|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Initiative Update
Proponents of the Right-To-Vote Initiative received word on March 6 that Mission Viejo’s land-use measure qualified for the next General Election. Registrar of Voters Neal Kelley found that the number of verified signatures (8,327) exceeded the 10 percent threshold of 6,142. However, he stated that the initiative didn’t qualify for a special election at a threshold of 9,213 or 15 percent of Mission Viejo’s registered voters.
Proponents verified signatures prior to submitting them to the city clerk on Jan. 26. Their findings (by comparing data on the petitions with the RoV’s CD of registered voters) indicated the number reached the 15 percent threshold. After receiving Kelley’s figures, they were eager to review the petitions to see why so many signatures had been disqualified. The city clerk told proponents they may not look at the petitions because the initiative was successful in qualifying at 10 percent for the next General Election.
During the March 16 council meeting, City Attorney Bill Curley announced the results of the initiative’s certification process. He stated that the number of signatures failed to reach 15 percent to trigger a special election. The city clerk said she would call the Secretary of State for a ruling on whether or not the proponents can review the signatures.
By law, proponents have 21 days to review the signatures in a failed effort, and the time period ends this week. When the city attorney stated on March 16 that the effort failed to reach 15 percent, he confirmed the legal grounds for proponents to review the signatures.
One of the proponents commented after the March 16 meeting, “Is this situation a surprise to anyone? We know that the city staff and council majority oppose the initiative although they’re officially not supposed to take a position. If the council majority and their attorney manage to keep the initiative off the ballot altogether, residents will have one more reason to change this majority by recalling Councilman Lance MacLean.
|
|
|
|
|
|
MacLean Recall Petition Gets City Clerk’s Approval
Press Release
Mission Viejo, CA, March 19, 2009 – On March 18, Mission Viejo City Clerk Karen Hamman approved the petition to recall Councilman Lance MacLean. Hamman addressed her March 18 letter to one of the recall proponents, Dale Tyler, stating the petition format meets the requirements of the Elections Code as to form and wording. Hamman had rejected the original proposed petition on March 4 and asked for minor revisions. Tyler submitted the second version on March 9.
In her letter to Tyler, Hamman wrote, “Pursuant to Elections Code Section 11220, the petition shall be filed with the City Clerk’s office no later than 160 days from March 18, 2009. Therefore, the petition shall be filed with my office no later than the close of normal office hours on Tuesday, August 25, 2009.”
Hamman stated that the petition must be signed by at least 15 percent of the city’s 62,621 registered voters to qualify for a recall election. The minimum number needed is 9,393 verified signatures.
One of the recall proponents, Lisa De Paul-Snyder, responded to the news by saying she would begin getting signatures immediately. She said, “This has been a long time coming. MacLean has consistently demonstrated he’s unfit for office. He campaigned to 'restore public trust through open, accessible and responsive city government.’ He instead has championed pointless expenditures, which are relentlessly promoted through costly, taxpayer-funded public relations campaigns. MacLean has given us pro-developer, anti-resident rhetoric, proposals and voting.”
Recall proponent Beverly Cruse agreed with De Paul-Snyder’s assessment that the recall is long overdue. Cruse added, “MacLean’s performance is far below what I expect from a representative of the people, and he continues giving residents more reasons to recall him.”
Hamman’s approval of the petition was the final step of legal requirements proponents had to meet prior to gathering signatures. On Feb. 2, MacLean was served with notice that 51 Mission Viejo residents were initiating a recall to remove him from the council. A public notice was published in the Feb. 13 Orange County Register, and MacLean filed an answer to the notice. The proponents’ grounds for the recall as well as MacLean’s answer are included in the petition.
Many of those who initiated the action as proponents or supporters of the recall helped MacLean win a council seat in 2002. They said he campaigned on principles of open government and fiscal responsibility but changed dramatically after he was elected.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CUSD Update: Carter’s Party Is Over
The CUSD board of trustees put Supt. Woodrow Carter on paid administrative leave on Jan. 7 and fired him on March 9. For months, the trustees have been legally prevented from discussing closed-session information and personnel matters that involved allegations against Carter.
Teachers union members and a few parents have lambasted the trustees during public comments at board meetings, knowing the trustees couldn’t address questions and accusations about Carter.
The tables turned on March 19 when the district released a report describing the trustees’ charges against the ex-superintendent. The trustees had conducted an investigation of Carter after putting him on leave, and some of the findings are stunning. A few of the charges are outlined in a March 20 OC Weekly article by Daffodil J. Altran, “Spa getaway bites ex-superintendent in the butt.”
Altran’s list of Carter’s deeds includes some of the following:
- His weekend at a spa, partially funded by an architectural firm that later received multimillion dollar contracts from CUSD.
- Misappropriation of district funds for political purposes (Fleming is awaiting trial after being charged with felonies for similar allegations). Evidence of illegal use of district time and resources was found in Carter’s emails seeking support for school board candidates Erin Kutnick, Duane Stiff, Andrea Kooiman and Ken Maddox. Carter also directed his assistant to promote Kooiman’s visits to schools. He asked OC School Supt. Bill Habermehl to endorse Kutnick, Stiff, Kooiman and Maddox.
- He wrote to ex-trustee Sheila Benecke, asking about her opinion of how the November election would turn out: “Will I be stuck with [candidates Sue] Palazzo and Mike Winsten? If so, I need to give notice to my landlord!!"
- He illegally added 18 months of severance pay to his contract without the board’s approval.
- He deceived the board by “double dipping” on reimbursements and prepared misleading agendas.
- He withheld information requested by the board and breached confidentiality laws.
- He behaved inappropriately (usually angrily) with parents
The board’s 54-page report is backed with 58 pages of exhibits.
The report and Carter’s rebuttal can be found in an OC Register article: http://www.ocregister.com/articles/carter-report-district-2341049-school-board
Supporting documentation was forwarded to this blog by a CUSD parent, and can be accessed with these links: 4of9 5of9 6of9 7of9 8of9 9of9 These files contain obscenity-laced communication and include the following email written by Carter on Jan. 5 while he was at work: "There are 5 trustees who are as cowardly as any group I known [sic], and they backed off trying to fire me. I hope the hell they do, then I would get a nice buy-out and go on an extended golfing vacation!"
Carter also sent numerous emails to personal friends about sensitive and/or confidential issues. A Jan. 6 email from a CUSD parent to Carter starts off with, "Hi Babe" and asks questions “Is it true that Maddox is back on our side? Do we have three solids now?” She signs off with "hugs, kisses and massages. XXOOXX”
A Dec. 21 email from Carter ends, “Meanwhile, I absolutely am crazy about your little Sister. Gonna spend 10 days with her over the break. I will try to whip [redacted] into shape … that will keep me sharp for January when I take up the sword with the trustees again.”
A Jan. 12 email from Carter: “I am in Dana Bro … awaiting a call from my fine lawyer friend. I suspect they [trustees] have to go back into closed session after the regular meeting. I will call you tomorrow. Where are all the white women??”
On Jan. 6, Carter writes to ex-trustee Sheila Benecke, “It will be interesting to see what happens tonight. I really let them have it in closed session Dec. 18th … this could be pay-back. So be it … I am tired of this little troop of idiots!”
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Buzz, March 21
An alert Buzz reader responded to a statement in last week’s column. One paragraph questioned how city administrator Keith Rattay had managed to become the person in charge of almost everything in city hall. The reader correctly stated that Rattay is the director is public services and has never been the director of public works as stated on the blog. The reader is correct – thank you for the catch.
Another reader updated information about mature palm trees being planted along Crown Valley Parkway. The cost has been estimated at approximately $10,000 to purchase and place each tree. The reader’s comment: “I don’t know about the cost per tree, but your total for the number of trees is way low. You stated 15 trees were added, but the workers are still planting trees. It’s more like 50 new palm trees now, and there are new ones near the intersection of Crown Valley and Marguerite. It is worth finding out the total cost because taxpayers should revolt over a $500,000 tree-planting binge.”
Cost isn’t the only problem with placing mature trees in medians or close to a roadway. Traffic deaths in Mission Viejo along thoroughfares often result when a driver hits a tree, wall or other immovable object. Safety is the foremost consideration, not how the roadside looks. Trees and pillars along Crown Valley are hazardous, particularly in medians. Daytime driving is not as risky when traffic is barely moving, but most of the traffic deaths result from high-speed crashes at night.
OC Register columnist Frank Mickadeit made a reference to City Councilman Lance MacLean in his March 19 column. Mickadeit’s column makes fun of Irvine’s “Great Pork,” and the reference to MacLean is with regard to his anger issues. Mission Viejo’s council is known countywide as a circus and an embarrassment.
Check out a humorous article in last week’s OC Weekly about OC Sheriff Sandra Hutchens revoking the concealed weapon permit of Orange County political bigwig Michael Schroeder. Go to http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/breaking-news/sandra-say-it-aint-so/ . Reporter R. Scott Moxley pokes fun, saying “Schroeder's weapon isn't always his fat checkbook. This time, it's a handgun he's been allowed to conceal for years thanks to a CCW permit given to him by his pal, former Sheriff Mike Carona.”
Papers released last week by Capo school district attorneys include the files of CUSD ex-superintendent A. Woodrow Carter. Carter’s emails and text exchanges contain raunchy references and “adult language.” Look for links to the documents in this week’s article about CUSD. An allegation against Carter describes his attempt to get support and endorsements for his favorite CUSD board candidates in the November 2008 race. One of this blog’s contributors made a public records request several months ago while trying to discover whether or not Carter had contacted county schools Supt. Bill Habermehl for endorsements. Such contact would be illegal. Habermehl’s office didn’t provide any documents in response to the blog contributor’s official request for public information. This week’s CUSD update shows that Carter asked Hebermehl and others for endorsements, support and other help for his choice of candidates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
