Easelgate Update
Editorial staff

City hall released the long-awaited “Easelgate” documents to activist Lisa De Paul-Snyder on Wed., July 2. Her May 23 public records request included costs of a photo display and 500 custom-built easels. The city first responded by saying it would take longer than the usual 10-day period to compile the “voluminous” records. City staffers took 40 days to amass all of 59 pages, which were mostly invoice copies.

City administrator Keith Rattay, the apparent mastermind of the 20th anniversary photo gallery, called Saddleback Valley News on Mon., June 30, and arranged to have himself interviewed by reporter Lindsey Baguio.

Topping the 59-page package, Rattay wrote a memo dated June 18 to City Manager Dennis Wilberg to put his spin on the photo display. Absent is the fanfare of six months ago that the city was creating a photo gallery of record-breaking length – the reason for having 500 easels. Following are Rattay’s claims in the memo:

1. The intent of the photo display was “to create early interest and excitement” for the city’s 20th anniversary by involving the community.
2. Photo frames [easels] were partially made and painted by volunteers. More than 150 volunteers contributed approximately 800 hours to this activity.
3. Because of rainy weekends in January and February, a contractor had to “finish off” easel production to meet the schedule.
4. Materials for each easel cost $12 [no mention of $45/hr construction cost].
5. Easels were taken to the corporate yard to be sorted and stored after the display ended; 257 were given away and 190 were stored for future use.

The veracity of Rattay’s claim of community involvement can be judged in the return of cameras given to the public. The city purchased 500 disposable cameras (costing $1,185.30) to give to any resident who wanted one. Residents were supposed to take pictures and then return the cameras to city hall so that pictures could be developed for the photo gallery. Records show the number of cameras returned was 33. The list of 33 names includes a number of people on the city payroll – some of whom don’t live in Mission Viejo (e.g., City Manager Dennis Wilberg lives in Lake Forest). Many photos in the display were of trees, rocks and sky but no people. The city staffers were at least savvy enough not to take pictures of themselves.

When activists checked other names on the list of 33, they found only 11 who actually live in Mission Viejo and are not connected with city hall. Some others could be children who wouldn’t be listed anywhere, including the database of registered voters.

As noted in a previous Easelgate Update, a photographer who viewed the display said a significant portion of the 500 photos were “artsy” shots of trees and rocks that may have been taken by the same person. Whether the bulk of photos were taken by city staffers or 11 confirmed residents, Rattay’s implication of engaging the community is false.

Rattay’s statement that the city got 150 volunteers to work 800 hours putting easels together is a stunning revelation, which he apparently forgot to mention prior to June 18. But wait – did it happen or was it merely planned? Or did Rattay imagine it was planned? Anyway, Rattay said volunteers couldn’t do the job because of “rainy weekends in January and February.” When Rattay made comments to Saddleback Valley News on May 23, he didn’t mention 150 volunteers, and he didn’t mention alleged vandals destroying easels, as claimed by resident Evelyn Olson in her May 30 letter to SVN. Rattay did state, however, that the easels cost $15 each, and that clearly was a lie. No one asked what the materials cost, which is minor compared with labor costs at $45 per hour. The cost of $45/hr apparently applies to anything involving city contractor Jamey Clark, including making easels or counting banners and poles.

Rattay falsely claimed in the May 2 SVN that easels were dumped on a hillside because there was no place to store them. His statement made no sense. After the story broke April 23 on Brad Morton’s Dispatch blog, a city contractor hauled a large quantity of the easels to a county dump and stacked the remaining easels mere feet from the original pile on the hillside.

Regarding Rattay’s ever-changing numbers, keep in mind that two activists went to the city yard before any easels were given away, and they counted only approximately 310 when a city official said all 500 were there. The missing 190 were likely the ones later discovered in a county dump. Miraculously, easels reappear in Rattay’s June 18 summary, in which a total of 447 are accounted for – given away or stored. How can this be? Are easels reproducing like rabbits under the tarp next to the corporate yard?

Several activists are currently reviewing 59 pages of invoices. One person looking through the records commented, “The information city hall provided is interesting. The invoices from Jamey Clark got my attention immediately. Thanks to insider tips, we know what we’re looking for. The anachronisms and contradictory information almost jumps off the page, with particular conflicts between Rattay’s June 18 memo and the data. I think at least one person in city hall spent 40 days trying to create data and explanations after the fact, and that was a very bad idea.”