City Hall – Mission Viejo’s Money Pit
Staff editorial

How does Mission Viejo city hall react to a downturn in the economy – do administrators tighten their belts? Heck no! They hire more employees and talk about dipping into reserves.

City revenues are flat, and administrators during the June 30 budget meeting projected more flatness. However, numbers show a decrease of 4.3 percent in revenues – that’s not flat. Instead of cutting back, they plan to increase spending by one percent and add 3.5 full-time equivalent city employees, bringing the total to 152.3 FTE positions. Do residents know that city hall also contracts with temporary employees each month?

The revised operating budget is $59.5 million for 2008-2009.

What’s gone wrong in a contract-based city that was designed as a model of small government? This blog often compares Mission Viejo’s bloated city staff with that of Rancho Santa Margarita. RSM’s population is approximately half of Mission Viejo’s, and RSM has a city staff of twenty-some people. While RSM’s homeowners association (SAMLARC – Santa Margarita Landscape and Recreation Corporation) owns its parks, and the cities aren’t entirely comparable, readers get the idea.

Just like Mission Viejo, RSM refers to itself as a built-out, contract-based city. RSM contracts for such professionals as engineers and planners if and when they’re needed. By contrast, Mission Viejo maintains positions that should have been cut back or eliminated when the city’s infrastructure was completed and residential development and retail construction ended.

A May 23 request for public records by activist Lisa De Paul-Snyder has resulted in 59 pages of “Easelgate” documents that can be viewed online. Residents should look at how city hall staffers are throwing away money on extravagant make-work projects. After city employees compiled the documents, administrator Keith Rattay called a news reporter two days prior to De Paul-Snyder receiving the information. Reporter Lindsey Baguio of Saddleback Valley News got a copy directly from Rattay. Baguio headlined the incident “Damage Control” when she reported her conversation with Rattay in the July 4 SVN.

The “damage” is not just the black eye for city hall resulting from exposure of city administrators who threw away money and lied about it. The real damage is to taxpayers. It’s been a long time since anyone on the council deserved the title of watchdog. Perhaps residents expect the city staff to act responsibly and tell the truth about what they’ve done, but that’s not happening. Voters can raise the bar this November by electing council members who have a proven record of fiscal responsibility and some basic sense about business management.

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.”

Toll Road Hearing Set for July 25
Editorial staff

The Department of Commerce will hear the Transportation Corridor Agency’s appeal on Fri., July 25, at the UCI Bren Center in Irvine regarding the proposed 241 extension. The initial request from TCA was to shut out the public by holding the appeal privately. The TCA hopes to overturn the Coastal Commission’s February decision to reject Consistency Certification of the 241 South Toll Road Project.

Community groups including Friends of the Foothills and Save San Onofre Coalition are organizing their supporters to attend the hearing. Michael Fitts, the staff attorney for Endangered Habitats League, spoke at a Volunteer Mobilization meeting in San Clemente on June 30 on alternatives to completion of the toll road. Prior to introducing Fitts, one of the organizers announced, “If anyone is here from the TCA to see what we’re doing, you don’t need to spy on us. We’re doing the same things we did at the hearing in Del Mar.” Residents were urged to attend the July 25 hearing and express their opinion in person so that the Department of Commerce can see how many people are invested in protecting a popular state beach and pristine watershed.

Residents acknowledge the need to relieve traffic congestion, but they disagree on how much relief the proposed 241 extension would provide. Blog publisher Dale Tyler wrote an editorial on Jan. 19 explaining why the southern half of the extension (running south from Ortega to the I-5 near San Onofre State Beach) isn’t a good choice. Here’s an excerpt from his editorial:

“The south section of the 241 is the controversial part and will carry very little traffic. How many people will want to use the 241 to get from San Diego County to Riverside? If the real traffic need is for flow north, then why is the TCA proposing building the southern section of the 241 extension? The answer is simple: money and power. If the 241 does not connect to I-5, the TCA apparently believes that traffic and tolls will be much lower, despite common sense evidence to the contrary. The TCA staff members probably also think they gain more prestige by having a road that connects two other major highways, I-5 and CA-55. In fact, considering the extra costs of building the southern section that will get little use, they are probably endangering their bond holders by adding the southern section. One possible answer to this is the ability to force the I-5 to remain congested by invoking the non-compete agreement with OCTA. In this way, traffic on I-5 will be so bad that the TCA hopes people will bypass the I-5 and take their toll road instead. Once again, this shows that the TCA staff and shills do not care about transportation, but merely about the profits from their toll road.”

Several Mission Viejo residents attended the July 1 meeting in San Clemente. They said audience members included a wide range of South County citizens including environmentalists as well as others who want to see real solutions to traffic problems instead of enriching developers.

The time and agenda of the July 25 hearing in Irvine are to be announced. To connect with volunteers who will attend the hearing, email robin.everett@sierraclub.org.

CUSD Update
Editorial staff

As anticipated, Capo school board Trustees Mike Darnold and Duane Stiff (the two remaining old-guard trustees) didn’t attend the July 1 special meeting to witness new Trustees Sue Palazzo and Ken Maddox being sworn into office. Following the June 24 recall of former Trustees Marlene Draper and Sheila Benecke, the Capistrano Dispatch reported that Darnold and Stiff had scheduled vacations for July 1. Also on vacation was Supt. Woodrow Carter.

Was it a coincidence all three were absent? Perhaps Darnold and Stiff, who have four months remaining in what is likely their final term, weren’t up to friendly gestures.

The July 1 meeting began promptly at 6 p.m. and ended at 6:15. Trustee Ellen Addonizio administered the oath of office to Pallazo and Maddox. In the reorganization of the new board, Addonizio was elected president, Anna Bryson became vice president and Larry Christianson became the clerk, each with 5-0 votes. Palazzo and Maddox spoke briefly, thanking their supporters and introducing family members in attendance.

It took a staff member two tries to switch nameplates around after Addonizio moved to the left side of the dais to assume her duties as president. Former president Darnold’s nameplate wouldn’t budge from its holder. The symbolism wasn’t lost on audience members who had worked in the recall.

The district’s financial woes and controversial issues could make any celebration short-lived. Some parents are speculating Supt. Carter will soon be fired by the new board majority of reform trustees. Constituents should consider, however, that Palazzo and Maddox have to run again in the November election to keep their seats. If the new majority gets off to a stormy start by firing the superintendent – regardless of his questionable performance – it could backfire at the ballot box. On July 3, the Orange County Register posted an online article about the D.A. investigating Carter’s contract. The D.A. would like to know how the contract was modified without approval of the board to include a lucrative termination clause. Carter says he has done nothing wrong.

A constituent reacted, “I think Carter will last four more months at CUSD. He’s shown he’s a politician but not a leader. I doubt the board majority will get rid of him until they’re certain about their own futures after the November election.”

The district is operating on an interim budget while the Legislature continues to work on the state budget. Some people viewed Carter’s interim budget was as a tool to provide leverage against the recall with happy talk about rehiring. As a result of the old board majority passing the interim budget, CUSD has an obligation to rehire some employees whether it can afford them or not. Carter’s electioneering worked, as the teachers union came out against the recall.

Former Supt. James Fleming’s heydays came during boom times of real estate development. Money that should have gone toward modernization or saving for a rainy day was funneled into an extravagant administration center and an overpriced school next to a dump in San Juan Capistrano. A district with an annual budget approaching half a billion dollars couldn’t make ends meet in good times, and it now has a huge budget deficit and deteriorating older facilities.

Palazzo lightheartedly mentioned at the July 1 meeting that she’d already found $7,000 for CUSD by looking through the State Controller’s unclaimed property. It’s a start.

The Buzz, July 4, 2008

Last week on another blog, someone anonymously posted that most Mission Viejo city hall employees are decent folks who don’t support what some of the top managers are doing. Here’s a thought. If an employee knows of wrongdoing, give specifics. Employees might be surprised how quickly a corrupt supervisor can be ousted when evidence surfaces. The Year of the Rat (informant) could be followed by the Year of the Exterminator.

***

Why did two residents write letters to the editor of Saddleback Valley News with false implications against the Mission Viejo Right-To-Vote Initiative? The two supported failed candidate Diane Greenwood in the 2006 council campaign. Greenwood was proposing that the retail center at La Paz and Marguerite should be razed and rebuilt so she could enjoy dinner in “downtown” Mission Viejo. Mission Viejo as a master-planned, decentralized community has no downtown. Greenwood fails to mention (according to a study paid for by the city) that 350 to 450 apartments on top of stores would be needed for financial feasibility. The Right-To-Vote Initiative could derail putting apartments on top of stores if voters decide it doesn’t benefit the community.

***

Lisa De Paul-Snyder wasn’t the only one who saw the pile of easels on a hillside. At least one resident called Councilwoman Trish Kelley to ask about the trashed easels. A way to remember the date of the discovery is that it happened on Earth Day, April 22 – a pile of rubbish that included mangled easels, laminated signs, etc., as the city staff’s tribute to Mother Earth. Activists toured the city yard (next to the sewage treatment plant, which stinks to high heaven) to view and count remaining easels on May 5. The activists dubbed the experience “Stinko de Mayo.” Perhaps other residents would like to share their knowledge of Easelgate by emailing this blog.

***

A resident who received a copy of the “Easelgate” documents via the Internet wrote a comment: “I saw in the information that two city staff members and one Mission Viejo resident decided which photos were representative of what was important in Mission Viejo to those who live here. It’s nice to know that photos of a leaf, a rock, a tree and the sky were determined to be important enough to merit enlargement and lamination for display on the custom-made easels.”

***

In long-delayed proceedings, two former Capistrano Unified School District administrators will be back in court on Fri., July 11, for a pre-trial hearing. They face multiple felony charges for their roles in the creation of “enemies lists” that included the names of parents and children. The “enemies” included community members who participated in the 2005 effort to recall all seven CUSD trustees. Former Supt. James Fleming is charged with using district employees and resources for political purposes McGill got tripped up when she lied to the Grand Jury. She has been charged with two felonies: conspiracy to commit an act injurious to the public and perjury.