting to see what city hall provides.

City hall responded to the request for public records by stating extra time would be needed to compile the information. The costs are for one project, and the information should be readily available as such. Otherwise, how does the city know it stayed below the $30,000 threshold – the city manager’s ceiling for spending without council approval?

What’s the real issue causing a delay? Does someone in city hall not want the information released? As another problem, Rattay was quoted in the May 23 issue of SVN saying the easels cost “approximately $15 each.” Residents estimating costs have guessed the figure is at least $50 each.

Given the city manager’s limit of $30,000 per project, does anyone on the city staff think it’s acceptable to string out a project’s costs to deceive the public? Will any city staffer argue that 500 disposable cameras, development and enlargement of photos and so on were separate “projects” and not components of the photo display? All the city manager had to do was tell the council he wanted $50,000 or $100,000 for an easel project.

The council majority has approved everything from a $300,000 Rose Parade float to a $15-million senior center expansion. These folks aren’t real concerned about spending someone else’s money.

Keep in mind that the city manager has had numerous opportunities to explain why a couple hundred broken easels were trashed on a hillside next to the city yard.