itchingpost.com

CM Unplugged Email

2007-05-12T09:56:00.000-07:00

Costa Mesa Unplugged - our new column in the Daily Pilot - debuted on Thursday, May 10.

We've set up a new email account for readers to reach us. If you have news tips; the inside skinny on some tidbit of Costa Mesa politics, culture, entertainment, etc.; or you just want to comment on a specific column, write us at cmunplugged@yahoo.com

itchingpost signs off

2007-04-27T09:54:00.000-07:00

itchingpost.com is signing off. We'll miss the banter. But we won't be far away. In fact, we'll just be in a different medium...ever ready with our box of rubber gloves to keep Costa Mesa government and those who serve us, shall we say, on their toes.

Here's the scoop. We've been asked by the Daily Pilot to rekindle our column writing...to bring back our trenchant and acerbic observations of the Costa Mesa government machinery.

We're happy to oblige. It's the Daily Pilot where we first took up the task of probing and lampooning the workings and foot soldiers of our municipal government in a column called Between The Lines. Later, we penned a different collection of thoughts under the Watchdog banner.

We don't know what this new column will be called...but, it won't hold any punches, and we'll call 'em as we see 'em.

The good news for us is that we'll again hold court before a larger audience, and we'll be a regular seat warmer at City Council, Planning and Parks Commission meetings. We're really pumped that we now have an excuse to dust off our collection of ball caps, which sort of became our brand back in the Between The Lines days.

In the meantime, we'll keep itchingpost.com live so past writings can be reread.

To all of our readers, thanks. And to our many sources, rest assured we'll always be available to hear you out.

Thanks for reading. Good night.

Small heads and the arrogance of power

2007-04-18T09:57:00.000-07:00

Predictably - and with a deep sigh - the troika of shrinking heads on the Costa Mesa City Council last evening told Costa Mesa's police leadership that it didn't know what it was talking about where gang prevention and intervention is concerned. And, so, this city got a half-solution that's all stick; a methodology based in ideology that simply says beat the crap out of those gang bastards and eventually they'll go away.

Except that they won't.

Allan Mansoor, Eric Bever and Wendy Leece could not bring themselves to appropriate 65 grand for the retention of a CMPD administered gang interventionist specialist.

Mansoor rationalized his opposition with the claim that he has seen no evidence that gang prevention-intervention in the NMUSD-run ASK (Advocates Supporting Kids) program has materially reduced gang activity in Costa Mesa. He offered that the district should use part of its $8 million in federal grants to prove to the city that prevention-intervention works.

Mansoor's argument was stunningly ironic, if not unconvincing. Here's a guy who hasn't missed a beat tongue lashing the NMUSD for its failure to stem the district's truancy challenges. So then how does his dearth of confidence in the district where truancy is concerned translate to any sense of his that the district has the capability to prove that gang prevention-intervention works? It doesn't. And he knows it. His discourse was simply a gutless cover for his ideology.

We believe the mayor's rejection of the expertise and advice of the city's police leadership is cemented in his intractable ideology that embraces only enforcement, and which rejects any kind of socially based intervention as panty-waist liberalism. We'd have a lot more respect for the mayor if he'd just say that instead of peddling weak, shallow and patently disingenuous intellectualizations.

Bever's slapdown of the gang prevention-intervention component of the program struck us much more as a herculian flexing of ego, power and a self-annointed expertise in sociology based on his experiences as a tot in a "neighborhood where there were gangs." Dr. Bever theorizes, essentially, this: That tots growing up in a family where there is a gang member or members are lost causes and that not one plug nickle of taxpayer money is worth an attempt to divert them from a certain fate.

So then, Bever's gang suppression model goes something like this: Children growing up in families where there are gang influences will become gang members. This means we must prep ourselves for this inevitability, and provide ourselves the enforcement tools to remove the little bugger from society once he commits himself to gangbanging.

Bever's mental gearwork on this one is lubed with stunning arrogance and high-viscosity ignorance. Based nearly exclusively on his experiences as a youth long ago (and, of course, the times never change) - and ignoring decades of science that demonstrates prevention-intervention can be effective - sociologist Bever consigns tikes in gang families to a gangbanging fate and seems content to deal with them only after they've careened to the dark side.

As for Wendy Leece...well, we're not sure what she really thinks. At times during the discussion she seemed to lean toward an understanding of the prevention-intervention component. But, as lemmings go, she toed the mayor's line. Independent thinking, it seems, is not among her skill sets.

A manifest lack of judgment

2007-04-09T22:03:00.000-07:00

When Jane Garland - Newport-Mesa Unified School District's director of outreach and advocacy - advocated in the April 7 edition of the Daily Pilot for a daytime curfew to help stem the district's truancy challenges (here), the community immediately offered support and opposition to Garland's essay in the Pilot's on-line blog feature.

Two of the participants in the dialogue were Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and Mayor Pro Tem Eric Bever. And in their comments, both men displayed a manifest lack of judgment that - not for the first time - underscores a cavalier, blast-from-the-hip style that is not in the city's best interests.

Mansoor, in his post, wrote: Ms. Garland, with all due respect, I believe it is parents, teachers, and the school board who need to reduce the 222 unexcused absences per day. The "it takes a village" approach is not the answer. If the 222 unexcused absences per day were under the jurisdiction of the city, there would be a line a mile long at public comments. Where is the demand from the parents for results from the school board? It seems to me that the school district itself has an unexcused absence on this issue.

A couple of observations, here. One might argue that the troika of parents, teachers and the school board the mayor cites indeed comprises, on some scale, a "village." But, beyond that, it's the mayor's undisciplined urge to publicly tongue lash the school district and one of its officials - and even the parents of school children, presumably many of whom voted for the mayor - over their "unexcused absense on this issue."

The problem is, Mr. Mayor, the NMUSD is an autonomous legislative agency empowered by the State of California, not the City of Costa Mesa. Costa Mesa has no authority to compel the district to tie its shoe (or issue "unexcused" absences), let alone mandate how it should police truants. Nevertheless, the NMUSD is a partner with Costa Mesa - most notably and in writing through the JUA governing the use of NMUSD property for the recreational needs of the community's youth and adults.

This is to say that the City needs the NMUSD far more than the NMUSD needs Costa Mesa.

Don't think so? Well, the district doesn't need the CMPD to enforce truancy laws, since it is perfectly capable under California law of establishing its own law enforcement agency not unlike the Los Angeles Unified School District (and perhaps it should do so). And it certainly has no legal obligation to provide recreational fields for Costa Mesa's youth and adults after school hours. Nor does it need the City's money; it has every authority under the law to ask voters for money via some tax or another (and it's proven to be effective at that).

In this context, the mayor would do well to bridle his tongue against undisciplined and reckless commentary that has the potential to damage the City's partnership with the NMUSD.

For his part, Bever posted this entry aimed at the district:

"The CMPD does deal with truants currently. What they don't do is send the kids through the courts for ditching school. They generally drag them back to their schools. From there, the school's job is to use their system to address the problem. I recall reading about the school's get-tough policy on truants a year or two ago, and it sounded like they had some effective measures and practices in place (SARB). What seems to be lacking is a commitment on the part of the schools to use the tools they already have in place. "

Bever's remarks were a bit more disciplined than the Mayor's. Nevertheless, he should recognize that bitch slapping a government agency that Costa Mesa needs to work with if the city is to improve is not conducive to a productive partnership in achieving said improvement.

C'mon, boys, grow up and shut up. And if you have something to say to the district, use the proper channels.

Email shows Leece requested seating change

2007-03-20T17:57:00.000-07:00

itchingpost.com has obtained from a confidential source a copy of an email that indicates Costa Mesa City Councilmember Wendy Leece in early February made a request to City Manager Allan Roeder to change seats with Councilmember Linda Dixon.

In the email from Leece to Roeder dated February 7, 8:19 p.m., Ms. Leece writes: "Hi Allan, I would like to request to be moved on the dais to be seated between you and Eric. I have discussed this with the mayor and he concurs. Thank you, Wendy."

Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor is listed as a cc on the email.

The email appears to directly contradict statements made by Leece to Daily Pilot staffer Alicia Robinson in Robinson's March 19 report on the Seating Chart fiasco (here). In that story, Leece told Robinson, "I don't remember how that did come up."

While the email makes it clear that Leece hatched and discussed the seating switch with Mansoor, it's not clear if either councilmember discussed it with any of the other councilmembers (a potential Brown Act violation). No other member of council, including Dixon, is listed as being cc'd on the email.

It is at least curious to us that Leece - assuming the email substantiates that she initiated the chair swap request - was unable to remember her initiative when interviewed by the Daily Pilot earlier this week.

I forget...sort of

2007-03-19T08:25:00.000-07:00

On the eve of the Costa Mesa City Council Seating Chart pimple coming to a head, Daily Pilot staffer Alicia Robinson reports today (here) on just how poisoned the council chemistry has become over this one.

Apart from the surrealism that city staffers have had to spend any time refereeing this spitball dustup (about $120 worth, according to the Pilot), two things emerge from Robinson's piece.

First, Mayor Allan Mansoor is fast becoming the poster boy for blameless autocraticism. Remember the ICE initiative? No study session. No opportunity for public input prior to the issue showing up on the agenda. The mayor simply piloted the thing on to the city's frontyard without warning. Recall, too, the mayor's unannounced zephyr to dismantle part of the Costa Mesa Country Club's Mesa Linda course to make way for soccer fields.

Now we learn, according to Robinson's story today, that Mansoor never approached Dixon about the potential seat change. But never mind that. He's the mayor and it's not his fault that this has become an issue.

So then, who's to blame for this lawn-dump, Mr. Mayor? "The Daily Pilot is turning this into a huge issue when it's not." Ah...of course.

The other curiosity we learn about is that Councilmember Wendy Leece is prone to hazy recollection. As to how the seating squabble came to be, she tells Robinson: "I don't remember how that did come up."

Well, sort of. In nearly the same breath, Leece says that "it's been a challenge where I've been sitting, so I think I brought it up to the mayor that it would be helpful to get some answers during the meeting."

Hmmm. Okay.

We conclude with a suggestion: The seating chart doo-dah is scheduled as the last item of business on the council's March 20 agenda. And given that the political math guarantees Councilmember Linda Dixon will be moving, we urge the council to move the item to the lead of all other business.

After all, the city's business is far too important to abide the "challenge" confronting Ms. Leece. Costa Mesa will benefit if she begins receiving the counsel of City Manager Allan Roeder as soon as possible.

Colorless crime update

2007-03-16T10:38:00.000-07:00

We pick up on yesterday's post on colorless crime - our argument that certain Costa Mesa voices want to look at violent crime in our city only through a prism - with a Daily Pilot brief on the March 14 stabbing of a Newport Beach lad over on Costa Mesa's troubled west side (here).

According to the Pilot report, Costa Mesa Police are on the hunt for a mascara-wearing 19- to 20-year-old male approximately 6-feet-2, and 170 pounds with blond hair and a powder-white face. The other perp is described as a 17- to 18-year-old, 5-foot-10, 150-pound male with black, slicked-back hair and a partial goatee.

The vehicle used by the perps is described by the victim to police as a silver Honda.

Can we expect a hue and cry from our city's leaders and improver citizens about the proliferation of white, gothic gangs? Afterall, two months ago county and city badges rounded up a bunch of white supremacists within Costa Mesa. This second event could mean Costa Mesa may be trending more like Boise, Idaho instead of Newport Beach.

Perhaps not. Over at the CM Press today (here), we're treated to a quaint history reminding us that Zorro was really an Irish soldier of fortune named Bill who ultimately hung himself before the Mexicans could toast him at the stake for knocking up the wife of the Spanish Viceroy of Mexico.

Here's the deal. We don't give a rat's ass about the color of folks who commit crime in Costa Mesa. Just get them off the street. All of them.

Colorless crime

2007-03-15T19:06:00.000-07:00

On the occasions when violent crime occurs in Costa Mesa, we have come to expect - as we are sure the sun will rise - that certain voices within the community will want to know one thing: Is it gang related? And if it is they'll quickly announce - eyes flickering with rage - that the perps are most assuredly of Latino or Hispanic heritage, and that our city's leaders must act swiftly, decisively to rid our little municipality of these unseemly agents and the social heroin that attracts them.

We won't bother to remind regular readers who the source(s) is/are of the predictably assumptive, above-the-fold editorials that follow such events. We'll just say that according to their theory, violent gang-related crime is brown crime. And there is no other.

Or, at least, no other worth mentioning.

Remember how, two months ago, Costa Mesa made national headlines (here) when our city's police department - in collaboration with the Orange County Sheriffs Department - busted a handful of white supremacists allegedly part of the Public Enemy No. 1 gang? The sweep was an orchestrated law-enforcement initiative that broke up a ring which was, allegedly and alarmingly, poised to murder cops.

Strangely, only tumbleweeds rolled and crickets chirped from within the confines of the usual community sources who are ready to run the Mexicans out of town whenever a gun goes off or some grafitti shows up on a wall.

Most recently, there is this troubling event as reported today by Orange County Register staffer Kimberley Edds (here). According to Edds' report, a 17-year-old Newport Beach youth was stabbed March 14 while walking on Placentia Avenue near Shalimar Drive.

According to CMPD Sgt. Mike Ginther, the perps were dressed in Gothic clothes (not exactly your standard dress for Latino or Hispanic gang members). Too, the assailants reportedly asked the young man - prior to the stabbing - if he liked "to kick it with Hispanics."

Apparently, the victim gave them the wrong answer (his girlfriend, according to the OC Register report, is Hispanic). And so, naturally, they cut him.

So we cup our ear and tune our gain waiting to here the outrage from the bleachers where the pontificators hold season tickets to Costa Mesa's disintegration. Again, nothing. Crickets and tumbleweeds.

Now then, if the crime-is-rampant crowd in this community - certainly those who regularly spew or hold press conferences and offer rewards whenever a crime smells of a gang orientation of a certain tint - hope to have any credibility when it comes to actually snuffing out crime and gangs in Costa Mesa, we'd better hear them singing whenever events likes these occur. Regardless of color.

Otherwise, shut up.

Musical chairs

2007-03-08T12:22:00.000-08:00

We hated musical chairs back in the hey. The Costa Mesa City Council's latest calliope-accompanied doo-dah reminded us of this. When the match gets down to the last, coveted chair - in this case adjacent to City Manager Allan Roeder - booger munchers tend to get really snotty.

And so it was on Tuesday in the hallowed chamber halls - err, Big Top - of Costa Mesa's civic center.

It went down like this: To wrap up his council comments, Mayor Allan Mansoor thought it would be really swell if the new kid in class (Councilmember Wendy Leece) could sit next to the teacher (Roeder). Afterall, the teacher is really smart and all and the new kid...well, she's got kind of a big learning curve in front of her, ya know. A little extra help might bring her test scores up. And we know how important those are to home values and helping us be more like Newport Beach and less like Santa Ana.

But there was a problem. Councilmember Linda Dixon - who's been in class awhile - likes sitting next to the teacher. And she thought the mayor was trying to put the unpopular kids together 'cause they're kind of weird and everything and they never have the right answers. But neener-neener, Mr. Mayor, you're not the boss of her. And your mother wears Army boots.

The Mayor, seeing how he wasn't going to get his way, pulled the bully card and decided to make the musical chairs game an agenda item at the council's next meeting. Think of that...high-level city employees developing a staff report on the critical subject of where our city's councilmembers should park their butts. Ehhh, those staffers are slackards anyway. They gotta have something to do.

The teacher just rolled his eyes and thought about his pension. In the meantime, the seating chart remains the same.

As we noted to Orange County Register staffer Jeff Overley (here), all of this reminds us of a bunch of goober-flinging grade schoolers fighting for swings on the playground.

We guess Costa Mesa really doesn't need a Youth in Government program. It already has one.

On Anonymity

2007-03-01T19:53:00.000-08:00

The last round of posts on itchingpost.com sparked a wave of comments from folks without the stones - or with too much at stake - to reveal their identity or, at the very least, come up with some dopey moniker to tack on to their opinion.

At itchingpost.com, we're not big fans of anonymous posters. And we won't post opinions from the nameless.

So, here's a suggestion. If you want to share an opinion with us - or inside news - but are spooked that your identity may be found out (in which case you figure you'd need someone to start your car for you in the morning), email us directly at byron@bdacommunications.com. If you need confidentiality, we'll give it. But not on our comments pages where we have no ability to verify who you are or corroborate the information you provide (and that's important, as we're finding out bloggers can be sued just as readily as the New York Times).

Now, if you think we're peeing in your shall-remain-nameless pool, just come up with some catchy name tag when you post your comment. Chances are, it'll get posted.

If you don't have dogs in the hunt - or your butt on the line - but still insist on submitting anonymous comments, find another blog.

OC GOP vs. CM Improvers

2007-02-22T15:59:00.000-08:00

Over at the CM Press today (here), the first kernel of discontent in the Improvers community - that curiouisly amorphous gang of Costa Mesa residents who think CM ought to be "more like Newport Beach" and less like Santa Ana (we agree) and who have convincingly seated a City Council majority presumably in step with their drumbeat - has turned up.

And the target of this sprouting ill-contentment? It is, apparently and quite ironically, Mayor Allan Mansoor, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Bever and newly elected Councilmember Wendy Leece. Amid a litany of pointed - perhaps embittered - rhetorical questions aimed at the council troika, a particularly interesting nugget in the CM Press post caught our eye.

CM Press blogger Martin Millard wonders if the Improvers majority on the council deliberately stiff armed long-time Improvers for commission and committee appointments in favor of "appointed political hacks" whose knowledge of Costa Mesa and the Improvers agenda couldn't fill a thimble.

itchingpost.com offers its opinion: That is indeed what has happened.

In offering the question, we believe the CM Press was clearly alluding to the Planning Commission appointment drama during which the Mayor and Mrs. Leece brazenly tossed long-time Costa Mesa resident Paul Bunney (a loyal Improver) overboard in favor of 5-month Costa Mesa resident Jim Righeimer. In fact, Mansoor voted against Bunney's appoint three times. Bunney supported Mansoor's and Leece's candidacies.

Nice to have friends like these, eh Paul?

Now, before we proceed, we should note that we have a lot of respect for Righeimer as a solid family man who has devoted much time to civil service and politcal goings on. Indeed, we were impressed with his level of preparation, his sound thinking and his measured statements during his first Planning Commission meeting.

But, Righeimer is a long-time Republican Party operative, and a close ally of Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (the 800-pound Republican gorilla widely credited for having been the key factor in Mansoor's and Leece's successful council bids this last November).

So, this means what? It means the Improvers have far less influence over the direction of Costa Mesa than they think. That's because the Orange County Republican Party - as part of its unabashed strategy to inject partisan politics into Orange County municipal elections - established a clear beachhead in Costa Mesa this last election cycle. And leading the assault on the party's behalf were Mansoor and Leece. This explains how Mansoor was able to finance 63% of his campaign with money from sources outside of Costa Mesa. Leece's coffers were flush with nearly 50% non-Costa Mesa money.

What made it all work - at least for this last election - was that the Improvers and the OC GOP both shared a common cause. Snuffing out illegal immigration - the Mansoor/Leece cause celebre. But - with the planting of a Federal ICE agent in Costa Mesa's jail - that's no longer the issue.

Nevertheless, the Improvers still have issues. For instance, the catalyzing of residential development on Costa Mesa's largely industrial West side, an aggressive assault against gang activity and graffiti, the pushing of the 55 Freeway's southbound terminus farther downstream, and more.

But are these issues the OC GOP really cares about? Nope. It has a bigger strategy in play. It's grooming municipal electeds for the retention of or assault on coveted assembly and senate districts. That would include the 68th Assembly District (which covers Costa Mesa, Fountain Valley and Garden Grove). That makes Costa Mesa one of its farm systems, and Mansoor and Leece its prospects.

Indeed, we've heard from several sources that the OC GOP likes Mansoor as a potential 68th Assembly District candidate, taking Van Tran's place as he moves up the elected office ladder. What higher office they may have their eye on for Leece isn't clear.

So, the Improvers shouldn't be surprised (but they should be pissed) if Mansoor and Leece forget about the date that brought them to the ball (the Improvement vote). The OC GOP bought the ticket to that ball. And the party has the scratch to buy the ticket to even bigger soirees. If Mansoor and Leece have designs for higher office, guess who they'll remember?

There's a tantalizing aside to this, too. We're hearing that the perceived association between Mansoor and Millard (whose frequent creative writings about race and gene pool purity regularly spark controversy) is making the OC GOP nervous. Don't be surprised, then, if the Mayor becomes aggressively unsympathetic to other Costa Mesa issues that Millard (and a lot of Improvers) care about.

All of this simply affirms past itchingpost.com commentary on the invasion of partisanship into our City's government. Our issues are our own, sure. But our candidates are no longer.

They belong to the careermakers in the County's political power structure.

Getting schooled

2007-02-06T16:53:00.000-08:00

As Daily Pilot staffer Michael Miller reports today (here), Newport-Mesa Unified School District trustees and administrators presided over a trio of public hearings on a panel report that suggests ways to halt the subpar-performance of Wilson Elementary School, Pomona Elementary School and TeWinkle Middle School.

All three campuses are on the cusp of being slapped with federal sanctions under the No Child Left Behind Act.

itchingpost.com's reading of some of the panel report's solutions doesn't leave us encouraged that success will be produced any time soon. Among the recommendations are the extension of the school day or school year at all three schools, the adoption of a new English-learner curriculum at Wilson and Pomona, and the retaining of outside administrators to run Pomona and TeWinkle.

Players in several forums of debate on the subject place the blame for the failing schools mostly on students who are the children of illegal immigrants. The argument is a patent oversimplification dolled up in political lipstick. What is not refutable, as we see it, is that language, culture and - to a lesser extent - economics are the root causes of what ails these and many of Costa Mesa's schools. That these language, culture and socio-economic issues are predominant in the Latino community - which owns the attribution to Costa Mesa's undocumented immigrant challenges - makes for easy political flamethrowing. But for achieving any meaningful progress near term - enough to keep these schools out of the hands of the State and the Feds - political spitballs aren't constructive.

Still, language, culture and economics are the issues.

On the language front, the numbers reported in the NMUSD's School Accountability Report Cards for each of the troubled schools clearly define the problem:

Wilson Elementary - Of the school's 94.2% Hispanic or Latino population, only 19% scored at a Proficient or Advanced level on standardized tests in English. Just 30% tested at a Proficient or Advanced level in Mathematics.
Pomona Elementary - Of the school's 93.5% Hispanic or Latino population, 19% scored at a Proficient or Advanced level on standardized tests in English. Only 30% tested at a Proficient or Advanced level in Mathematics.
TeWinkle Middle School - Of the school's 68.2% Hispanic or Latino population, 23% scored at a Proficient or Advanced level on standardized tests in English. Worse, just 18% tested at a Proficient or Advanced level in Mathematics.

This does not suggest these kids are stupid. We think most folks proficient in English wouldn't fair well attempting to learn Math in Russian or French or Mandarin or any other language they don't have a clue about.

So is the problem entirely attributable to language barriers? Mostly. Not entirely.

There are cultural issues, too. Costa Mesa's Hispanic and Latino populations tend to be more transient than other ethnic populations. History shows this to be true among agrarian and low-wage-trade oriented cultures. As well, because Hispanic and Latino parents are often not proficient in English, Spanish remains the primary language in the household. Cumulatively, children who frequently move around and are in non-English-speaking households are challenged by Enlish-based curriculae in school. And their test scores suffer.

We've heard the arguments about economic disparity and its nexus to the gap between superior achieving schools on the Newport Beach side of the Newport-Mesa District, and those on the Costa Mesa side of the border. They have some merit.

Witness that in the poorer sections of the massive Los Angeles Unified School District, English language proficiency isn't the issue at many underperforming schools. Low economic status is. And not simply because schools in higher socio-economic realms have more access to private resources. Households struggling to make ends meet are more stressful environments with working parents too often absent to make sure Sam and Sally are toeing the academic line. Or, the kids themselves are out pulling a paycheck to keep the lights on. That's not conducive to scholatisc achievement.

Now, when you add a lack of language proficiency, cultural norms and low economic status together, the school performance problem becomes frighteningly huge. We have all three in Costa Mesa schools.

Barring the sudden disappearance of the Hispanic and Latino populations in Costa Mesa (not all Hispanics and Latinos in town are undocumented), the improvement of Pomona, Wilson and TeWinkle schools will take wads of time assuming the solutions proposed by the NMUSD panel are effective.

But we're not sure they will be. Devoting scarce district resources to an English-learners curriculum takes resources from classrooms with students who have already achieved Proficiency or Advanced Levels in basic subjects such as English, Math and Science. And when more resources are devoted to children below a certain mean, the parents of kids who occupy positions above the mean tend to go elsewhere. That, in turn, removes higher-scoring students from an underpeforming school, and creates a new drag effect on standardized test scores.

The same flight effect is likely to occur at schools with extended school-day or school-year calendars.

Moderate solution, better results

2007-01-30T09:50:00.000-08:00

We're back.

November isn't too distant in the rearview mirror to remember that Costa Mesans who stood with Mayor Allan Mansoor and Councilmember Wendy Leece and their backing of an initiative to arm Costa Mesa cops with federal immigration screening authority were pretty effective at driving pitchforks into the noggins of folks who disagreed with the tactic.

We're one of the pitchforked. And that's okay. That's politics.

Our waning brain pain aside, it's worth noting (and applauding) just how effective the still-young implementation of the alternative immigration screening regime has been. Remember that in the twilight of 2006, Immigration and Customs Enforcement snuffed out the rancor surrounding the Mansoor initiative by offering to plant a federal ICE agent in the City's jail full time.

itchingpost.com applauded the alternative for two reasons: First, it would put in place the screening mechanism for which the city was clamoring. Second, it would spare the CMPD having to sacrifice valuable cop-on-the-street time to navigate the tangled processing and transport of immigration detainees.

Now we see that in two months time, the ICE agent in CM's jail has been exceptionally busy. According to a report today by Daily Pilot staffers Alicia Robinson and Michael Alexander (here), immigration holds were placed on 57 folks booked into the City's slammer in January. That was up 24% from December's 46 immigration holds.

A couple of nuggets come to mind as we noodle on these numbers. In the first instance, former Costa Mesa Police Chief John Hensley grossly underestimated just how many arrestees would be subject to immigration holds. Early last year, Hensley told the City Council he anticipated that 8 to 12 folks a year would be identified as illegal party crashers. We now know we've exceeded that number 10 fold...in just two months.

This is clear, tangible proof of the extent of Costa Mesa's illegal immigration problem. A side note: We're curious about ratios...that is, how many arrestees were interviewed in total during December and January. Comparing that number to the 103 immigration holds that were placed might provide early anecdotal evidence of the depth of the undocumented population in the City.

We would also point out that - in the shadow of these compelling numbers - the Mayor's and Councilmember Leece's support of the CMPD-led immigration screening tactic was clearly misplaced. Remembering estimates that as much as half a street officer's shift time would be spent processing and transporting immigration holds, very likely the CMPD would have been out more than 500 hours of cops-on-the-street time dealing with the 103 holds these past two months.

There is an important distinction here. For all the political mischaracterizations that went on in November over the motives behind Bruce Garlich's and Mike Scheafer's opposition to the Mayor's propoposal (the "they don't want to uphold our immigration laws" crap), both men (and itchingpost.com) supported federally-led immigration screening. What they, and we, opposed was the tactic of using our local police resources to tackle the deed.

They, and we, did so for precisely the reason that we cannot afford to have CMPD cops off the streets 250 hours a month doing the job of the federal government.

Pursuing the Steel Doctrine

2006-12-20T13:33:00.000-08:00

We've opined to a few souls in Costa Mesa that the unvarnished message sent by the City's voters in the Nov. 7 municipal election is really the reaffirmation of the Chris Steel Revolution. Or, at least, the Revolution's message.

Steel - a multiple losing candidate for Costa Mesa City Council in previous years - was swept into office in the November 2000 general election. And we mean swept. Steel yanked in 10,664 votes; a vote tally that exceeded every other council seeker in the 11 candidate field.

Steel's message was the Magna Carta of the Improvers movement. Eliminate the non-profit entities in town, which attract illegal immigrants. Rid the city of aging, decrepit apartment buildings, which are the havens for gang types and multiple generations of immigrant families. Shutter the job center, a magnet for illegal immigrant day workers and unlawful employment transactions. Close the gates of our schools to outside recreation interests - many of them adult soccer leagues and youth sports organizations from outside Costa Mesa.

Steel often canned his message in two ways. "Stop the status quo, woe, flow," he would say. In other instances he insisted that "we must eliminate the magnets that house, educate, recreate, and medicate illegal immigrants."

Steel's message resonated, but he was a miserable failure. He could frame a message, but couldn't achieve the result. Chris Steel was a talker, not a leader.

Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and Councilmember Wendy Leece were elected in a convincing avalanche that reaffirmed the Steel Doctrine still beats close to the heart of a majority of Costa Mesa voters.

The question remains: Will Mansoor, Mayor Pro Tem Eric Bever, and Leece cash in the voters' mandate and flex their majority to achieve the Steel Doctrine?

Our view is that they don't have a choice if Steel's fate is any barometer.

Steel failed because he followed up his hard-line political talk with moderate, soft-line action. Mansoor has yet to prove to us that he's any different. The mayor's backers will dispute that. Mansoor has already proven he can make the tough, controversial decisions leadership requires, they'll say. His Immigration and Customs Enforcement juggernaut is proof of that.

We're not so sure. The presence of a Federal ICE agent in Costa Mesa's jail - despite the magnitude of the controversy it stirred - will barely move the needle in achieving the objectives of the Steel Doctrine.

Whether or not Leece has the moxy to aggressively seize her mandate is also suspect. While a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission, she fiercely opposed lighting more fields at the Farm Sports Complex. She later caved - agreeing to the lighting of all six Farm fields - when one of her campaign's biggest financial backers pressed his case for more lights.

Bever's leadership remains vague, too. His initiative to expand the residential overlay to most of the Westside's industrial zone still leaves the region's transformation up to market forces. And those forces will take time to work their magic. Lots of time. Perhaps more time than Costa Mesa voters will tolerate.

If Mansoor, Leece and Bever are to remain the favorite sons and daughter of the Costa Mesa electorate - as Steel once was for a brief moment - we believe they'll need to hatch far more ambitious policies with sufficient teeth to effect real improvements. And quickly.

They'll need to craft legislation that outlaws renting a home or apartment to illegal immigrants. They'll need to draft ordinances that heavily fine businesses that employ illegal immigrants. They'll need to reduce demand for our playing fields by placing broader prohibitions on specific uses of our parks and athletic fields by outside groups. They'll have to rezone some areas of town to disallow commercial and institutional land uses that encourage non-profit activity.

Each of these will make the Immigration and Customs Enforcement issue look like a church picnic. But if the Steel Doctrine is what Costa Mesa voters want, Mansoor, Leece and Bever better have the gonads to deliver it.

Nibbling around the edges won't do it.

Pilot: CM inks pact with ICE

2006-11-28T16:05:00.000-08:00

The Daily Pilot's Alicia Robinson reports in the paper's online edition this afternoon that Costa Mesa has inked a pact with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The agreement, to place a full-time federal ICE agent in Costa Mesa's jail facility, apparently does not include cross-designation training of Costa Mesa police officers. Read Robinson's report here.

According to other sources, the ICE agent will review the jail's booking log and interview potential immigration violators. It isn't clear if that means interviewing all foreign nationals - mirroring Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona's cross-designation program - or every person booked into the CM jail facility.

itchingpost.com believe this is a prudent step...and the right step. That a federal ICE agent will be posted to the CM jail means CM cops who - under a cross-designation regime would have spent far too much time off the street processing immigration violators - can now remain on the streets busting violent criminals and other assorted bad guys and girls.

It's worth noting, though, that there are voices in the Costa Mesa community who want to take the concept of immigration screening to the streets, and who will continue to push for cross-designation training. The objective of these folks, apparently, is to screen folks for immigration status when stopped for infractions and/or detained for misdemeanors.

None of that can happen unless ICE agrees to cross-designate CMPD officers. At this stage, the federal agency doesn't appear to want to go there.

UPDATE: Daily Pilot also reports on ICE offer

2006-11-16T22:33:00.000-08:00

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE...

The Daily Pilot's online edition posts a report this evening by staffer Alicia Robinson (here) on the late-day Immigration and Customs Enforcement offer to staff Costa Mesa's jail with a federal ICE agent.

The Pilot story adds an interesting - but not surprising - angle to the story, reporting that a federal ICE agent in the city's jail may "offset" Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor's plan to have ICE provide cross-designation training to certain CMPD personnel.

James T. Hayes, the Los Angeles field office director for ICE, seems to confirm the notion in the Pilot's story. "This is an overture that we, that ICE is making to Costa Mesa to partner with them to try to put an agent in the jail. I think that would alleviate the need to have them go ahead and take on the extra task"

itchingpost.com has learned that Hayes faxed the offer letter to Costa Mesa Interim Police Chief Steve Staveley late today.

We have some incubating theories as to why ICE is offering to staff CM's jail with a federal agent rather than provide cross-designation training, and why the letter was distributed to the media at least nearly simultaneously with its distribution to Staveley.

It is unclear when Mayor Mansoor was made aware of the letter and the offer. However, other sources are telling itchingpost.com that City Manager Allan Roeder and City Attorney Kim Barlow only became aware of the letter and the offer when the news was broken by the Orange County Register this evening.

UPDATE: Register Files ICE Report

2006-11-16T21:26:00.000-08:00

BREAKING NEWS UPDATE...

The Orange County Register's online edition has posted a report by staffer Jeff Overley confirming that Immigration and Customs Enforcement has proposed in a letter to interim Costa Mesa Police Chief Steve Staveley that it staff the city's jail with one Federal ICE agent.

Overley's report (here) quotes James T. Hayes Jr., a field office director with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement as saying: "I think it's something that is going to benefit the city of Costa Mesa, and be good for public safety for the people of Orange County."

The Register's Overley also quotes Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor: "All we've been asking all along is that the federal government do its job. This is very reasonable, and it's the very least we should be doing, and it should have been done a long time ago."

It appears from sources we've spoken with that few, if any, city councilmembers are aware of the letter or the specifics of ICE's offer. One councilmember we spoke with is not happy the ICE proposal letter has been made public prior to the council's knowledge of it.

It is unclear from the Register story when Chief Staveley received the letter from Hayes.

Report: ICE Agents May Staff CM Jail

2006-11-16T20:23:00.000-08:00

BREAKING NEWS...

itchingpost.com has learned from a reliable source in the media community that the Orange County Register will report in its Friday edition that Immigration and Customs Enforcement has sent a letter to high-level Costa Mesa staff members offering to man the city's jail with federal ICE agents.

According to the source, the ICE agents - and not Costa Mesa police officers - will conduct immigration screening of "everyone who comes through there."

No details are yet available regarding the number of federal agents who will man the CM jail, or how often. Nor is any information available as to whether or not ICE will ask or require Costa Mesa to pick up the tab.

The breaking news of the ICE letter comes nearly two weeks after Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona submitted a letter to the Daily Pilot discouraging Orange County cities from entering a cross-designation training relationship with ICE. Carona wrote that such relationships "would not be in our best interest at this time."

If the report pans out - and immigration screening in Costa Mesa's jail will be conducted only by federal agents without a cost to the city - we're supportive of the move. Federal immigration law should be enforced by the federal government.

Will ICE agree to MOU with Costa Mesa?

2006-11-14T20:50:00.000-08:00

With Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona's recent - and boldly timed - announcement that he would prefer Orange County cities leave the immigration screening of arrested foreign nationals to his agency, county law enforcement and political sources are telling itchingpost.com that ICE isn't likely to enter a Memorandum of Understanding with the City of Costa Mesa.

The thinking is the resource-strapped agency can't justify the outlay of resources to a city requesting cross-designation training when it has a similar program in a jail just 10 miles away.

itchingpost.com wants to know what you think. Since Carona now has a relationship with ICE, do you believe ICE will agree to a Memorandum of Understanding with Costa Mesa to allow cross-designation training of certain CMPD personnel?

You'll find the itchingpost.com straw poll ballot on this issue to the right just under the itchingpost.com visitor counter.

Mansoor-Leece victory was sweeping

2006-11-13T19:31:00.000-08:00

The post-election chatter buzzing around the election of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and Parks and Recreation Commissioner Wendy Leece to the City Council centers on whether or not the two have been awarded a mandate from Costa Mesa voters.

In the opinion of itchingpost.com, they have. Our view is that when you win an election - regardless of the margin - you have a mandate.

Now, whether or not the policy views of Mansoor and Leece comport with the attitudes of the majority of Costa Mesa's registered voters is beside the point. Too many of these voters (27,000 or so) failed to vote, and therefore forfeited their franchise - by choice - to have their voices heard. But of the nearly 24,000 who did vote, they clearly - and decisively - backed the Mansoor-Leece agenda.

The numbers show this to be true in overwhelming fashion.

Of the 65 precincts in Costa Mesa where votes for City Council were recorded, Mayor Mansoor won 45 (69.2%) of them. Commissioner Leece won 16 (24.6%). Costa Mesa Planning Commissioner Bruce Garlich won just 3 precincts (4.6%), and former Councilmember Mike Scheafer won only 1 (1.5%).

The numbers also show just how effective the Mansoor-Leece slate candidacy was. Of the 45 precincts conquered by Mansoor, Leece finished second in 36 of them. And, in the 16 precincts that Leece won, Mansoor finished second in 11 of them.

Conversely, the Garlich-Scheafer slate - promoted heavily by the Return to Reason political action committee - did not resonate even in the few precincts that Garlich and Scheafer took. Of the 3 precincts Garlich won, Scheafer finished no better than fourth in any of them. In fact, Mansoor finished second in all of the precincts Garlich won.

In the single precinct taken by Scheafer, Garlich finished fourth. Mansoor and Leece finished second and third, respectively.

The pain inflicted on the Garlich and Scheafer campaigns was further compounded by the fact that neither man won the precincts in which they live. Ironically, neither did Mansoor (he finished third in his precinct behind Leece and Garlich). Only Leece won the precinct in which she lives.

The Mansoor-Leece juggernaut dominated every part of town. Garlich's strength was in two precincts in Eastside Costa Mesa, and the Pinecreek Apartments community. The one precinct won by Scheafer is near Wilson Elementary School on Costa Mesa's Westside.

Even though itchingpost.com opposed the candidacies of Mansoor and Leece, it is clear to us that Costa Mesa wants their leadership. We believe it's important that the outcome be respected, and that the mayor and Mrs. Leece be accorded the respect their election affords them.

Mansoor, Leece win CM Council race

2006-11-08T01:17:00.000-08:00

With 63 of Costa Mesa's 70 precincts counted as of this posting, Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and Parks and Recreation Commissoner Wendy Leece have won re-election and election, respectively, to the Costa Mesa City Council.

itchingpost.com congratulates Mayor Mansoor and Councilmember-elect Leece, and wishes them well in their leadership responsibilities. While we opposed their candidacies during the campaign, we believe the voters of Costa Mesa have spoken with a clear voice. It's time to heal this community and work collectively to make Costa Mesa a better place to live, work and play.

We also acknowledge Planning Commissioner Bruce Garlich, former Councilmember Mike Scheafer, former Parks and Recreation Commissioner Mirna Burciaga, and Chris Bunyan. Running for any office is not for the weak hearted. These folks put themselves out there, worked inordinantly hard, and yet came up short. Their efforts and their courage deserve praise, as do their records of public service to the citizens of Costa Mesa.

In a few days - and following some digesting of the numbers - we'll provide some breakdown and analysis of the vote, as well as a post mortem on the various campaign strategies.

Itchingpost.com Straw Poll Closes

2006-11-07T08:20:00.000-08:00

The itchingpost.com staw poll of our readers closed this morning at 7 a.m., as Costa Mesa voters began heading to the voting booth to cast their ballots in the most important election in the city in more than a generation.

Costa Mesa City Council candidates Mike Scheafer and Bruce Garlich took first and second, respectively, in our unscientific poll of itchingpost.com readers.

Political newcomer Chris Bunyan finished a respectable - and surprising - third. Council candidate Wendy Leece finished a distant fourth. Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor landed in fifth behind Leece by just one vote.

Mirna Burciaga garnered just two votes as the trailing candidate.

Here are the results based on the 142 votes cast:

Mike Scheafer - 42 votes - 29.5%
Bruce Garlich - 37 votes - 26.0%
Chris Bunyan - 34 votes - 23.9%
Wendy Leece - 14 votes - 9.8%
Allan Mansoor - 13 votes - 9.1%
Mirna Burciaga - 2 votes - 1.4%

itchingpost.com thanks its loyal readers and, in particular, those who participated in our poll. We're also grateful - and a little creeped out - that the number of hits to itchingpost.com will break the 10,000 mark on this very important election day. An omen? 10,000 votes is probably the number any of the candidates will need to win a seat on the City Council.

Remember, voting is much more than a wonderful privilege. It is our solemn duty.

Carona Bombshell: We have enough ICE

2006-11-04T20:29:00.000-08:00

BREAKING NEWS...
…in the Sunday edition of the Daily Pilot.

Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona has tossed a bombshell into the Costa Mesa City Council election.

itchingpost.com has learned that in a letter to the editor published in the print edition of the Sunday Daily Pilot (here), Carona urges OC cities (including Costa Mesa) not to pursue cross-designation training through ICE, offering that such municipally based programs will merely duplicate what the sheriff has in place and would not be "in our best interests at this time."

Instead, Carona suggests OC cities invest resources in gang intervention and at-risk youth programs as the best way to support the OCSD's broad-based crime- and gang-prevention strategies.

Carona also confirms that his agency will be checking "the immigration status of all foreign nationals booked into our jails."

And so with the breaking news of the Carona letter, that thud you hear is the sound of the Mansoor-Leece campaign hitting the ground at roughly terminal velocity.

itchingpost.com believes Carona's letter represents a course-changing event in Costa Mesa's City Council election, and in the county's illegal immigration debate.

Our observations are these:

The Carona letter is verification of what Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor says he was looking for regarding the sheriff’s ICE program; specifically, whether or not OCSD will conduct immigration screening for every foreign national booked into the county’s jail facility.

Answer: It will.

On that score, part of Carona’s statement - a copy of which itchingpost.com obtained earlier today - reads this way:

“Last month the Orange County Sheriff’s Department received approval for approximately 20 sworn Sheriff’s Deputies who work in the Orange County Jail to perform immigration investigations. Some know this plan as the Cross-Designation Program. Once these deputies are trained, we plan to check the immigration status of all foreign nationals that are booked into our jail.

This means that every foreign national arrested anywhere in Orange County and sent to our OC Jail will be screened for deportation, including, every previously deported felon apprehended anywhere in Orange County.”

We believe this forces Mansoor's hand, given what the mayor wrote in his Friday Daily Pilot op-ed:

“If they (OCSD) are screening all (foreign nationals), I am very supportive of what Carona is doing, and it sets a good precedent. I am the first person to agree that we should not be duplicating efforts but rather should be working together.”

The sheriff is probably glad to hear that. Because in the second part of his Daily Pilot letter, Carona writes this:

“I am aware that similar plans are underway in other Orange County cities to duplicate this program and, while I appreciate the efforts of some local politicians to assist my department, I believe duplicating this program is not in our best interests at this time. Local taxpayer dollars are better spent developing crime prevention and intervention programs for at-risk youth.”

A sidebar here: The intervention programs for at-risk youth Carona’s letter mentions are the very kind Mansoor voted against when the City Council voted to approve the Katrina Foley-led gang eradication program.

Carona's letter mirrors exactly the immigration approach offered by City Council candidate Bruce Garlich when he - wisely - suggested that Costa Mesa "wait and see” what the position of the OCSD and ICE will be relative to county- and municipal-based immigration enforcement, then determine the best way the CMPD can support the Sheriff’s efforts.

With Carona’s statement, we now know how Costa Mesa can do that: Invest in crime prevention and programs for at-risk youth, but scuttle any notion of deploying ICE at the municipal level.

We think - given Carona's stated position - that Immigraton and Customs Enforcement will now pass on engaging Costa Mesa in a cross-designation training program.

Given all this, it seems to us that the Mansoor-Leece campaign would be wise to hone to their words, respect – finally – the expert counsel of our city’s and now the county’s law enforcement leaders, and drop its relentless, wasteful and ill-conceived ICE scheme in Costa Mesa.

Garlich campaign fires back

2006-11-03T15:14:00.000-08:00

The City Council campaign of Planning Commissioner Bruce Garlich fired back today, whistling a high-and-tight fastball under the chin of the Mansoor-Leece campaign for its recent wave of mailers that misrepresent Garlich's positions on immigration enforcement and ICE, and that feature deliberately manipulated photos of Mr. Garlich.

The statement, which the Garlich campaign tells us was issued to local print news outlets, calls the tactics "desperate" and "ugly." The statement expresses confidence that Costa Mesa voters will reject such back-alley maneuvers.

Here's the text of Garlich's statement in its entirety:

Official Statement
For Immediate Release – November 2, 2006

Statement of Costa Mesa City Council Candidate Bruce Garlich
Regarding Mansoor-Leece Campaign Tactics

The Costa Mesa City Council campaign of the Mansoor-Leece camp has turned to ugly, desperate tactics...tactics that are uglier than anything ever seen in Costa Mesa by the measure of the calls I have received.

It seems clear now that the Mansoor-Leece campaign has seen polling data that shows they are losing. And so they have resorted to negative mailers which spread lies about my record and which manipulate photographs of me. While this may be standard faire in most political environments, it has no place in Costa Mesa. I am confident Costa Mesa voters will reject these tactics.

In their most recent mailer, the Mansoor-Leece campaign deliberately lies about my position on illegal immigration. Repeatedly, in candidate forums and in the press, I have supported Federal immigration reform, especially border security. I support Sheriff Corona’s plan to screen and deport illegal immigrants - in cooperation with ICE - at the Central Jail. In addition, I recently e-mailed Assemblyman Van Tran to urge him to include the issue of over crowding of apartments as part of his participation in a task force on immigration issues.

Former Police Chief Dave Snowden’s recent commentary in the Daily Pilot eloquently makes the case for supporting the Sheriff’s plan and keeping Costa Mesa Police Officers focused on making Costa Mesa safer by working cooperatively with the Sheriff, not redundantly. It’s really that simple. That’s why all the public safety organizations have endorsed me and not Mansoor-Leece.

Costa Mesa deserves civil, principled and dignified campaigns. More importantly, it deserves honest leadership. That’s what you’ll get from me. You have my word.

The statement is also posted on Garlich's campaign website at www.garlichforcm.com

Mansoor takes 'next step.' Now it's not just felons.

2006-11-02T22:27:00.000-08:00

Who were we kidding?

Just when itchingpost.com signed off for the remainder of the campaign season - keeping our powder dry, of course, in case something big broke - something, well, big has broken.

The Daily Pilot Forum Page is publishing Friday a lengthy response by Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor to former CMPD Chief Dave Snowden's dressing down of the mayor and his ICE proposal in Wednesday's DP (here).

You'll recall that in previous itchingpost.com dispatches we've pointed out that the mayor has called Sheriff Mike Carona's recently approved ICE screening regime a "good first step." We then noodled on what Mansoor's next steps might be even though the mayor has doggedly represented his own version of ICE as a mechanism that will finger only "illegal alien felons" and won't result in sweeps.

Well, Oz fans, Toto reveals the true man behind the curtain in Mansoor's own words. Buried deep in the mayor's response to Snowden is this eye popping paragraph (we added emphasis to get your attention):

The problem we face is that we don't take everyone to county jail, only felons. Possession of burglary tools is a misdemeanor, so if an illegal immigrant were arrested today in Costa Mesa, we would not be asking for his or her legal status, and we would not be contacting immigration enforcement. Yes, the proposal that was put forward was to screen major felons and model our proposal after the sheriff's. If the sheriff is in fact screening all criminals, should we not be screening the ones that are not taken to county jail? There are all kinds of crimes that we should be screening for, such as making or selling false documents, various degrees of theft, assault and battery, indecent exposure, fighting in public, brandishing a weapon, drug offenses, and the list goes on. Should illegal immigrants who commit these and other crimes be released back into society? I don't think so.

The list does indeed go on. And on. And on. And on.

It is now abundantly clear what Mansoor has in mind beyond Carona's "good first step." He's circling back to his original plan...to ICE train every CMPD officer, and to conduct immigration screening of every misdemeanor suspect.

Imagine the legal and civil liberty ramifications of that little stink bomb in the community. Afterall, you won't be able to screen just Latinos suspected of misdemeansors without the ACLU jamming a law suit down your throat. So, you'll have to screen everybody who comes in contact with the PD for a misdemeanor. Then, what's next? Immigration screening on infractions? Cites?

Welcome to East Berlin. May ve see your papers?

Vote at itchingpost.com...sort of

2006-11-02T15:31:00.000-08:00

The Costa Mesa City Council elections are upon us. Over the past several weeks, itchingpost.com has endeavored to report and opine on the pending election and the candidates seeking to lead the city. We've had our say...so much so, in fact, that we're going on hiatus until after the election (we do have to get back to running our public affairs business). One caveat...if something really big breaks or torks us off, we'll jump in and let you know.

In the meantime, it's your turn. Tell us which two of the six city council candidates you will vote for on Nov. 7. You'll find your ballot on the right hand edge of the page in a yellow box.

Remember, this isn't Chicago. But just so you're not tempted, the poll will only allow you to vote once. Or so we've been told. One other thing; don't get all jacked up or down in the dumps if you see your favorite candidate either running away from the others or getting trounced. This thing is not scientific...it will allow people from anywhere on the planet to vote (which ought to make the mayor happy). Sorry, couldn't resist one last dig.

Be sure to vote for real on Nov. 7.

The 63% candidate

2006-11-02T13:05:00.000-08:00

More news reporting today by Los Angeles Times staffers Jennifer Delson and Christian Berthelsen on the outsiders-with-cash-are-welcome campaign of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor. Read it here.

As itchingpost.com has reported here in several posts, Mansoor has been lining his campaign war chest with tens of thousands of dollars that have found their way to him from the wallets of individuals, businesses and political action committees that do not have addresses and cannot vote in Costa Mesa.

As reported by Delson and Berthelsen, non-Costa Mesa money sources make up 63% of the mayor's cash haul. His co-candidate, Wendy Leece, has collected 49% of her campaign dough from interests unable to vote in Costa Mesa.

On the flip side, 78% of Costa Mesa Planning Commissioner and City Council candidate Bruce Garlich's campaign donations are from Costa Mesa-based contributors. And, candidate Mike Scheafer has received 85% of his campaign donations from Costa Mesans.

It's just galling, isn't it, that Garlich and Scheafer would be financing their respective campaigns with contributions from people who can actually vote in our city.

It remains curious to us that the mayor and Mrs. Leece - certain that "a majority of Costa Mesans" are supportive of their policies and candidacies - are so dependent on the financial graces of folks and special interests who can't even occupy a Costa Mesa voting booth in order to be competitive in this election cycle.

As we've written here before, the traditionally independent voters of Costa Mesa aren't likely to be keen on the fact that their city has been hijacked as a national political stage, and that its mayor is preening in the spotlight preparing himself for a bigger role in politics beyond Costa Mesa.

Nov. 7 looms.

'Stuck' troops fire back at Kerry

2006-11-01T16:32:00.000-08:00

itchingpost.com doesn't often stray from the Costa Mesa-Newport Beach landscape. But, from time to time, something so delicious pops up that we just can't resist sharing it with our readers.

As you can see from the photo, not only are our men and women in America's armed forces brave and determined fighters, they're also plenty smart enough to seize an opportunity for sarcastic political humor when it shows itself.

In this instance, here we have eight brilliant, brave soldiers sending a message to Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass) re: the failed presidential candidate's size-15-foot-in-mouth comment about how a failed education will get you "stuck in Iraq."

Good on ya, boys! A Bronze Star for each of ya!

Snowden knows

2006-10-31T22:46:00.000-08:00

The Forum page of the Daily Pilot Wednesday carries the most definitive argument - penned by former Costa Mesa Police Chief Dave Snowden - against the candidacies of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and Wendy Leece we've seen this election cycle.

itchingpost.com couldn't have written a better - or more damning -indictment of the corrosive leadership of Mansoor, his demoralizing effect on our city's police force, and the pall of fear and mistrust he has cast over many of Costa Mesa's quarters. So, we suggest you read it for yourself (here).

Whatever number of Costa Mesa voters remain undecided, we're certain their voting decision will crystalize in a hurry after digesting Snowden's observations.

We're sure the proponents of the mayor and Mrs. Leece won't waste any time firing back. That's fine.

But the numbers don't lie. And the mayor can't run away from his record.

Costa Mesa is Manassas; Manassas is Costa Mesa

2006-10-31T16:06:00.000-08:00

Our trusty news alert tool spit up this interesting little news item from the Washington Post. It seems John J. Skinner, chief of the Manassas City Police Department in Virgina, has won his own ICE war with Manassas City Councilmember Jackson H. Miller. Read about it here.

Miller is also a candidate for the 50th District seat in Virginia's House of Delegates, and is running on an illegal immigration platform, according to the news report.

In a nutshell, Chief Skinner wanted nothing to do with the City of Manassas' proposal to train Manassas officers to enforce some federal immigration laws. According to the report by Washington Post staffer Nick Miroff, Skinner said the ICE program would saddle the Manassas PD with an "undue burden." That undue burden, reports Miroff, includes a short-staffed police department and the "marring (of the Manassas PD's) fragile relations with the city's growing Latino community."

Miroff also reports that Manassas Jail Superintendent Charles "Skip" Land says that "completing the paperwork to process an immigrant offender can take hours, potentially straining jail staff."

Skinner - unlike former Costa Mesa Police Chief John Hensley - has been spitting bullets over the ICE proposal in Mansassas. He prevailed. The Manassas City Council voted not to process offenders for immigration status in their city jail, opting instead to leave it to the Prince William County Adult Detention Center which has adopted an ICE screening mechanism.

Plug in the name Costa Mesa anywhere you see Manassas, the name Orange County anywhere you see Prince William County.

Costa Mesa should follow suit and leave immigration screening to the Orange County Sheriffs Department at the county's central jail facility.

Peddled myths and the truth

2006-10-30T12:59:00.000-08:00

itchingpost.com on Saturday chronicled the head-first dive of the Mansoor-Leece campaign into the bowels of yellow campaigning. The gone-negative tactic of the mayor and Mrs. Leece - in which photos of candidates Bruce Garlich and Mike Scheafer were manipulated to make them look like a cadaver and a drug kingpin, respectively - is the first signal from the Mansoor-Leece campaign that poll numbers aren't their friend at this late juncture.

In between fielding media inquiries from various news outlets requesting a hard copy of the mailer, itchingpost.com has reviewed some of the more substantive claims of fact in the Mansoor-Leece campaign mailer. And, just as the photos of Mssrs. Garlich and Scheafer were manipulated and distorted, so too are the mailer's stated positions of the candidates.

Infections spread like that.

Here's our assessment of the mayor's and Mrs. Leece's peddled myths in the mailer.

Peddled Myth #1: Mayor Allan Mansoor and Commissioner Wendy Leece are the ONLY candidates in favor of identifying and deporting illegal aliens who commit major crimes.

Truth #1: Both Bruce Garlich and Mike Scheafer are in favor of identifying and deporting illegal immigrants who commit major crimes. That's why they support Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona's ICE program to screen for immigration status every foreign national booked into the county's jail facility.

Peddled Myth #2: Garlich and Scheafer OPPOSE the law enforcement program to deport illegal aliens who commit major crimes.

Truth #2: See Truth #1 above. Garlich and Scheafer do oppose duplicating the Sheriff's program in Costa Mesa. As they see it, why should the city incur a revolving $200,000 training tab to provide immigration screening for CMPD's blue force, and take CMPD officers off the street for up to half their shift to process felony detainees for immigration status when that very same process will take place at the county jail? No need to screen them twice, is there?

Peddled Myth #3: Garlich and Scheafer have NO PLAN AND NO EXPERIENCE to combat gangs. This inaction has allowed Costa Mesa to deteriorate.

Truth #3: Seeing that Mr. Garlich has never been a member of the Costa Mesa City Council -and Mr. Scheafer served as an appointed councilman for just 18 months - it's tough to pick out what "action" the two might have taken to combat gangs. To boot, Wendy Leece has NO EXPERIENCE to combat gangs, either. That aside, both Garlich and Scheafer support the city council's recently adopted gang eradication program. In addition, both Garlich and Scheafer have stated for the record that their first actions as members of City Council will be to immediately close the city's 10% officer shortfall, and approve budgeting for even more officers as needed. So, they do have a plan. Oh, by the way, we're not sure it's a wise campaign strategy to bemoan the rise in gang activity and other violent crime in town when you've been the mayor for the last nearly two years. One might draw a parallel between the two that also looks an awful lot like "inaction."

Peddled Myth #4: Both Garlich and Scheafer voted to approve 1901 Newport, a project that INCREASED TRAFFIC at the second worst intersection in the County.

Truth #4: We're wondering how a project that isn't completed yet has already INCREASED TRAFFIC at the second worst instersection in the County. Barring that little reality check, it's worth noting that Councilmember Gary Monahan also voted to approve the 1901 Newport Boulevard project (which is, in our estimation, a fine development). Curiously, Monahan's approval of the project doesn't seem to bother the mayor and Mrs. Leece enough that they have rejected his ensorsement of their candidacies.

Peddled Myth #5: Mayor Allan Mansoor and Parks and Recreation Commissioner Wendy Leece have worked hard to improve our neighborhoods by ADDING MORE SPORTS FIELDS and parks for our children to play.

Truth #5: Both the mayor and Mrs. Leece opposed the concept plan to permanently light the remaining fields at the Farms Sports Complex, opposed the funding of permanent lights for Fields 3 and 4 at the Farm, and have offered no credible solutions to develop additional city-owned sports facilities either as mayor or as chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission.

Peddled Myth #6: Industrial polluters have contributed $35,000 to elect Garlich and Scheafer. Garlich and Scheafer want to make it harder to revitalize the Westside where these polluters operate.

Truth #6: In the first instance, most manufacturing businesses located in Westside Costa Mesa are currently compliant with South Coast Air Quality Management District standards. And those that haven't been have found out just how lead-handed the AQMD is when it comes to industrial pollution. Beyond that, Garlich and Scheafer support the Mesa West Residential Ownership Urban Plan, the Mesa West Bluffs Urban Plan and the 19 West Urban Plan. These are the foundational blueprints for the revitalization of the Westside...blueprints, by the way, that the mayor also supports. So, a big round of applause for all three men.

We reiterate...when a campaign tries to make 2 degrees of separation look like a 23-degree chasm, you gotta wonder if they're pushing the panic button.

Mansoor-Leece campaign goes negative; manipulates photos

2006-10-28T21:47:00.000-07:00

Two things become immediately evident following a quick scan of the lastest Mansoor-Leece campaign mailer to hit Costa Mesa mailboxes.

First, Costa Mesa is no longer independent of the toilet-ring campaigning that infests an election whenever deep-pocket special interests and partisans decide it's time to pee in the pool.

Second, the Mansoor-Leece campaign is desperate. The campaign that goes negative first is usually forced into the smear game by internal polling that's telling them something they don't want to hear: You're behind.

The most perverse and troubling aspect of the Mansoor-Leece campaign's descent into yellow politics is the clearly deliberate manipulation of photographs in the mailer to make candidates Bruce Garlich and Mike Scheafer appear to be something like the second comings of Lenin and Stalin.

The photograph of Mr. Garlich - deliberately washed out and filtered in Photoshop - portrays the man as something resembling a death camp survivor. The photograph of Mr. Scheafer is also manipulated; blown-up and pixelated to make him look like a drug cartel goon not unlike what you see on one of those find-the-criminal cable shows.

Over at the CM Press - the unofficial campaign propaganda sheet of the Mansoor-Leece campaign published by Martin Millard - sandbox name calling (Millard refers to Garlich as "Stinky" and Scheafer as the "Walrus") and the regular sarcastic use of photographs to poke at and misrepresent Garlich and Scheafer is a matter of course. That Mansoor and Leece are now doing the breastroke in the gutter with Millard forces us - and should do the same with reasonable Costa Mesans - to rethink whether the mayor and Mrs. Leece are indeed what we thought they were...principled people whose policies we simply disagree with.

That the mayor and Mrs. Leece would approve of these tactics is contemptible. Clearly, Mansoor and Leece made a conscious decision to disrespect Mr. Scheafer's and Mr. Garlich's long history of community service to Costa Mesa and its citizens by manipulating their images. And they did so with total disregard for Garlich's and Scheafer's families, and Costa Mesa's long tradition of dignified, above the belt political campaigns.

But, this is what we get when desperate candidates sell their souls to unprincipled, win-at-all-cost partisans, political hitmen and out-of-town money sources.

The Mayor's Alien Money: Epilogue

2006-10-27T11:35:00.000-07:00

Whose Costa Mesa is this?

With the filing of the last campaign finance disclosure reports before the Nov. 7 election, it's patently clear that Mayor Allan Mansoor has run the first city council campaign in Costa Mesa history that is supported - audaciously and predominantly - by people and deep pocketed special interests who can't even vote in this town.

The Mansoor campaign - which also continues to prop up the candidacy of Wendy Leece - is giving Costa Mesa away to the folks who want to make our city ground zero in the national immigration debate, and who are greasing the mayor's path to higher office.

According to Mansoor's latest campaign finance disclosure report filed with the City Clerk yesterday, his campaign raked in $10,923 in individual donations of $100 or more from 27 separate contributors between October 1 and October 21. And, once gain, the bulk of those contributors list addresses outside of Costa Mesa. Of the mayor's 27 identified money sources who gave $100 or more during the period, 17 (62.9%) are legally barred from voting in Costa Mesa.

The kidnapping of Costa Mesa's destiny by the Mansoor campaign and its non-Costa Mesa supporters is even clearer when the mayor's money numbers for the entire year are pondered.

Between January 1 and October 21, Mansoor's campaign piggy bank has been stuffed with $51,776.00 via donations of $100 or more. He's received nearly $6,660 in donations of $99 or less. State law doesn't require contributors of $99 or less to be identified on a candidate's Form 460, so there's no telling how much of these smaller contributions are also from non-Costa Mesa sources.

Of the $51,776.00 filling Mansoor's campaign wallet, $32,533 (62.8%) of it is traced to contributors with addresses in places other than Costa Mesa. Said another way, were it not for the bumper crop of cash harvested from money trees outside of Costa Mesa, Mansoor has raised just $19,243 from folks who actually live - and can vote - in this town. That places him at least third among the leading candidates.

If that's not evidence enough for Costa Mesa voters that outside special interests have hijacked this city's election via the mayor's and Mrs. Leece's campaigns, then they might want to noodle on another troubling factoid. For the entire year, Mansoor has received campaign contributions of $100 or more from 102 separate individuals, companies and political action committees (PACs). Of these, a breathtaking 75 of them (73.5%) list addresses that are not in Costa Mesa.

The cross-border migration of dollars into the mayor's campaign coffers is benefitting Mrs. Leece, too.

Of the $42,219.92 recieved in both cash and non-cash contributions by the Leece campaign this year, $7,805.92 (18.4%) of its has come directly from the mayor's war chest. This is in addition to the non-Costa Mesa sources that have directly contributed nearly 50% of the cash donations fueling Leece's candidacy.

All of this leaves us to wonder: As the mayor trots around town (as well as in Tustin and Nellie Gail Ranch) crowing about "how the majority of Costa Mesans" want what he has to peddle, why is most of the jack in his campaign account from sources other than Costa Mesans?

The mayor may think he knows what a majority of Costa Mesans want, but the predominantly alien source of his campaign cash seems to indicate that quite a different reality is in play.

Harris letter has it wrong

2006-10-25T11:17:00.000-07:00

Today's Daily Pilot publishes a love letter penned by long-time Parks and Recreation Commissioner Mark Harris (here) in which he professes his support - and encourages Costa Mesans to do the same - of the Siamese Twin candidacy of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and Wendy Leece.

The central theme of Harris' letter is, of course, immigration and the pending ICE proposal advanced by Mansoor and supported by Mrs. Leece. In it, Harris writes this:

It (the ICE plan) allows a handful of gang officers and investigators (not the entire Costa Mesa Police Department) to be trained by immigration officers on how to properly book into custody illegal immigrants, from any country, who are arrested on felony charges in Costa Mesa. These illegal immigrants will be deported and then kept track of, in case they choose to return to our city, whereby they will be legally deported again (emphasis added).

If Harris means to say here that illegal immigrants brought into custody by Costa Mesa police officers will be deported by Costa Mesa police officers, he's flat wrong.

Neither the Costa Mesa ICE proposal or the Orange County Sheriff's recently approved ICE mechanism guarantees the deportation of anyone. Only the federal government has the authority to deport persons in the United States illegally.

In truth, the Costa Mesa ICE scheme merely provides certain CMPD officers the authority to screen and process felony detainees for immigration status, and to transport these individuals to the federal immigration detention facility in Westminster.

Knowing that, the question remains: Why should Costa Mesa engage in this costly process - which, according to former police chief John Hensley, may chew up half the processing officer's shift time - when the recently blessed ICE mechanism under the Orange County Sheriff Department's auspices will do exactly the same thing?

Simple answer: It shouldn't.

Even Councilmember Gary Monahan - whose modified ICE plan is actually what's on the table in Costa Mesa - acknowledges that the sheriff's approved plan will result in the immigration screening of every foreign national booked into the county's jail facility. So then, how does it make sense to draw down Costa Mesa's scarce police resources to duplicate an immigration screening mechanism that's in place at the county level?

Simple answer: It doesn't.

Harris' letter stubs its toe on another area. He writes:

How about if the police and fire unions refrain from endorsing any candidate, as some of these future council members may one day be voting on pay raises and benefits packages for the members of these unions? If there were no endorsements from these labor groups, the elected council members would be less easily influenced and less biased when it came to a vote that affected these unions.

If Costa Mesa, as a city, expects the men and women of our police and fire departments to put their lives on the line day in and day out, we think it's important that their voices be heard. Not just about who - as an association - they support, but about what they - as law enforcement and public safety experts - think will work to make Costa Mesa a safer place in which to live, work, and play. Mansoor's record is one of absolute disregard for the expert advise and counsel of our public safety professionals. The city's voters have a right to know that as expressed through the Costa Mesa Police Association and Costa Mesa Fire Association endorsements of Bruce Garlich and Mike Scheafer.

Finally, the Harris letter tells "outsiders" to butt out of Costa Mesa's political process. He writes:

If you no longer live here, or work here, or own a business here, please withhold your commentary so our resident voters can sift through the already overwhelming amount of minutiae out there. This goes for those of you who used to live here or used to work here and chose to leave Costa Mesa. Your comments are not necessary. If you want to be a part of it, live it with the rest of us.

Bravo! on that sentiment, Commissioner Harris. We couldn't agree more. One small point, however; if folks who work here are permitted to have a voice in the city's political machinery as you seem to indicate in the paragraph above, one would presume that would include our police and fire professionals, wouldn't it?

That notwithstanding, perhaps - as a supporter of the mayor - you will find it appropriate to publically call on Mansoor to return every dime of campaign cash he's received from "outsiders."

We won't hold our breath. After all - as we've reported here - nearly 68% of Mansoor's contributors are not from Costa Mesa. Giving back all that "outsider" money (nearly $27,000 in total) would place him about fourth on the campaign money list. And make him decidedly less competitive.

Only Eric Bever gives a dam(n)?

2006-10-23T12:39:00.000-07:00

Costa Mesa Mayor Pro Tem Eric Bever takes the Daily Pilot to the woodshed for its “fabrication and distortion” of Mayor Allan Mansoor’s record with the predictable you’re-either-with-us-or-you’re-with-the-terrorists straw man (here).

Bever's screed can essentially be interpreted this way: If you aren't a supporter of Mansoor and candidate Wendy Leece and their policies for improving Costa Mesa, then you don't give a damn about Costa Mesa.

Not a single city council candidate in this election cycle will disagree with the litany of ills confronting Costa Mesa that Bever highlights. Indeed, many (though certainly not all) of Costa Mesa’s schools are underperforming. And the city is confronted by challenges of traffic congestion and crime.

But most of the candidates - and we would suspect several thousand Costa Mesa voters - will disagree that the mayor’s solutions to solving these problems are the only solutions. The 7,617 votes Mansoor received in the last election did not divine him with unchallengeable wisdom or dispense him with skills to develop policies that are flawless to the exclusion of all others.

That candidates Bruce Garlich and Mike Scheafer disagree with the methods by which the mayor, Bever and Mrs. Leece plan to improve Costa Mesa does not - as Bever claims - make them men without a "vision" who are "passively standing by." They simply have in mind methods and policies that can achieve the same end without setting Costa Mesans against Costa Mesans.

This is the distinguishing fact separating Bruce Garlich and Mike Scheafer from Allan Mansoor and Wendy Leece.

Costa Mesa: The capital of xenophobia?

2006-10-20T10:56:00.000-07:00

Just how tarnished and mangled has Costa Mesa's reputation become? Here's how much.

Have a read of this morning's A Section, front page story in the Los Angeles Times (here) by staffers Christian Berthelsen, Mai Tran and Christopher Goffard (a former Daily Pilot reporter) on the implosion and GOP disownment of 47th Congressional District candidate Tan Nguyen. If you are not aware, Nguyen - a Republican - has been fingered as the dummy behind the shockingly stupid letter sent to 14,000 Latino voters in the 47th warning them - erroneously - that if "your residence in this country is illegal or you are an immigrant (emphasis added), voting in a federal election is a crime that could result in jail time, and you will be deported for voting without having a right to do so."

Funny how if this were true (that immigrants are barred from voting, that is), Nguyen himself would be sent back to his native Vietnam for stepping into a voting booth.

The letter also advises its recipients that "the government of the United States is installing a new computer system to verify the names of all new registered voters that vote in the October and November elections. Anti-immigration organizations can ask for information from this new computer system." Black-helicopter fiction.

But we digress.

Apart from this really dumb and apalling voter-intimidation offensive is the profoundly troubling mention of Costa Mesa in the story. It reads this way:

Some observers say xenophobia has long been part of the GOP playbook in a county that spawned Proposition 187, the 1994 ballot measure that sought to curb public services for illegal immigrants. It is also home to Jim Gilchrist, co-founder of the Minuteman Project for citizen border patrols, and Costa Mesa is the nation's first municipality seeking to train local police in immigration enforcement.

This is where all of our city's dopey policy blather about the municipal enforcement of federal immigration laws has landed us; that is, on the laundry list of everything in Orange County that brands this region as xenophobic.

So, while all the good folks at the Costa Mesa Chamber of Commerce, the Costa Mesa Conference & Visitors Bureau, the South Coast Metro Alliance, and everyone at City Hall who still care about the image of this city are probably battling some pretty good headaches over this one, we're not powerless to reverse course.

Costa Mesa's voters - at least the ones who aren't proud to have their city cited as one of the reasons the OC is xenophobic - can vote Nov. 7 for Bruce Garlich and Mike Scheafer.

Reasonable solution melts ICE in Costa Mesa

2006-10-18T09:42:00.000-07:00

In the immediate wake of yesterday's Orange County Board of Supervisors vote to approve a significantly pared rendition of Sheriff Mike Carona's initiative to cross-train deputies as immigration screeners, it seems clear that continuing to pursue Costa Mesa's own version of the Carona immigration blueprint would be folly and a waste of already scarce law enforcement resources in the city.

Carona's inked pact with Immigration and Customs Enforcement calls for the training of 24 deputies to provide full-time immigration screening at the county's jail facility. The plan, according to reports and comments by Councilmember Gary Monahan at the Oct. 17 meeting of the Costa Mesa City Council, will provide sufficient immigration screening resources to interview every foreign national booked into the county jail.

That's a vast and important improvement over 2005, when just 15% of foreign nationals booked into the county jail were interviewed regarding their immigration status. As we've written here before, we fully agree that unchecked illegal immigration has real negative impacts - socially and economically - on our communities. And we've sharply criticized the federal government for its abject failure to address the crisis.

We believe Carona's scaled down plan is the right solution; an effective federal-county partnership with the best chance to weed out illegal immigrants who've committed one or more felonies.

Recognizing that Carona's plan will, supposedly, provide sufficient resources to screen all foreign nationals booked into the county's jail system, it seems to us that continuing to pursue a similar model in Costa Mesa is now moot. Certainly, it would be irresponsible and a costly waste of this town's police resources to screen felony detainees who will, now, face the very same screening regimen when transferred to the county jail. We mean this: Why remove a CM police officer from the street for up to half his shift time in order to screeen one felony detainee when - under Carona's approved plan - the suspect will be screened at the county jail?

The answer is: We shouldn't.

Nonetheless, it will be very interesting to see if Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and his running mate Wendy Leece moderate their position. We suspect they won't.

Remember, Mansoor has said that Carona's original plan was a "good first step," which of course implies some additional step. Costa Mesa voters should be worried about the "additional steps" Mansoor and Leece may have in mind. After all, Mansoor's original proposal last year was to train all CMPD officers to conduct immigrations status checks on every suspected foreign national they come in contact with. The current CM proposal still on the table was a compromise resolution authored by Monahan, and limits ICE training to the gang unit, the special investigations team, jailors and detectives. It also limits immigration screening to detainees suspected of aggravated felonies.

The Leece Sports Field Warrior Chronicles

2006-10-17T14:08:00.000-07:00

itchingpost.com chronicled in our previous post the absolute incongruity of City Council candidate Wendy Leece's claim in her campaign mailers that "as chairman of the Parks and Recreation Commission, I fought for more parks, sports fields and more recreational opportunities for Costa Mesa's families," and the reality of her record which, to date, reveals her to be anything but a sports field advocate.

We've already cited her "NO" votes - while chair of the Costa Mesa Parks and Recreation Commission, the seat at which she claims she's fought for more sports fields - to achieve the full utilization of Costa Mesa's Farm Sports Complex by lighting additional fields there.

In fact, we missed one. Consider the following from the Parks and Recreation Commission meeting of March 22, 2006:

Motion made by Commissioner de Arakal, seconded by Commissioner Stiller and carried three to two with Chair Leece and Commissioner Harris voting "NO" to approve the proposed concept plan for the lighting of four soccer fields at the Farm Sports Complex and recommends City Council approve the funding for the lighting of Fields No. 3 and No. 4, at this time, and that perimeter signage prohibiting trespassing be posted around the property."

To be fair, Leece did - ultimately - vote in the affirmative to add additional temporary portable lights on Farm fields 3, 4, 5 and 6 at the commission's September meeting. But only after she and Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor had been summoned by telephone to the Farm by one of the largest contributors to their respective campaigns, Steve Mensinger of Arnel Management. Mensinger is active in the Costa Mesa Pop Warner program.

Aside from this one election-year double sommersault with a half twist, Leece has routinely voted to restrict field use and has not formally brought forward any initiatives as chair to add additional sports fields in Costa Mesa.

Leece fought for more sports fields. And we're Groucho Marx.

2006-10-13T22:40:00.000-07:00

So, we received city council candidate Wendy Leece's latest mailer in our post box today. And we think - after reading it - that either we or she has stepped into an alternative reality.

Leece is currently the chair of the Costa Mesa Parks and Recreation Commission. The operator of this blog is also a commissioner on that body and - if we can modestly say - has been the principal leading the commission's charge to add more athletic fields - particularly fields with lights - for most of our nearly four-year term on the commission.

That aside, Leece's mailer trumpets one particular claim that is - by our recollection and the minutes of the Parks and Recreation Commission meetings - flat out false.

Leece's mailer advertises that she "as chairman of the Parks and Recreation Commission...fought for more parks, sports fields and more recreational opportunities for Costa Mesa's families." Sure. And we're Groucho Marx.

Read for yourself from the minutes of certain Parks and Recreation Commission meetings to get a gauge on how Mrs. Leece has been "fighting" for more sports fields:

April 26, 2006 - Motion made by Commissioner de Arakal, seconded by Commissioner Stiller and carried three to two with Chair Leece and Commissioner Harris voting "NO" to recommend to City Council the adoption of the proposed FY 2006-2007 C.I.P. Line 19 - Athletic Field Lighting, under Park Improvements on handwritten page 4 of the report."

August 23, 2006 - Motion made by Commissioner de Arakal, seconded by Commissioner Stiller to:

Direct staff to place portable lights on the Farm Sports Complex fields 3, 4 and 6 and at a field at Davis School, with the understanding that the Newport-Mesa Unified School District would re-evalutate the use of portable lights on Davis School in December.

Motion carried four to one with Chair Leece voting "NO".

Apart from voting NO for additional lighted fields at the Farm Sports Complex, Leece was quoted in the Orange County Register as saying: "The rights of homeowners and taxpayers takes (sic) precedence over kids playing."

Wendy Leece can claim she has "fought for more sports fields," but her record and her public comments say - starkly - otherwise. And the youth sports organizations in town know it.

Setting CM Press straight on setting us straight

2006-10-12T10:16:00.000-07:00

CM Press - the unofficial spin sheet of the Mansoor/Leece campaign published by Martin Millard - works hard today to put a heavy topspin on our recent letter to the Daily Pilot (here) regarding the flood of cash pouring into the Mansoor campaign piggy bank from sources outside of Costa Mesa. The post is chock full of the usual deflections and false arguments that often litter the CM Press.

After freely admitting that the bulk of the Mansoor/Leece cash machine is headquartered in just about every city in California except Costa Mesa, the CM Press wants to imply that there are certain facts we don't want Costa Mesa voters to know: namely, that the campaign of Planning Commissioner Bruce Garlich "is also getting a lot of financial support from those who don't live in Costa Mesa."

Well, if it were true, we'd want Costa Mesa voters to know that, too. Our principle is that we want special interests - who given any time other than an election year don't give a rat's ass about Costa Mesa - to butt out.

But the fact is that nearly 85% of Garlich's campaign contributions are from sources within Costa Mesa. And, much of the roughly 15% of Garlich's non-Costa Mesa contributions are traced to individuals and companies whose business interests - if not their residences - are located in Costa Mesa.

Now, lay those numbers along side the mayor's. Nearly 68% of the cash contributions he's received in amounts of $100 or more are from sources who can't vote in Costa Mesa's municipal election. Nearly 58% of his total contributions (both less and more than $100) are from folks who can't step into a Costa Mesa voting booth. Legally, anyway.

But, let's move on.

The most reckless propaganda in the CM Press post is its denunciation of Garlich as a "liberal" who "is not an anti-crime or an improvement candidate." This is, of course and in fact, crap. It is, nonetheless, typical Mansoor/Millard hubris which suggests that there's only one way to rollup crime or revitalize the Westside. Theirs. And, if you don't agree, you must be pro-criminal and a fan of keeping Costa Mesa "more like Santa Ana than Newport Beach."

Yea, sure.

But let's play along for a moment and see who's really the best candidate for public safety and Westside revitalization. Garlich does in fact back the SoBECA Urban Plan, the 19 West Urban Plan, the Mesa West Urban Plan and the Mesa West Bluffs Urban Plan. But each of these very creative, progressive blueprints for revitalization understand that something other than low-density development is mandatory if the land economics are to pencil out.

Where the mayor and his tag-along candidate Wendy Leece are concerned, however, their campaign rhetoric trashing density seems to imply that achieving the densities necessary to make the urban plans viable isn't an option with them. We may be wrong, but that's the impression the mayor and Mrs. Leece are advertising on the campaign trail.

We wonder, too, if the Mansoor/Millard pummeling of Garlich as not being an "anti-crime" candidate means the organizations that are endorsing Garlich and Mike Scheafer - the Costa Mesa Police Association, the Costa Mesa Fire Association and the Orange County Coalition of Police and Sheriffs - are also not interested in fighting crime. Is that the message the Mansoor/Millard machine is peddling?

In fact, we might argue that the mayor is not "anti-crime" given his propensity to regularly ignore the expert counsel and recommendations of the city's police professionals. Now, we don't really believe the mayor is anything but an "anti-crime" candidate. But he is not more of one than Garlich.

Garlich - and a whole bunch of cops who are behind him - simply think the mayor's way is the wrong way and that if we are going to fight crime in this city, we'd better do it in a way that the crimefighters think will work.

Orange County Coalition of Police and Sheriffs set to back Garlich, Scheafer

2006-10-10T09:28:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

itchingpost.com has learned that the Orange County Coalition of Police and Sheriffs is set to announce its endorsement of Bruce Garlich and Mike Scheafer for Costa Mesa City Council.

The coalition is an organization with considerable political muscle, and is comprised of public safety associations representing more than 2,500 deputy seriffs and police officers throughout Orange County.

The coaltion's endorsement solidifies Scheafer's and Garlich's positions as the frontrunning public safety candidates in the Costa Mesa City Council election. Earlier this month, the two candidates scored the backing of the Costa Mesa Police Association and the Costa Mesa Fire Association.

Having failed to earn the confidence of the CMPA, CMFA and now the Orange County Coalition of Police and Sheriffs, the city council candidacies of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and Parks Commissioner Wendy Leece continue to erode. The mayor's and Mrs. Leece's safety platform - predominantly pinned on the city's fading Immigration and Customs Enforcement plan to cross-designate some CMPD officers as federal immigration screeners - has clearly been rejected by the city's public safety employees. And, with the the coalition's backing of Garlich and Scheafer, the county's rank-and-file law enforcement soldiers are sending a clear message that the ICE regime isn't passing muster with the sworns at the county level either.

Also chipping away at the Mansoor/Leece campaign foundation is Immigration and Customs Enforcement's signficantly downscaled cross-designation agreement with the Orange County Sheriffs Department. OC Sheriff Mike Carona had wanted to cross-train 200 officers; ICE agreed to only 15 jail personnel. Speculation continues that this pared down agreement is as far as the federal agency wants to go with the cross-training program in local jurisdictions, and that Costa Mesa's proposal is dead in the water.

Mainstream thinking is that Costa Mesa's recently funded gang eradication program and its partnership with the county's TARGET program - coupled with the county's jail-based ICE regime - is a solid, down-the-middle solution to begin achieving the ID and deportation of illegal immigrant felons in Costa Mesa.

Daily Pilot endorses Garlich, Scheafer

2006-10-07T23:54:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

In another significant blow to the candidacies of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and Wendy Leece, the Sunday edition of the Daily Pilot is endorsing Planning Commissioner Bruce Garlich and former councilman Mike Scheafer. Read the editorial endorsements of the two men here.

Pilot Editor S.J. Cahn's thoughtful, expansive write up of the paper's reasoning for backing Garlich and Scheafer cites what many in Costa Mesa already know; that the current majority on the city council has fomented policies that have sewn fear, divisiveness and uncertainty in this historically tranquil, cohesive community.

The Pilot articulates that Mansoor's ICE proposal - which Leece supports - cannot work. And, on the other issues this town faces (the critical shortage of athletic fields and the revitalization of the Westside) the Pilot defers to Garlich and Scheafer as the agents to achieve consensus solutions.

Also worth noting in the endorsement editorial is the Pilot's acknowledgement of newcomer candidate Chris Bunyan. itchingpost.com concurs that Bunyan is a bright, articulate, creative thinker who has emerged as one of Costa Mesa's future leaders. With some service on either the city's Planning or Parks Commission, we think Bunyan is representative of Costa Mesa's future...young, upwardly mobile, progressive and creative.

The Pilot also acknowledges the community leadership of Mirna Burciaga. Burciaga is clearly the Latino community's best hope for representation in the city's government. At itchingpost.com, we believe she would be far more effective as a member of the Newport-Mesa Unified School Board.

That the mayor and Mrs. Leece failed to convince the Pilot's editorial board that they are the right candidates for Costa Mesa at the right time underscores a series of setbacks that have befallen the Mansoor/Leece candidacy over the last fortnight. Mansoor and Leece - whose campaign platform emphasizes public safety - failed to win the confidence of the Costa Mesa Police Association and the Costa Mesa Firefighters Association.

Just last week, the future of the Mansoor-led proposal to cross-designate certain CMPD officers as immigration agents was dealt a serious setback when Immigration and Customs Enforcement dramatcially scaled back Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona's plan to train 200 sheriff officers for immigration screening. ICE told Carona that it will agree to train only 15 sheriff officers, and that immigration screening will be limited to the county jail facility. The pared down plan, according to Carona, is due to the limited resources ICE has to train local law enforcement agencies. Presuming the limited resources talking point to be true, itchingpost.com believe ICE will not have resources to conduct cross-designated training of municipal peace officers, and will instead invest what resources it has with state and county agencies.

itchingpost.com would argue that the Mansoor/Leece campaign is rapidly taking on water for three reasons:

The credibility of the Mansoor/Leece public safety campaign has been significantly undermined by its failure to win the confidence and endorsement of the city's public safety employees who would be charged to affect the Mansoor/Leece policies.
The viability of the Mansoor-led ICE cross-designation training proposal is significantly compromised given the Immigration and Customs Enforcement's sharply reduced cross-training regime with the Orange County Sheriff's office.
The Mansoor/Leece campaign has failed to connect with a majority of Costa Mesa voters as evidenced by the fact that nearly 7 out of every 10 contributors to the mayor's campaign do not reside in Costa Mesa and therefore cannot cast a vote.

Four weeks to go.

The Mayor's Alien Money Part II: The Hijacking

2006-10-04T16:37:00.000-07:00

Lest any Costa Mesa voter remains dumbed to the insurgent corruption of the city's political process at the hands of "outsiders" and other alien influences, let your brain chew on the most recent campaign finance disclosure (Form 460) filed today by Mayor Allan Mansoor.

The document confirms, clearly, that "outsiders" are using the Mansoor campaign to hijack Costa Mesa's municipal election in a bid to establish a beachhead for broader state and national political wars to come. And that Mansoor can't seem to rake the jack in from these folks fast enough makes it clear he's now being groomed for a bigger political stage.

All at Costa Mesa's expense.

Here's what we've got. Between July 1 and September 30, Mansoor raked in a whopping $25,462.51. Of that amount, $20,611.00 came in contributions of $100 or greater, requiring Mansoor to identify those contributors. The mayor's 460 identifies 62 contributors by name and address; 42 of 'em are from reaches beyond Costa Mesa. This is to say that 67.7% of Mansoor's contributors are folks who can't even enter a voting booth in this town.

So it is more than a mild curiosity that Mansoor's support structure is represented by more "outsiders" than it is Costa Mesa voters. And, even more so when you noodle on the fact that these "outsiders" forked over $13,465.00 to the mayor's campaign in just the last three months, representing 65.3% of his cash haul for the reporting period.

To boot, Mansoor's Form 460 seems to indicate he's quite a hit in other confines beyond the city in which he's seeking office. "Outside" money filtered into his campaign coffers from Newport Beach, Lakewood, Laguna Beach, San Juan Capistrano, Santa Ana, Beverly Hills, Long Beach, Brea, Troy (the one in Virginia), Fountain Valley, Placentia, Irvine, Orange, Chicago (the one in Illinois), Anaheim, Fullerton, Westminster, Temecula, Huntington Beach, Rancho Santa Margarita, Laguna Hills, San Francisco, Monarch Beach and Corona del Mar.

It should be curious - and, indeed, troubling - to Costa Mesa voters that Mansoor is a viable candidate in this election only because of the vast network of alien, non-Costa Mesa money sources that are propping him up.

Put another way, without the $26,660.00 the mayor has received from non-Costa Mesa money sources this year, his campaign war chest would contain a paltry $19,665.51. And he'd have a tough time winning re-election with such a thin wallet.

But if the campaign finance report of the Mansoor campaign is troubling to Costa Mesa voters - and it should be - it ought to be giving the mayor pause himself. Afterall, what does it say about a municipal candidate when nearly 7 out of 10 folks who are feeding your piggy bank can't even vote in the election?

What it tells us is that the mayor's base of support in Costa Mesa is pretty thin.

Venezia bow out symptom of partisan rot

2006-10-04T09:02:00.000-07:00

Barbara Venezia - the District 4 challenger to appointed Newport Beach City Councilwoman Leslie Daigle - yesterday marched into her candidate interview with the Daily Pilot and prompty announced her resignation from the heated race. Read Pilot editor S.J. Cahn's report on Venezia's bow out here.

Venezia's withdrawal is two things. It is, first, the clearest evidence yet that the concerted strategy of the GOP - which has been hijacked by neo-cons, neo-evangelicals and the loons of the California Republican Assembly - to infest traditionally non-partisan local elections with its unseemly brand of partisanship is quickly rotting municipal governments. This radicalization of the once grand old party - and its fanatical invasion of local government - is precisely why we left the party earlier this year.

But, second, Venezia's leaving the race could pan out to be a brilliant strategic move that may - at least in Newport Beach - plant a brass-knuckle sandwich squarely between the eyes of the neo-con insurgency. Venezia was widely regarded as a fresh, fiesty, energetic, and unifying voice on the Newport Beach political landscape. She was an odds-on favorite to unseat Leslie "Do You Know Who I am?" Daigle, the prop-up candidate of the neo-con GOP.

But the GOP's political goons decided to kneecap her. And, in deference to her family (a princple, by the way, the GOP ought to appreciate), Venezia essentially responded with a "Who needs this?"

Nevertheless, since Venezia's decision to cease active campaigning does not remove her name from the ballot, itchingpost.com foresees a sunami protest vote that will unceremoniously boot Daigle from the Newport Beach dais by a larger margin than would have been the case had Venezia stuck it out. A Venezia victory would be a refreshing return salvo; something like a burst of repellent to chase away the rabid partisans who've taken up peeing on the lawn.

And that's what municipal politics in Orange County needs to lance this festering partisan boil.

The alternative is this: The void of good, non-partisan, principled candidates like Venezia - and the countless other solid citizens like her who never pursue elected public service because they're not interested in wading in a cesspool - will only leave us with droids piloted by partisan neo-radicals.

Vote for Venezia.

Arrest made in Maciel slaying

2006-09-27T22:22:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

The Daily Pilot is reporting late this evening (here) that Costa Mesa Police have made an arrest in the drive-by slaying of Costa Mesa resident Israel Maciel.

Joshua Anthony Blount, 22, of Compton is being held on suspicion of the murder of Maciel on Aug. 2 outside Maciel's home in the 1300 block of Baker Street.

According to the Pilot's report, Blount is currently on
probation in Los Angeles County on weapons violations. The Pilot is also reporting that, according to law enforcement authorities, Blount is a gang member. No determination has been made, according to the Pilot, whether Maciel's slaying was gang related.

No information is yet available regarding Blount's residency status, or whether Maciel knew Blount. The Pilot does report, however, that the $10,000 reward offered by the city did not lead to Blount's arrest.

The mayor's alien money

2006-09-26T09:54:00.000-07:00

Here's a useful case study in campaign double-speak.

Over at the CM PRESS - the unofficial campaign organ for Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and candidate Wendy Leece - you'll find a post headlined 'Following Garlich's Money'. It's a slanted hand-wringing of planning commissioner and council candidate Bruce Garlich's receipt of campaign contributions from certain political action committees, associations and businesses who have vested business and property interests in Costa Mesa.

The CM Press tacitly implies that this is tainted money, since its sources allegedly are individuals who - while having business interests in Costa Mesa - don't reside in this city. It is, therefore, outside money.

More to the point, the post feeds into the often-heard talking points of the Mansoor/Leece campaign - and the relentless musings of the CM Press - that Costa Mesa is being destroyed by "outsiders" and illegal aliens.

But when it comes to taking money to fuel his re-election bid, the mayor doesn't seem to be at all put off by so-called outsiders. In fact, the mayor's campaign coffers are flush with alien money according to his Form 460 filing in June.

For the first six months of 2006, the mayor's campaign received $20,863.00 in monetary contributions. But here's the kicker: $13,195.00 came from sources with addresses outside of Costa Mesa. That's 63.2% folks...a lot of jack from outsiders, wouldn't you say? The mayor's largest contributor ($5,000) lists a Laguna Beach address.

Nice that some denizens of Laguna care so much about Costa Mesa, isn't it? Other outside confines that seem to want to help steer the direction of Costa Mesa via the mayor's re-election include Irvine, Newport Beach, San Clemente, Rancho Domingues, Long Beach, Fair Oaks, Los Angeles, Garden Grove and West Hills. Indeed, the mayor lists 32 contributors for the first half of the year. Sixteen (50%) of them list addresses outside of Costa Mesa.

One of those contributors was Newport Beach-based The Family Action political action committee. This is a curious one to us, as the mayor has never wasted an opportunity to club Garlich and council candidate Mike Scheafer for receiving contributions from the Costa Mesa-based PAC, Return to Reason. Indeed, at the August candidate forum hosted by Mesa Verde Community, Inc., both the mayor and Mrs. Leece cast about all sorts of negative PACisms for voters to consume...never mentioning, of course, that they both received cash from one.

All this just proves that opposing campaigns live by rules that suit them, but not their opponents.

itchingpost.com will post a follow-up report once the candidates file their 460s for the third quarter of 2006. Those are due October 5.

Mensinger's message: Immigration not an issue

2006-09-22T12:25:00.000-07:00

In today's Los Angeles Times report by staffer Jennifer Delson on Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor's and city council candidate Wendy Leece's failure to tie down the endorsements of the Costa Mesa Firefighters Association and the Costa Mesa Police Association (here), Mansoor/Leece ally Steve Mensinger - president of Arnel Management, a real estate company owned by George Argyros - alludes that the CMPA stiff arming of his candidates is unrelated to Mansoor's ICE regime proposal.

Immigration, says Mensinger in the Times piece, "is not the issue in this election..."

Really. Do the mayor and Mrs. Leece know this? Immigration is all they seem to be talking about on the campaign trail.

Or, perhaps, Mensinger's statement - given that he represents one of the mayor's and Mrs. Leece's largest backers - is a first clue that immigration and the mayor's ICE regime isn't washing with most Costa Mesa voters.

Given that, Mensinger's statement could be seen as a deliberate strategy to begin distancing the Mansoor/Leece campaign from immigration as an "issue in this election."

If it's true, the Mansoor/Leece campaign is not going well.

Garlich, Scheafer win Police Association endorsement

2006-09-19T22:05:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

Itchingpost.com has learned this evening that Costa Mesa City Council candidates Bruce Garlich and Mike Scheafer have won the endorsement of the Costa Mesa Police Association.

The Daily Pilot is also reporting the late breaking news (here).

The nod to Garlich and Scheafer by the CMPA comes just days after the two men received the endorsement of the Costa Mesa Firefighters Association.

Multiple sources tell itchingpost.com that the CMPA assessment of the candidates was exhaustive, and involved an extensive questionnaire and a belly-to-belly interview.

Now backed by both of Costa Mesa's public safety employee organizations, Garlich and Scheafer have clearly emerged as the frontrunners in the upcoming council elections Nov. 7, and are the most credible candidates for advancing city policies to make Costa Mesa a safer city for all residents. itchingpost.com would argue that any council candidate or councilmember without the backing of at least one - if not both - of the city's public safety employee associations makes the achievement of whatever public safety agenda they're advancing something like pushing a car up hill with a rope.

That both the Costa Mesa Police Association and the Costa Mesa Firefighters Association have thrown their full weight behind the candidacies of Garlich and Scheafer is - in our view - a significant setback to the campaigns of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor, Wendy Leece, Mirna Burciaga and Chris Bunyan.

The endorsements are also additional evidence that the CMPA and the CMFA have significant differences with the current leadership of the city council and its policy directives with respect to how to make Costa Mesa safer.

The outsiders campaign

2006-09-16T20:51:00.000-07:00

One of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor's stuck-needle talking points is that he wants to move Costa Mesa forward "in the right direction."

At itchingpost.com, we're wondering who's holding the compass for Mansoor. Is the "right" direction Mansoor refers to the heading most Costa Mesans want to chart, or is it the vector pre-set by outside political interests with a broader state and national agenda?

The answer is found on Mansoor's website. His endorsements page is a virtual who's who of luminaries and political types. And most of them don't reside in Costa Mesa.

Here's the laundry list of Mansoor boosters:

Congressman Dana Rohrabacher (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Assemblyman Van Tran (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Assemblyman Chuck DeVore (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Treasure/Supervisor-Elect John Moorlach (Lives in Costa Mesa)
Orange County Supervisor Bill Campbell (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa
Dr. Ken Williams, Orange County Department of Education Trustee (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Dr. Alexandria Coronado, Orange County Department of Education Trustee (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Former Costa Mesa Mayor Jack Hammett (Lives in Costa Mesa)
Costa Mesa Mayor Pro-Tem Eric Bever (Lives in Costa Mesa)
Costa Mesa City Councilman Gary Monahan (Lives in Costa Mesa)
Costa Mesa Parks and Recreation Commissioner Wendy Leece (Lives in Costa Mesa)
Costa Mesa Sanitary District Director Dan Worthington (Lives in Costa Mesa)
Westminster City Councilman Kermit Marsh (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Cypress City Councilman Mike McGill (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Newport Beach City Councilman Dick Nichols (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Huntington Beach Union High School District Trustee Mathew Harper (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Orange County Young Republicans (Based in Newport Beach)
Trung Quang Nguyen, Esq., Garden Grove Unified School District (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
State Senator Tom Harman (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Westminster City Councilman Andy Quach (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Garden Grove City Councilwoman Janet Nguyen (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Nancy Padberg, South Orange County Community College District Board of Trustees (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Dr. M. Reza Karkia, California Council on Criminal Justice (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Orange City Councilman Jon Dumitru (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Former Mayor of La Palma Charlene Hatakeyama (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Irvine City Councilman Steven Choi (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)
Cerritos College Teacher Art Pedroza (Doesn't live/can't vote in Costa Mesa)

Some quick math tells us that of the 28 supporters Mansoor proudly claims, only 6 (21.4%) of 'em call Costa Mesa home. The vast majority are fellow pols who share with Mansoor a broader state and national agenda. On any given day outside of an election year, most of Mansoor's listed bandwagon passengers couldn't care less about the day-in-day-out affairs of Costa Mesa.

The list is telling. Mansoor's campaign is not about Costa Mesa, but about making Costa Mesa a national stage for this country's on-going illegal immigration debate. We doubt that sits well with a majority of Costa Mesa voters, who are - traditionally - fiercely independent and who do not suffer gladly the meddlings of outsiders.

There's more to this story. Sniffing down the money trail of Mansoor's contributors also shows a significant flow of cash from outside Costa Mesa's borders. We'll focus on that in subsequent posts.

For now, it's ironic to itchingpost.com that Mansoor - a guy who regularly trash talks outsiders playing on our city's athletic fields and whose entire immigration agenda paints a bullseye on "outsiders" - is so hugely dependent on "outsiders" for his re-election.

CM firefighters back Garlich, Scheafer

2006-09-15T12:56:00.000-07:00

It's much more than a political base hit for the city council campaigns of Bruce Garlich and Mike Scheafer that they have won the endorsement of the Costa Mesa Firefighters Association. The endorsement likens to clubbing a towering dinger over Fenway's Green Monster.

But for the campaigns of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and candidate Wendy Leece, failing to lock up the CMFA's nod amounts to striking out looking.

If you are going to sink the planks of your campaign platform into a public safety foundation, it seems to us the strategy manual will tell you to lock up the endorsements of the public safety professionals who'll be charged with spearheading your initiatives. Certainly, both the mayor and Mrs. Leece have dolled up their campaign platforms with big, flashing lights advertising their commitment to public safety. But having fanned on winning the confidence of the CMFA, it leaves one to ponder if either have the leadership muscle to achieve substantive public safety improvements.

That the CMFA passed on Mansoor and Leece simply underscores the careening, wobbling path this city has traveled during Mansoor's mayoral tenure. And much of it has to do with the on-going public safety dust storm in Costa Mesa.

For most of 2006, Costa Mesa's public safety agencies have been roiled in quiet turmoil. In June, Costa Mesa Police Chief John Hensley turned in his badge. Retirement was the official reason. But the inside chatter on Hensley's departure is that that he lost the confidence of the Costa Mesa Police Association for several reasons. Chief (pardon the pun) among them was Hensley's ambassadorial refusal to criticize and push back at the city council over the Immigration Customs Enforcement proporsal it approved last December.

Multiple sources tell itchingpost.com that the CMPA has no interest in participating in ICE. In fact, the ICE proposal is seen to be at least partly responsible for the cop flight out of Costa Mesa; the city's force is currently short 17 officers (more than 10%).

There's also been smoke in the firehouse in recent months. Costa Mesa Fire Chief Jim Ellis remains on indefinite leave, ostensibly for medical reasons. The CMFA has deep and lingering issues with the council on several fronts, not the least of which is Mansoor's chilly attitude toward public employee unions. This leaves open the question if Ellis' leave is - not unlike Hensely's predicament - related to how aggressively (or not) he's flaking the interests of the CMFA before council.

Like the mayor and Mrs. Leece, Garlich and Scheafer are making public safety the centerpiece of their respective council campaigns. But it seems to us - given the CMFA's endorsement - that the two men now become the more credible public safety candidates. They've got the bigger bats.

We wait now to see who, if anyone, the Costa Mesa Police Association endorses. If it, too, balks at Mansoor and Leece, it should leave voters wondering whether or not the mayor and Mrs. Leece can deliver the public safety improvements they promise if the city's police and fire personnel aren't of a mind to play ball with them.

5 years later

2006-09-11T10:27:00.000-07:00

We are, today, five years removed from the unspeakable events of September 11, 2001. And we are still at war.

We must remain so until the facism that despises America and its freedoms are forever crushed.

But on this day, we wonder. We live ever fattened lives that too easily erase from our conscience what occurred a half decade ago. We yap on our cell phones, refinance our mortgages, swill our wines and get impatient waiting for the section of a revolving door.

And yet the enemy - living among us - still zealously seeks to kill us. Is our resolve to kill them first fueled by equal zeal?

We would hope so. But if you doubt, spend a few moments pondering the images in this post.

We are indeed at war.

Doin' that 1901 double density tango

2006-08-31T17:13:00.000-07:00

Were you able to stomach the droning talking points of council candidate Wendy Leece and Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor at the Aug. 30 candidate forum, you'd think the 1901 Newport residential project was the reconstruction of Treblinka.

Both Leece and Mansoor fumbled to spear fellow candidate Bruce Garlich for his vote to approve the owner-occupied home development. The mayor and Mrs. Leece praddled on - incessantly, mind you - with these lyrics: "1901 Newport is a double-density project subsidized with $1.5 million of your tax dollars." And, so, the implication is that because Garlich voted to approve the project, he's clearly of a mind to rob the city's coffers to build a Wilshire Boulevard condo canyon smack in the heart of Goat Hill.

Blah, blah, blah.

Had the mayor and Mrs. Leece been up front with - or, perhaps, aware of - the true nature of the project and the $1.5 million affordable housing bonus, they'd understand why their spear to the chest of Garlich bounced off and landed with a thud. Anticipating that, they'd been better off not chucking it at all.

Part of the 1901 Newport project lies within Costa Mesa's redevelopment zone. That means it's at least partially ensnared in state redevelopment agency law that requires 20% of a redevelopment zone's tax increment be devoted to affordable housing. That's what the $1.5 million affordable housing bonus relative to 1901 Newport was all about. It wasn't a giveaway or a subsidy or a payoff to make Rudder Development's law suit against the city go away. It's not money the city could have used - lawfully - for pot holes, or undergrounding utilities, or for extra cops to chase off vending trucks "that play La Cucaracha at all hours of the day."

The $1.5 million had to be used for affordable housing. 1901 Newport is providing 12-units of affordable housing, so it gets the dough.

If the mayor and Mrs. Leece understood this, you'd think they would love 1901 Newport given their concerned answer to one particular question during the candidate forum. Costa Mesa resident Elaine Cassity lamented that her adult children (one of whom was the teacher of one of our children), was forced to move out of Costa Mesa to confines more affordable. What, she wondered, would Leece and Mansoor do to make Costa Mesa an affordable town for young folks (teachers, police officers, firefighters) to live in?

The mayor and Mrs. Leece could only blather on about the Westside residential overlay and about the cute live/work lofts that ultimately will be constructed on that side of town. Problem is, at market rates those "lofts" will carry a ticket of at least half a mil. Really affordable stuff, wouldn't you say?

Lesson? If you don't understand the nuances of redevelopment or the economics of land development, doin' that 1901 double density tango can make you look like you have two left feet.

In Costa Mesa, an armed debate

2006-08-30T22:22:00.000-07:00

Never in the 53-year history of Costa Mesa has a city council candidate forum been held under the protection of armed guards.

That unblemished history is now, well, history.

The first council candidate forum of the 2006 election cycle - sponsored by the Mesa Verde Community Inc. homeowners association - featured all six council candidates, a couple of hundred Costa Mesans by our rough count, and two private armed guards.

The show of force was a shameful indictment of the state of this city.

Torn and divided by an ill-conceived, unvetted proposal peddled by Mayor Allan Mansoor to pin federal immigration badges on Costa Mesa cops - a proposal, we might add, that former Police Chief John Hensley did not support and didn't think would prove to be effective - this town has been plunged into a goo of fear, mistrust and insecurity. How bad is it? Bad enough to post Glock-wielding sentries at our candidate forums.

It is a disquieting, revolting state of affairs.

Garlich is good for you

2006-08-30T10:10:00.000-07:00

itchingpost.com is endorsing Costa Mesa Planning Commissioner Bruce Garlich's candidacy for city council.

We suggest visiting Garlich's new website (here). Just a few minutes scouring Garlich's website should provide enough proof as to why he's the right candidate at the right time for Costa Mesa.

Garlich has in spades what few other candidates in the field have: A methodical, strategic approach to the daunting public safety, infrastructure, recreation, education and revitalization challenges confronting Costa Mesa; complete respect for the expertise of our Police and Fire personnel in the formulation of public safety policies; the apolitical temperament necessary to wade through the issues to find balanced, common sense solutions to the city's challenges; the humility to recognize that he serves the community and that good policy is the product of consensus building; one of the broadest cross sections of community support and endorsements we've seen in some time.

At a time in Costa Mesa's history when there seems to be no shortage of clowns, caliopies, sword swallowers and assorted freak shows, Garlich represents an important leveling force that will return Costa Mesa to a sound, even-handed, unifying form of government that's good for all of our city's residents, businesses and children.

Cross-border mail invasion continues

2006-08-29T10:00:00.000-07:00

The cross-border mail invasion of the Daily Pilot's Forum page rambles on today with a missive from Chino Hills resident Laura Espinoza (here). She wonders, in prose supportive of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor, when we became "obligated to provide a living for an entire other country?"

itchingpost.com wonders who "we" is? If she means Costa Mesa, we'd suggest that our city is not, in fact, providing "a living for an entire other country." If she means the United States, her letter would be more on target if directed to her congressional representative.

It is telling to us, as we stated yesterday, that those in Costa Mesa who are lamenting the meddling of outside industrialists and non-Costa Mesa residents in our city's politics dummy up when outsiders ply the Daily Pilot's editorial page with correspondence that presume to suggest we should support certain city leaders. Nor do they speak up when these same outsiders clog the public comments portion of our city council meetings.

So then, are outsiders really the issue? Or, could it be that outside voices and influences in Costa Mesa are just fine so long as they share our agenda and policy positions?

In the meantime, Ms. Espinoza might want to move to Costa Mesa or, perhaps, encourage Mayor Mansoor to move to Chino Hills and seek office there.

Out Damned Carpetbaggers!

2006-08-28T06:47:00.000-07:00

From the huge-irony-of-the-day file: Out damned carpetbaggers!

Much of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor's and council candidate Wendy Leece's terms in city government have been occupied with rhetoric bemoaning the influences of "outsiders" on Costa Mesa's quality of life. Of particular note is the pair's persistent interest in the use of some of Costa Mesa's athletic facilities by Newport Beach children participating in Region 97 of the American Youth Soccer Organization. Region 97 serves both Costa Mesa and Newport Beach children.

Also chastised as "outsiders" are the business owners of West Costa Mesa; "industrialists" is the pejorative used to describe them. Some of the good people who own these businesses do not reside in Costa Mesa.

We note, too, that the CM Press - the unofficial propaganda sheet for the Mansoor/Leece campaign - makes it a daily hymn to bitch slap "outsiders" as the agents of Costa Mesa's supposed spiral into the abyss of Third World demographics, social rot and crime.

If "outsiders" are the scourge the Mansoor/Leece ticket believe them to be, then it is curious that letters to the editor of the Daily Pilot from time to time feature missives cheering the mayor and Mrs. Leece penned by folks who, GASP, do not live or do business in Costa Mesa.

This morning's Daily Pilot (here) is a good example. Sandra Sweet - a Minuteman organizer - sings the mayor's praises from her home in Mission Viejo. Leslie McIsaac does the same from Orange. So, apparently, "outsiders" aren't all that bad.

Nevertheless, all of this "outsiders" trash talk makes us wonder: How much of the mayor's and Mrs. Leece's campaign contributions are from "outsiders"? We would hope none. In fact, given that the mayor and Mrs. Leece are so hive-ridden by the influences of outsiders on Costa Mesa, we expect to hear soon their pledge to refuse any campaign contributions from non-Costa Mesa sources.

And if they have received "outsider" cash, we encourage the mayor and Mrs. Leece to promptly return it. If not, then spare us all the whining about "outsiders".

Melting ICE

2006-08-25T20:40:00.000-07:00

The ICE may be melting.

The outpouring of emails received by itchingpost.com to our "One Reasoner's Perspective" post may be indicating a thaw in middle-of-the-road-Costa Mesan support for the city's pending proposal to cross designate certain CMPD officers as federal immigration agents.

Of the nearly 70 emails we've received in response to the "One Reasoner's Perspective" entry, more than 40 indicated that they were not aware of former Costa Mesa Police Chief John Hensley's professional assessment of the limited potential success the ICE proposal would likely produce.

We're troubled by that. It seems some who embrace the ICE blueprint are doing so because it sounds good.

That smells an awful lot like a classic big "D" democrat policy; to do "something" that makes us all feel good; that makes us feel that we're goring a problem that is - in reality - beyond our control.

But ICE will do little, if anything, to make Costa Mesa's streets "safer". One only need watch former Costa Mesa Police Chief John Hensely's colloquy with the Costa Mesa City Council to figure this out.

If you haven't witnessed the revealing exchange between members of the Costa Mesa City Council and Hensely regarding the ICE proposal, itchingpost.com suggests a little internet television viewing. Here's what you should do:

Go to Costa Mesa's CMTV-24 online site (here)
Click on the View Video link for the March 7, 2006 City Council meeting
Slide the video timing bar to 56:30, which is the portion of the meeting where Chief Hensely makes his presentation about the ICE proposal.

There are two take aways from the video: First, Costa Mesa has no idea how many illegal immigrants reside in Costa Mesa. Second, the ICE proposal will have limited beneficial effect. So what we essentially have in the ICE proposal is a very defined, costly solution for a problem that is poorly understood if understood at all. That means we're either attempting to extinguish a candle with a fire hose, a bonfire with a water pistol or neither. And all while wearing a blindfold. Adopting policy for a muncipal problem that few - if any - can define is bad government.

Indeed, the specter of ICE may well make Costa Mesa's streets more dangerous. How?

Consider that at the recent CMPD community meetings at Sonora Elementary School to address the spate of shootings in Mesa North, it was learned that many of the Latino families in the area didn't attend the afternoon event because of the police presence. Our source later informed us that the Latino community doesn't believe the ICE proposal will be limited to those suspected of aggravated felonies, but that it will creep outward to include sweeps within the Latino community. The source cited Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor's original ICE proposal, which would have cross-trained virtually every CMPD officer as an immigration agent. He also cited the postings and writings of the operator of CM Press - a Mansoor/Leece supporter - who advocates the bulldozing of their homes. Our source called it "eviction by bulldozer and gentrification."

It may well be that the mere specter of the ICE proposal is making Costa Mesa's streets more dangerous by placing a chill on the CMPD's intellgience sources within the Latino community...sources that have traditionally helped finger gang and other criminal elements.

That possibility is etched in the creeping unease expressed in the dozens of emails we received regarding the ICE proposal.

Irvine stabbing deaths; Welcome Mat murders?

2006-08-22T13:36:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

The Orange County Register's website is reporting breaking news of the stabbing deaths of two women in the wonderful, bucolic, job-center-free, soup-kitchen-free, downscale-apartment-free city of Irvine.

In just one short day, Irvine - supposedly the safest city in Orange County - tallied half the murders Costa Mesa has rung up in 7 1/2 months.

Circumstances surrounding the Irvine stabbings are not known other than they took place in a neighborhood near the tony Tustin Ranch Golf Club, and that the victims were stabbed to death.

So now it looks as if job centers, soup kitchens and downscale apartments aren't the only catalysts of a city's homicide rate. Apparently, high-value, white-collar neighborhoods are as well.

What's a city like Costa Mesa to do?

One Reasoner's Perspective

2006-08-17T15:23:00.000-07:00

You win in politics by painting your opponent with big, ugly brush strokes. That's as it is now with certain Costa Mesa politicians, candidates, bloggers and the remaining gaggle of hand-wringers charging that the political action committee - Return to Reason - is a singularly focused collection of liberal boobs who'd prefer Costa Mesa be a safe haven for illegal immigrants and the social ills that follow them.

Return to Reason's opponents are more interested in gentrification, which, not coincidentally, would have a disproportionate impact on the 35% of Costa Mesa's population that is Latino. This fuels the charge of many of Mayor Allan Mansoor's opponents that he and those who support gentrifying policies are simply clever racists.

As we've written here on many occasions, we don't believe the mayor is a racist. Misguided? Certainly.

It's not stupid political strategy for the mayor, council candidate Wendy Leece and their band of supporters to pin Return to Reason with the misnomer that because the PAC opposes the city's pending ICE program and the mayor who first pushed this rumbling snowball down the hill, RTR wants Costa Mesa to become Orange County's Maywood. This is, of course, absurd. Or, shall we say, silly.

But for the shmoe voter who punches the ballot with ungoverned emotion (and tragically little intellectual curiosity) coursing through his or her veins, this poop pile resonates. We suspect some number of these voters make reading of the CMPress a part of their morning coffee. And the CMPress knows this. When not engaging in schoolyard name calling of community leaders it opposes, the CMPress litters its posts with flaming pejoratives, breathtaking assumptions and gross generalizations.

The fact is the composition of Return to Reason is better described as a stew. Its supporters are Republican, Democrat, and even a few DTSers (Decline To State a party). We're one of the DTSers, although for 99.9% of our adult life, we've pitched our tent in the GOP's camp. At itchingpost.com, we're small-government religionists and dabble in libertarianism from time-to-time. But let's move on.

We're part of Return To Reason not so much because we disagree with the Mayor and his ballclub on the issues, but because we believe his solutions to the issues are either ineffective enough to make their cost to the city's budget and the community's social congeniality prohibitive, or because they are simply boneheaded and poorly conceived.

A case in point. Prior to his departure on a permanent fishing trip, former Costa Mesa Police Chief John Hensley told the City Council that, based on his expertise, he predicted that the ICE program would ensnare each year fewer than 10 illegals suspected of committing a felony. Hensely based his estimate on Costa Mesa's annual average of somewhere between 100 and 150 Class I crimes.

Now, no one will dispute that placing immigration holds on 10 illegal immigrants suspected of felony crimes is a good thing. Of course it is. But is the end worth the cost in dollar terms (a recurring tab of more than $200,000 in hard and soft costs to train officers and to replace them as they rotate out of their details)? And, equally, is it worth the atmosphere of mistrust, contention and division it creates in the community?

These are important questions. And they become even more salient when you consider Hensley's reminder to the council that nothing in the ICE proposal guarantees that the suspects it hauls down will indeed be deported.

Curiously, it is interesting to note that Costa Mesa's streets have been experiencing one of their most violent years since the City Council's adoption of the ICE proposal last December. One might theorize that citizens of the Latino community who previously assisted CMPD in identifying gang elements within the city prior to the specter of ICE are now suddenly mum. And for obvious reasons.

itchingpost.com would prefer that Costa Mesa see how Orange County Sheriff Mike Carona's ICE strategy works, and then work with the sheriff to define what kind of OCS resources would be available to Costa Mesa.

We've documented in previous posts our dismay with the mayor and Ms. Leece with respect to Costa Mesa's tragic shortage of lighted athletic fields. In our next post, we'll write about this issue as another reason why we're a part of Return to Reason.

Monahan Candidate for CM Sanitation District

2006-08-11T17:17:00.000-07:00

BREAKING

Three-term Costa Mesa City Councilman Gary Monahan shared with itchingpost.com late this afternoon that he has filed his candidate papers for the Costa Mesa Sanitation District.

Monahan, twice Costa Mesa's mayor, is widely respected throughout Costa Mesa as a get-it-down consensus builder who swings a big bat for Costa Mesa residents and business owners. The owner of Skosh Monahan's Irish Pub and Steakhouse, Monahan currently serves on the Orange County Transportation Authority Board of Directors and the California State Wage Board.

Monahan is termed out of his city council seat this election cycle.

Monahan says he's seeking a Sanitation District seat to help lead it back to being a customer-friendly agency. He says he's not happy with the district's 20% rate hikes just this year in the wake of the district's automation initiative, which was supposed to reduce and stabilize costs to the consumer. As well, he says sanitation district customers should not have to foot the bill for the cost of sewer repairs between their homes and the main sewer line. As it stands now, the sanitation district only pays the bill for repairs up to the main. Any repairs between the main and a customer's home is the responsibility of the homeowner. That, says Monahan, is more often than not a cost-prohibitive, permit laden exercise.

By name recognition, track record and reputation alone, Monahan should be a shoo in.

'Welcome mat' murders Israel Maciel?

2006-08-04T09:25:00.000-07:00

Costa Mesa resident Israel Maciel is dead; gunned down in a cold blooded drive-by Aug. 2 near his home on Baker Street. Four others were wounded in the fusillade of bullets.

The perp, as described by witnesses and recounted in the Costa Mesa Police Department's report on the crime, is caucasian; a bald headed goon with a goatee.

Israel's folks, Martin Rodriguez and Augustina Mendoza, are devastated by the death of their 23-year-old son.

By all accounts, Israel was a hardworking young man; an employee of Jack's Surfboards in Huntington Beach. His death shook his boss to tears. His family foundation seemed solid; mentored by a step dad who encouraged him to learn a trade and to follow his passion for cars.

It doesn't matter now. It is an awful, tragic story.

So when the Daily Pilot (here) canvassed community leaders for reaction to the shooting (and presumably Israel's death), one would have hoped for some expression of sympathy for Israel and his family; some sign of anger and a clear indication of resolve to haul down the killer.

But what we got from Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor was a shameful, cold hearted pile of political dung.

"It shows we still have work to do, but it takes time to remove the welcome mat. When you have job centers, soup kitchens and a high concentration of downscale rental units, it drives the city down, and I favor a multi-faceted approach to include stronger gang enforcement and overlay-zone revitalization, and I also think a social worker holding the hand of a hardened gang member has not worked in other cities."

Nice. And incredibly presumptuous.

Why? Let's look at the flip side of the Mayor's presumption (that Israel's slaying is likely a gang related event perpetrated by somone who was drawn to town by the now-defunct job center, the SOS soup kitchen and those downscale rental units). Let's suppose for a moment that witness accounts and the CMPD's report pan out; that the shooter was a white guy. And since we don't know whether the incident was gang related or not (but the Mayor seems to presume it was), let's take the same license to assume it wasn't. In fact, let's say the crime was committed by the hand of an angry white guy stoked and motivated by Costa Mesa's hostile anti-illegal immigrant bonfire.

Who or what do we then blame for creating the atmosphere that drove this guy to pull the trigger? Hmmm?

Oh, by the way, Mr. Mayor, you had an opportunity to put in place a "multi-faceted" gang eradication program at the June 20 City Council meeting. You voted against it.

I want Costa Mesa back

2006-07-27T10:50:00.000-07:00

A platoon of itchingpost.com readers have asked us to post our Daily Pilot commentary on our 'reasoning' for enlisting in the Return to Reason movement. We've posted the piece below. You can also link to it above.

City now like an angry old drunk
BYRON DE ARAKAL(Published: July 26, 2006)

Costa Mesa is different these days. Not in a good way.

As Costa Mesa wrestles with the many issues and circumstances that confront the everyday lives and futures of its 113,000 residents, I regret that the city's demeanor more often reminds me of an angry old drunk held captive by a narrowing mind seated in a rigid ideological wheelchair.

It wasn't always this way.

In 1993, my wife and I chose Costa Mesa as the town in which we would continue raising our four children. At the time my fondness of Costa Mesa was rooted in many of the city's traits and odd quirks, many of which aligned with my fiscally conservative/socially moderate political compass.

For instance, I was romanced by the city government's laissez faire tint; that it was more comfortable staying out of the way and out of the lives of its residents and its entrepreneurs. I enjoyed that Costa Mesa was home to more neighborhood merchants than faceless corporations; that it was one of the few cities left that hadn't confiscated from its residents the great American tradition of a front-yard fireworks show. I was wooed that its neighborhoods had an eclectic character, and that its population was equally diverse in occupation, culture, ethnicity and faith.

I liked that Costa Mesa seemed to be a town of live-and-let-live people; that you could improve your property without sparking a neighborhood revolt, or park your RV in front of your house. It was good to be part of a town that had a fish fry and a parade; that it had thriving Little League, Pop Warner and American Youth Soccer Organization programs.

But what struck me most favorably about Costa Mesa is that its government seemed remarkably free of partisanship, ideological spats and politicians willing to divide the city in an autocratic pursuit of an agenda.

On the last point, I can't say it's that way anymore. And that's why I've enlisted in the Return to Reason movement.

In recent years -- the last two in particular -- the construct of the Costa Mesa City Council has fomented an atmosphere of government by dictate. The architecture of our city government is today driven more by ideological fiat than public discussion and consensus building. Broad community needs are ignored or jettisoned to grease the grinding wheels of individuals who don't want a soccer field by their home, or people playing in their neighborhood parks.

I don't want to be led by a city council that should you disagree with its policy, or have a different view of how an issue should be handled, smugly chides that you aren't in favor of upholding the law.

I don't want to be led by a mayor so enamored with the headlines of his ideas that he fails to vet them with his colleagues or the community. I want to be led by a mayor with the wisdom and the humility to recognize that there is usually more than one solution to a problem.

I don't want to be led by a city council that believes kids playing on a field are a burden to the neighborhood. I want to be led by a city council that recognizes parks and recreation as essential parts of Costa Mesa's infrastructure; that appreciates city-supported recreational programs as a vital component of the social health of our community.

Most important, I want to be led by a city council that is acutely aware that it does not have all the answers, and that the best city government is the product of deliberation and inclusive dialogue striving to achieve a better way of life for a majority of its constituents.

I want Costa Mesa back. So does Return to Reason.

* BYRON DE ARAKAL is a resident of Costa Mesa and a member of the Costa Mesa Parks and Recreation Commission.

Silly is as silly does

2006-07-21T19:08:00.000-07:00

If you hold a season ticket to the political arena for any length of time, it's pretty easy to spot when an elected jumps the shark and becomes a politician doped on shameless rhetoric.

Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor is there. In spades.

Mansoor is the marquee guy behind the city's hugely controversial blueprint to cross train select members of its police force to act as federal immigration agents. The specter of the plan has the city tied in knots.

Indeed, the mayor's plan to have CM coppers screen felony suspects for residency status has carved a rift right down the middle of this once laissez faire, live-and-let live community. Mansoor critics on the fringe often brand him as a racist and his policy as an exercise in Old West vigilantism. Mansoor's canned response: "That's just silly."

Okay. We'll buy that. Seriously. We don't believe Mansoor's initiative is in anyway couched in bigotry.

So, when a cadre of very influential Costa Mesa residents organize - under the banner of Return to Reason - to change the construct of the Mansoor-led city council (for a variety of reasons including his immigration screening initiative), one might think that a mature politician might say: "I disagree with their views, but respect their right to dissent."

But that's not what we got from the mayor, who seems to think that all critics of himself and his leadership are "silly." Instead, Mansoor's response to the formation of Return to Reason - which opposes his immigration scheme - is that it must be a group of people "who don't want to uphold the law."

This is the kind of shameless rhetorical crap that has placed politicians a few rungs above, oh, Satan, in public opinion polls. In this case, the mayor is insisting that his proposal is the only way to solve the nettlesome problems of illegal immigration in Costa Mesa. And, if you disagree, then you must be a flack for illegal immigrants and not in favor of upholding the law.

With all due respect, Mr. Mayor, that's just silly.

Fire in the House

2006-07-02T20:52:00.000-07:00

Costa Mesa is burning. Or, at least, there's a whole lot of smoke.

On the very day former Costa Mesa Police Chief John Hensley was hanging up his badge - his leadership undermined by a cranky Costa Mesa Police Association that didn't like his style, among other things - we learned that Costa Mesa Fire Chief Jim Ellis is away from the station house on indefinite medical leave.

Whatever is ailing Ellis - a 30-year veteran of the CMFD and its chief since 2001 - isn't clear. But a quote from Costa Mesa Fire Association President Jeff Janzen in the June 30 Daily Pilot report revealing Ellis' leave hints, indirectly, that the chief's ailment may very well be union related.

The Pilot reports that Janzen said the reason for Ellis' leave is unclear. But then Janzen offers this curious aside: "Right now we are working with city staff to resolve whatever issues we do have."

Let's parse that one on a couple of fronts. Why would Janzen toss that morsel to a reporter during an interview on a subject that would appear to be unrelated. Unless, of course, they are very related. A follow-up question might have been: "Is Chief Ellis one of those issues?"

Second, the construct of Janzen's quote is patently shifty. On the one hand, the union boss acknowledges that the CMFA is working with the city's staff.

But on what? Says Janzen: "Whatever issues we do have."

Whatever issues we do have? There's a couple of ways to read that. One, the CMFA is meeting with the city on issues, but Janzen doesn't know what they are. Not likely, given he's the CMFA's president.

The other interpretation is that it's clearly card tipping. Why imply that the CMFA has issues it needs to work out with the city in the context of a news story announcing Ellis' medical leave, unless it's a crafty aside signaling CMFA's displeasure with Ellis?

Maybe. If it's true, then Costa Mesans should be less worried about who sits on its City Council and more worried about the backroom power play that this city's public safety unions seem to be engineering. Ellis is an immensely popular figure in the community. Were he to travel the same road as Hensley, and for the same reasons, then Costa Mesa needs to ponder whether or not its public safety servants are indeed serving our best interests.

And, if they're not, find an alternative. Costa Mesa is the province of its voters, not of its labor unions.

Affecting Fairness

2006-06-07T14:35:00.000-07:00

We alluded in an earlier post that the governance philosophy of Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and Parks Commission Chair Wendy Leece could be construed as being as effective as a potted plant. Or perhaps a rock. We drew that conclusion when they recently wrote in their Daily Pilot commentary that the notion of a 10-field soccer complex on part of the Costa Mesa Country Club's Mesa Linda golf course "fits our philosophy of not affecting our community in the name of serving our community."

We suggested that good leaders do indeed affect their community.

Both the mayor and Mrs. Leece have shared with us that the Daily Pilot edited the wording of that sentence, swapping out their original "impacting" for "affecting". Fair enough.

But even the use of the word "impacting" could be conveyed to mean they want to serve Costa Mesa without impact. We'll assume their intent was to write that their golf course idea "fits our philosophy of not negatively impacting our community in the name of serving our community."

So then, we withdraw the potted plant parallel with one caveat. If Mansoor and Leece have a precise message in mind, they'll benefit if they use precise language to convey it.

Duck Hooking Quality of Life

2006-06-06T16:07:00.000-07:00

How easy would it be, do you suppose, to rope 10 folks into agreeing what "quality of life" is? Not very. As concensus building goes, it's a Rubic's Cube exercise. One man's quality of life is another's hellish existence.

Nevertheless, the governance of Costa Mesa - at least until November - seems to be only by the situational decree of "quality of life" religionists. And in a city of 110,000 people, you can imagine that this philosophy of governance is making some happy, and pissing off a whole gaggle of others.

Let's look at an example, shall we. It has become maddeningly clear to those involved in the issue that Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor and Mayor Pro Tem Eric Bever are - at the very least - leaning toward killing the Parks and Recreation Commission's recommendation to install permanent lights on two additional fields at the Farm Sports Complex.

Their reasoning? The "quality of life" of the residents bordering the Farm would be negatively impacted. Not that they have any evidence of this, mind you, save for the claims of the neighboring residents who say it's so. Neither Mansoor or Bever, to my knowledge, have set foot on the Farm during soccer play and walked the fence line to see if "quality of life" is truly being trashed.

Now then, if "quality of life" is the deal breaker for the Farm Sports Complex lighting project, how is it that you can credibly propose a 10-field athletic complex - with lights - smack dab next to a residential facility for the developmentally disabled to the North, and a whole neighborhood of residents to the South? Yet, that's precisely what Mayor Mansoor's and Parks Commission Chair Wendy Leece's flyer to reconfigure part of the Costa Mesa Country Club into a lighted sports complex does.

Mansoor's and Leece's sports complex dream would be sandwiched squarely between the Fairview Developmental Center (which is already about to become home to four soccer fields on its property to the West), and the apartment communities on Joann Street to the South.

It is curious that "quality of life" matters to Mansoor, Bever and Leece when it comes to the residents of Mesa Del Mar (the neighborhood bordering the Farm), but doesn't count so much when we're talking about the developmentally disabled or predominantly Latino families who are renters.

If "quality of life" is going to be a yardstick for solving Costa Mesa's festering field shortage, it seems to me the measure of a solution ought to be the one that improves the quality of life for the largest number of people (in this case, the 4,000 youth who play organized youth sports in town). The measure should not be the one that destroys the "quality of life" for the largest number of people (namely, the golfing community, the city's revenue stream, the Fairview Developmental Center residents, and the Joann Street residents).

That aside, there's always hope that Mansoor, Leece and Bever will see the light and agree to the Farm project.

From the Potted Plant File

2006-06-03T20:37:00.000-07:00

Ignore for the moment that Costa Mesa Mayor Allan Mansoor's and Parks Commission Chair Wendy Leece's 11th-hour plan to scuttle Costa Mesa Country Club's Mesa Linda course in favor of a lighted soccer complex is screaming to Earth - nose down - like a clipped Stuka.

I'm still wrestling with this thumbless observation made by the pair in their Daily Pilot piece announcing the now ill-fated plan: "This approach fits our philosophy of not affecting our community in the name of serving our community." (Insert sound of deafening silence)

I think maybe that's a good philosophy for a potted plant. Or a rock. I sort of like that communty servants affect my community. But, maybe that's just me.

Light the Farm, and let's move on.

Lighting up a campaign - Part III

2006-05-29T19:03:00.000-07:00

Barring the rather obvious above-the-fold issues dominating the Costa Mesa cityscape the last half year, it would have been predictable with some certainty that this November's mid-term election would mirror earlier mid-terms in the city's history. That is, a low turnout. In a less turbulent setting, perhaps no more than 40,000 votes would be cast for the two available seats on the Costa Mesa City Council (held now by outgoing Councilmember Gary Monahan and Mayor Allan Mansoor). But these are indeed turbulent times. And, so, expect an inordinately large turnout this November, with better than 60,000 votes cast in the city council race.

Why will Costa Mesa voters - who normally mail it in for mid-term elections - beat major feet to the ballot box this go round? In recent months, two reasons have emerged. And, in just the last day, a third has arisen, which is related to one of the first two.

Clearly, the 800 pound gorilla in the room is the council's December approval (by a divided vote) to cross train some members of the Costa Mesa Police Department to facilitate certain federal immigration enforcement functions; namely, to screen felony detainees for residency status. Now, even though the scope of the progam (spearheaded by Mansoor) is pretty limited, the proposal has Costa Mesa's Latino community (about 35,000 members of the city's 110,000 residentship) knotted up in abject fear. Despite the best efforts of outgoing Police Chief John Hensley to soothe their angst, the Latino community (and others who oppose the mayor's plan) will have none of it. Why? They believe the program is only the first step in a broader plan to expunge the city of its Latino population. That the mayor has, in other public comments, voiced support for a broader screening regime is proof of that, they say.

The wake of all of this has stirred up a pretty vigorous voter registration drive in the Latino community...new voters who haven't figured into previous elections, and who certainly aren't going to be of a mind to seat the mayor for another four years. Now, this might not matter were a significant majority of Costa Mesa's broader population four-square behind Mansoor's immigration enforcement plan. But, near as I can tell from the more than 100 conversations I've had with influencers and just normal, everyday folk, Costa Mesa is divided nearly down the middle on this one. Combine the city's more moderate mainstream voters not in favor of the immigration plan with the anticipated surge in Latino voting, and that spells trouble for any candidate supporting the mayor's immigration plan...including the mayor.

This issue alone doesn't mean a re-election campaign is unmanageable. But it may not be the only issue.

As reported in an earlier itchingpost.com entry, Costa Mesa is squarely stuck in a classic supply-and-demand pickle with respect to the availability of athletic fields for youth and adult sports. More specifically, the city's problem is particularly acute in its vast shortage of lighted fields for nighttime use. In recent months, the Costa Mesa Parks and Recreation Commission (on which I am a member, for disclosure's sake) recommended to the City Council that it allocate funds to light two additional fields at the city's Farm Sports Complex.

Parks Commission Chair Wendy Leece, a presumed city council candidate, cast one of two votes against the plan in April, setting off a firestorm of fury among the voting parents of the more than 4,000 kids who play soccer, baseball and football in this town. Mansoor, on the other hand, had remained mum on the issue until just this last Sunday (May 28). That day, in a Daily Pilot report, Mansoor implied he would not support the Farm lights project, favoring instead the installation of portable lights at the Farm until such a time that a new 8- to 10-field complex could be developed on nine of the existing 18 holes of the Costa Mesa Country Club's Mesa Linda course.

The mayor's plan, said to be co-authored by Leece, is already under assault by two significant groups...the city's golfers (particularly senior golfers), and the Newport-Mesa Unfied School District's high school golf programs, which face their own persistent facility shortage problems.

While it certainly appears that the Mayor's and Leece's plan is an effort to nip the city's athletic field deficiencies, it may appease no one. Instead, it may simply rally additional voting constituencies who otherwise might not have voted in the upcoming mid-term.

It is curious, politically, that any elected official would make youth recreation a political issue (and it wouldn't be if only the council would support the lighting for two additional fields at the Farm). Now, add to the mix an immigration plan that alienates a third of the city's population, and a whole other group of recreation enthusiasts (the golfers), and you have a recipe for an unusually large mid-term election turnout.

If that occurs, it will be obvious who it helps at the ballot box.

A letter to the Costa Mesa City Council

2006-05-22T10:17:00.000-07:00

It is my view that recreation facilities are vital infrastructure components of any municipality, as they provide the venues at which youth can participate in supervised, organized sports. That a city have sufficient recreation facilities to serve the needs of its residents is beneficial for a number of reasons:

Participation in organized youth sports and recreation is the best avenue I know of to achieve and maintain health and fitness. It is well documented in several studies that children who are healthy and fit perform better in school, and tend to stay out of trouble.
Family participation in organized youth sports is integral to the social fabric of a community.
Families and teammates often develop long-standing and even life-long relationships out of their sports experiences. As well, organized youth sports bring our community’s families together in a healthy environment.
A full array of available sports and recreation opportunities enhances a community’s desirability as a place to live, work, and play. This desirability leads to families choosing Costa Mesa as the town in which they wish to reside, and that helps our economy and our home values. We can look to Irvine as a textbook example of this tenet.

Over the course of my three and half year tenure as a member of the Costa Mesa Parks and Recreation Commission, it has been my principal objective to define, understand and correct Costa Mesa’s long-standing and persistent lack of athletic fields. Over the last several years, the problem has become particularly acute. Here’s why:

Between 1990 and 2000, Costa Mesa’s population of children age 5 to 9 grew by nearly 32%. The population of children 10 to 14 nearly doubled. Finally, our population of young people 15 to 19 grew by 40%.
Within the last decade, youth soccer in Costa Mesa (indeed, in most communities in Orange County) has overtaken youth baseball and football in terms of youth participation.
Currently, more than 4,000 young people participate in organized youth sports in Costa Mesa (soccer, club soccer, youth baseball and youth football)
I think we can all agree that Costa Mesa is not a city that is going to suddenly stop growing. The council’s important and laudable achievement of the Westside residential overlay can be anticipated to produce over the next 20 years a substantial increase in the number of families moving to Costa Mesa. It would be irresponsible planning not to actively plan for and develop recreational facilities to accommodate these future Costa Mesans.

What is important to keep in mind is that Costa Mesa is a city whose recreational planning and athletic field inventory were in place well before youth soccer even came into being. Prior to 2002, the year the Farm Sports Complex opened, Costa Mesa had only one soccer field on land that it owns (the now defunct utility field at TeWinkle Park). With the addition of the Farm Sports Complex, our inventory of soccer fields grew to six.

The Costa Mesa Parks and Recreation Master Plan sets out a couple of objectives worth noting. It identifies that in 2002 Costa Mesa requires 21.9 soccer fields. At that time, we had 6 on land the city owns. By 2025, it designates that nearly 26 fields will be needed. As an additional reference, the California Parks and Recreation Department provides guidelines indicating that a municipality should have 1 soccer field for every 5,050 residents. Again, we have 6 on land the city owns. Were it not for our JUA partnership with the Newport-Mesa Unified School District, our field shortage would be catastrophic.

Now, I reference our field inventory on land the city owns for an important reason. There is no guarantee the JUA will last forever. Although the current revised JUA – which you approved in January – carries a term of 5 years, either party can terminate the agreement, with cause, at any time with a two-year written notice. Were that to occur, our current inventory of 68 soccer, baseball and utility fields would be reduced to approximately 12 to 13. This notwithstanding, our current field inventory in the context of the JUA just barely meets our current youth and adult sport field demands. I emphasize current.

It is my view that Costa Mesa must have a long-range strategy to become less dependent on the JUA by developing immediate and long-range solutions to provide for the recreational needs of its citizens. That has been my focus during my tenure on the Parks and Recreation Commission.

In June, you will be deliberating on Costa Mesa’s 2006-2007 budget. A recommended allocation of approximately $1 million to add lights on two additional fields at the Farm Sports Complex will be a part of the proposed budget.

I want to urge you, in the strongest possible terms, to support this allocation. Adding additional lights at the Farm Sports Complex is a prudent and reasonable investment on city-owned land that meets an immediate need for additional fields for nighttime use. In addition, it will create a permanent asset improvement that will serve not just current Costa Mesa youth, but the youth of the city’s future, as well. Moreover, it will enhance the quality of life of our youth. And, I know that quality of life is important to all of you.

Equally important, the project sets the city on a path to provide for the recreational needs of our youth in a way that makes us less dependent on the good graces of the Newport-Mesa Unified School District.

I know that on the many issues that have come before you, you are rightly sensitive to whether or not there is community support for important projects. I would encourage you to use that same yardstick as you consider the Farm Sports Complex project. I can assure you, and as you will see at your June meeting, there is broad community support for this vital project.

Lighting up a campaign - Part II

2006-05-08T16:43:00.000-07:00

The history of municipal elections in Costa Mesa tells us this much: Mid-term campaigns are low-turnout affairs.

Consider that in the November 2002 general election (a midterm event), Costa Mesans cast 34,658 votes for five city council candidates. In that contest for two open seats, Gary Monahan walked away with 10,739 votes (31%). Current Mayor Allan Mansoor won election with 7,617 votes (22%), edging out current Council Member Linda Dixon by 525 votes.

Two years earlier – which featured the historic Bush vs. Gore Supreme Court battle to settle the presidential contest – Costa Mesa voters dolled out 73,889 votes among 11 council candidates. With three open seats available, Chris Steel (10,664/14.4%), Libby Cowan (10,276/13.9%) and now-Judge Karen Robinson (9,224/12.5%) were elected.

It’s worth noting here that Mansoor – who has since become a national media figure for his initiative to cross-train Costa Mesa police officers as immigration agents – would have been trounced in the 2000 general election. His 7,617 votes in 2002 would have landed him in sixth place behind Joel Faris' 7,844 votes. And in the last non-midterm election (November 2004, in which Costa Mesans cast a whopping 84,216 votes), he would have finished a distant sixth behind Mike Scheafer’s 9,545 votes.

Of course, all campaigns are different. In 2002, the year Mansoor was elected, the base that elected Chris Steel was growing frustrated by his inability to advance its Westside improvement/eliminate the “magnets” of illegal immigration agenda. And, so, they turned out in droves to elect Mansoor while the rest of Costa Mesa stayed home. In itself, the low turnout may well suggest that a great swath of Costa Mesa voters were not at that time overly concerned about “magnets” and immigration.

Now, the true test of a candidate’s resonance among an electorate is his or her electability in a high-turnout election. That premise sets the table for a couple of thoughts on the city council election this November.

The seriously contending candidates at this stage – and this is our opinion, mind you – are Mansoor, Planning Commissioner Bruce Garlich, and Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Wendy Leece, but only by virtue of the likelihood that she’s the candidate Mansoor will be backing. (Note: Mansoor was seen squiring Leece around at the city’s May 7 Public Safety Expo)

Were this coming election to follow the low-turnout history of past midterms, Mansoor’s re-election would be a lock. That would leave Garlich (who lost out on a council seat in the 2004 general election by just 45 votes), battling Leece for the departing Monahan’s seat. Remember, though, Mansoor hasn’t been tested in a high-turnout election. Leece hasn’t been tested in a city council election at all.

Garlich, on the other hand, has been. He pulled down 10,095 votes in the high-turnout 2004 general election, a figure that would have smoked Mansoor’s 2002 tally.

Keep that in mind when we post Part III of Lighting Up a Campaign, in which we’ll dissect why this will be an uncharacteristically high, if not huge, turnout election.

Lighting up a campaign - Part I

2006-04-27T17:00:00.000-07:00

Measured by the yardstick of the California State Department of Parks and Recreation, Costa Mesa should have 1 soccer field for every 5,050 Costa Mesa residents. That pencils out to roughly 20 fields given the city's population of nearly 110,000. Yet, the city has only 6 on land that it owns. Worse, Costa Mesa doesn't hold the deed to any dirt remotely large enough to bring our inventory up to state standards.

A study commissioned by the city in April 2002 - a survey that guided Costa Mesa's update of its Parks and Recreation Master Plan - concluded that to meet the demand for youth soccer among Costa Mesa families in 2002, the city needs 21.9 soccer fields. Right now. By 2025, we'll need 25.1. Again, on land the city owns, we have 6.

Another set of numbers: From 1990 to 2000, Costa Mesa's population of children 5 to 9 years of age grew by 31.2%, its population of youngsters 10 to 14 nearly doubled (91.85%), and its collection of young people age 15 to 19 swelled by nearly 40%.

Why the numbers overview? To point out that Costa Mesa has, and still is, failing miserably to provide sufficient recreational facilities to meet the needs of its populace; particularly our kids. Costa Mesa has 12 baseball, softball, soccer and football fields on city-owned land. Were it not for Costa Mesa's Joint Use Agreement with the Newport-Mesa Unified School District (a pact that allows the city to use the district's 56 utility fields after school hours), the state of youth and adult recreation in Costa Mesa would be catastrophic. Nevertheless, there will always be the specter that at some point the school district could opt out of the JUA.

Here's the point: Costa Mesa must get serious, and now, about aggressively adding to its inventory of athletic fields on city owned land. The most urgent need is for fields with lights.

Over the last three and a half years, the Costa Mesa Parks and Recreation Commission has been focusing on backfilling the city's shameful lack of athletic fields. It recommended to and won the approval of the City Council to conduct studies of surplus government land (real estate owned by the county, state or the school district) to determine their feasibility as recreation facilities. The commission also asked the council to allocate funds for the development of concept plans in the event these surplus parcels become available for lease or sale.

On another front, Costa Mesa and the State of California are negotiating a lease agreement that will allow the city to use open land at the Fairview Development Center for youth sports. But, once again, it is a solution that finds the city prepared to invest hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on land it doesn't own.

The most promising and fiscally responsible solution on the table is the lighting of two additional fields at the Farm Sports Complex. The project - recently recommended to the City Council for funding by the Parks and Recreation Commission - would provide both an immediate and long-term solution to our growing recreation facilities demand, and move us closer to what the city's parks and recreation master plan envisions. Even better, it's an investment of taxpayer dollars on a city-owned facility.

What has the thousands of Costa Mesa families who have youngsters in youth sports exceptionally worried is the prevailing wind in city government that tacks to the concerns and interests of individual property owners. In this case, a handful of residents who live adjacent to the Farm Sports Complex oppose the additional lit fields.

Never mind that is is patently bad community policy to defer to the interests of a few property owners to the detriment of a communitywide need. At least two members of the Parks and Recreation Commission voted against the Farm project, siding with the small number of homeowners based on a "promise" made by a city employee nearly 10 years ago that two fields, and only two fields, would ever be lit. The problem is, the employee who made the pledge (if he indeed made it) didn't have the authority to make it. Nor is the "promise" codified anywhere. There's no deed restriction mentioning it, no condition mentioning it in the mitigated negative declaration of the Farm project EIR, and no mention of two lighted fields and only two lighted fields in the Farm Conditions of Approval.

Parks and Recreation Commission Chair Wendy Leece - a presumed City Council candidate - voted against the Farm project even as she acknowledged the city's enormous field deficit. Her reasoning: The "rights of homeowners and taxpayers takes precedence over kids playing." That logic coming from a Parks and Recreation Commissioner - presumably an officer of the city who should hold our parks and recreation needs as her highest priortiy - has the organized youth sports community seeing red.

Now, that this "community" is comprised of well over 2,000 families representing more than 4,000 children who participate in organized sports suggests that it's a constituency that isn't to be ignored. In fact, it more than suggests it. Presumably, those 2,000 families represent 4,000 voters, nearly half the number most council candidates need to win - or lose - an election. Leece, according to the leaders of this community, won't be a candidate they can support whether or not the City Council approves the funding for the Farm project in June. They'll not be taking chances that the next city council will continue to abdicate its responsiblity to meet our city's recreational infrastructure needs.

In Part II: How the Farm project may move the City Council election from a one-issue campaign to a two-issue campaign, and what that means for council candidates.

Barton Burps

2006-04-22T19:49:00.000-07:00

It's not my habit to fire back when 15-watt bulbs take ignorant swipes at the stuff I write whether it's here on this blog or in my Watchdog column for the Daily Pilot. Two decades as a journalist and communications consultant have taught me that it doesn't do much good to return smack talk.

But every now and again a dopey soul tosses a hand grenade with the pin still in it in my direction, and I just can't resist pulling the pin and lobbing it back. Costa Mesa resident Dennis Barton's backhand to my April 16 Watchdog column - in which I offer that a city commissioned survey shows little to no appetite among CM residents to bury the city's utilities, and that the city council ought to abandon the idea (which, by the way,it did) - is one of 'em.

Barton - in an April 23 letter-to-the-editor in the Daily Pilot - blows off my assertion of the utility survey's findings in a dither whose intellectual depth (perhaps a centimeter, maybe less) is exceeded only by its erroneous assumptions.

Barton's letter is factually off course a few thousands miles in its premise alone. First, he judges the column as a "sarcastic criticism of Mayor Allan Mansoor..." Errrrrrrr. Wrong. While I love sarcasm, the piece was a dead serious opinion. Second, I level no criticism at Mansoor. I merely opine that his utility undergrounding initiative - not necessarily a bad idea provided the community is willing to pay for it - doesn't appear to have much of any support according to the survey.

Now, if I had called the mayor a twit, or had offered that he's a leader without principles (both of which I don't believe to be true, by the way), Barton might have a point. But since I didn't, Denny doesn't.

Second, DB caps his letter by dismissing the column as a spotlight grabbing effort of "another City Council candidate pursuing name recognition at the expense of our mayor..."

Earth to Dennis: As I have said many times on the record, in public and to anyone who has asked me, "I am not, nor will I be, a candidate for City Council." Please spread the word. And, Dennis, let me know if there's anything in that statement you don't understand.

A few other glaring boners litter Barton's letter.

He writes that "the survey was apparently (emphasis added) on a plan to convert the entire city's utilities." Opining on appearances, Dennis, is a dangerous practice. In fact, the survey queried respondents on a host of undergrounding options, including citywide burying. But if Barton believes the citywide burying is not a "realistic plan" as he suggests in his letter, he should take that up with the Mayor he's defending and the city staff who commissioned the survey.

Here's another one. Writes Dennis: "The inferential statiscal sample of '500 likely voters' appears (emphasis added again) bogus." Whoa, dude. Bogus? Awesome. But that it appears bogus doesn't make it so. And how is my reporting of the survey's actual sample inferential? That's just like, so bogus.

Barton then offers that "whether the sample has voters or not is irrelevant." Really? I would think it makes sense to poll voters, since they're the poor saps who need to pull the lever for or against the tax the city'll need to pay for all this wire burying. And if not voters, who? Leprichauns?

Barton argues that the survey sample should be weighted toward owner-occupied, single-family-zoned residential areas and a larger percent of homeowners. So, what, renters don't have a say? To whom does Dennis think landlords will pass along a utility-burying tax?

One last thing. Barton believes the question, "Do you want underground utilities," is tainted because it's "stigmatized with erroneous price tags." Okay, he's right on that one. I wrote that previous estimates had pegged citywide utility undergrounding at roughly a half billion dollars. Actually, according to city staff and utility provider estimates, the cost is likely to be in excess of $850 million.

You got me on that one, Dennis. Other than that, try to do better next time. (Note: Now I'm being sarcastic).

Cat Fight in the Pool

2006-04-11T12:18:00.000-07:00

Costa Mesa and Newport Beach remind me of a couple of teenage girls from opposite sides of the track bunked in a dorm room. Maybe they'll share an eyebrow pencil from time to time. But apart from the eye paint, they don't have a whole bunch of stuff in common.

Here's what I mean.

The looming municipal election cycle in Costa Mesa has illegal immigration written all over it. A side note, though: More than a few battalions of families with kids in soccer, football and baseball are gearing up to show certain council members and candidates the door this November if they don't get on the stick and construct more lighted athletic fields in town.

By contrast, in Newport Beach the race that's shaping up to be a great reality TV night is the expected claw fest between Council Member Leslie Daigle and anticipated candidate Barbara Venezia, the Santa Ana Heights siren. And, no surprise here, the issue that seems to want to define - at least in part - this District 4 race between these two ladies is size.

So, duh. Everything in Newport Beach is about big and bigger.

In this case, the hissing is all about pool size (but only because there are no municipal controversies in Harbor Town right now over engagement rings and seating arrangements). The pool in question is slated to grace the proposed Santa Ana Heights Community Center; the hob-nob hub for unincorporated Santa Ana Heights types who'll soon be marching beneath the Newport Beach flag as adopted blue bloods. Joining the proletariat of Costa Mesa was just too much for them - or their property values - to bear.

Newport Beach has committed $2 million to the construction of a 50-meter 'community' pool at the center, and Daigle wants to keep it that size. Venezia doesn't. She'd prefer a 25-meter water hole to make space for a children's water area, an exercise pool for the elderly, some picnic tables and chairs, and a lot of grass (which is to say, a big lawn).

Daigle - an appointee to the City Council and who is facing her first campaign - is up against a firebrand in Venezia. While BV may have come off as the dim-witted chefette along side Santa Ana Heights mogul John Crean in their Home on the Range cooking show, she's anything but dumb. And, she's no doiley. Think of Margaret Thatcher with red hair.

It should be some cat fight.

John Hensley's Rock and Hard Place

2006-04-09T17:28:00.000-07:00

Which would you choose? Taking retirement with more than 75% of your current salary for the rest of your life, or staying in a job that lies somewhere between a colonoscopy and leprosy. Costa Mesa's police chief, John Hensley, is taking the dough. Smart guy.

Since the city council's December decision to cross-designate some members of the city's cop force as immigration agents, Hensley's been the guy left perched in the dunking booth. And the water's teeming with pirrana.

Worse, there's been no shortage of loons and whack jobs eager to fire fast balls at the bullseye. The worst of 'em is a creepy guy named James Robert Reade, who has a penchant for 10th Grade, over-the-top prose, a curious fixation on the life of one Dr. Hector Garcia, and a bizarre habit of taking big, theatrical gulps of air between sentences. Strange dude. The other is a woman named Alma Ramirez, who has a nails-to-chalkboard tendency to shift languages mid-sentence without engaging the clutch. Both Reade and Ramirez routinely slap Hensley during council meeting public comments, referring to him as Hitler and "the fuerer of the fourth reich." Ramirez's diatribes are a fascinating study in irony; she often alternatively shifts between anti-semetic tripe and Nazi bashing during her incoherent rants.

But enough for now about the circus acts in town. Hensley's not bailing out because of them.

Hensley's announced retirement left both the Orange County Register and the Los Angeles Times reporting his departure in the context of the city's on-going immigration dust up. Only the Daily Pilot was able to nail down a sitdown with Hensley, in which he alluded to what many in this town already knew: The Costa Mesa Police Association (CMPA) couldn't work for this guy.

The mumblings are that Hensley is a buttoned-down, no-nonsense manager who is a stickler for protocols and reports. He knows who his bosses are (the city council), salutes smartly and carries out their orders regardless of what he thinks about them personally or professionally.

That is, apparently, not a style the CMPA likes. And that's telling of the other bit of chatter floating around. The rank and file blue force is heard to be unhappy with the direction of this current city council. They're not interested in being immigration agents or spending time enforcing the niggly "quality of life" directives this city council is known for. To that end, they want a chief who'll push back.

John Hensley's problem in this environment is that he's not Dave Snowden, the chief he replaced in 2003. Snowden was a laugh-and-scratch commander who had no qualms about bracing a city council whose policies he thought were wrongheaded. Not Hensley. He takes orders and carries them out.

Hensley found himself in a vice, squeezed by the directives of his city council boss, and a work force that doesn't have much of an appetite for the current council's policy direction. Too bad, really. Hensley's a really good cop.

Mission Redux

2006-04-06T15:25:00.000-07:00

I like William F. Buckley. He's not the prettiest guy on the planet (a poster child for dermabrasion, actually) but he's really smart and can write better than just about anybody (except for maybe Christopher Hitchens).

Years ago, Buckley wrote an essay for Playboy called Redefining Smart. In it, he opined that "as man knows more, individual men know less and less." His theory was this: The mamoth expansion of information in the world makes it increasingly impossible for individual people to know it all. Picture it this way; it's sort of like trying to store a gig of information on a 40 megabyte hardrive.

Why the homage to Buckely's theorem? In my case, it's true. I hatched this bleepin' blog about the time 2006 was slipping through my front door. My thinking was that I had the time and the brainpower to wordsmith off-beat observations about the nation's people, plots and odd events.

As it turns out, I don't have enough of either.

Ergo, a little mission redux is in order. We're turning down the gain on the itchingpost.com radar to focus on oddballs and oddities a little more immediate to my front door. So, instead of commenting on Pat Robertson's on-going implosion or the strange phenomenon of people carrying on cell phone conversations in restroom stalls, I'll be targeting my scribblings at the people, politics, and plots of Costa Mesa and Newport Beach.

Soon, I'll be adding a link to an archive of my Daily PIlot 'Watchdog' columns. Later on, perhaps, I'll toss in a link to an archive of my old 'Between The Lines' columns, as I'm still getting regular requests that I post these somewhere.

Here is as good a place as any, I suppose.