City manager should be reprimanded in...

City manager should be reprimanded in ficus fracas

The total disregard for the democratic system that the Newport

Beach city manager exhibited is not only disgusting, but so blatant

in his “slap in the face” to Jan Vandersloot, who followed the legal

procedures set down by the city. For Mayor Tod Ridgeway to allow the

city manager to get away with this without official rebuke is equally

disturbing. Had Vandersloot been on the other side of the issue and

taken it into his own hands to have the trees cut down when there was

a desist order in place, he would have been arrested.

Why hasn’t the city manager been arrested for disobeying the

judge’s order? Unfortunately this “you can’t stop me” attitude is

rampant among -- I hate to sound prejudiced against males, but it is

very rare to have a woman disregard the public’s wishes, a judge’s

order, and chop down trees before the time the city allows such work

to be done, have the crew work as fast as possible and then have the

gall to stand there and gloat about it.

At our condominium complex, this exact same behavior was gleefully

enacted by a male board member who did not even live on the property

anymore. He used the same lame excuses about the roots -- people

might trip, the liability costs, etc.

Corona del Mar, Carmel and numerous other towns have sidewalks

buckled by tree roots in heavily trafficked areas and they cut roots,

put barriers around the remaining tree roots, repair the sidewalk and

put a sign warning people to watch their step. No way would they cut

down the trees.

Main Street has enough problems attracting business without

stripping its streets of grand old trees and spending a fortune to

replace them with small trees that will take years to even come close

to beautifying the area. I say start a movement to have the city

manager fired for blatantly ignoring the democratic process when he

demands others follow the rules. Where is the judge who issued the

desist order? Why isn’t he angry at this guy thumbing his nose at the

judge’s authority? Why isn’t Ridgeway taking action?

ROSEANNE EICHENBAUM

Costa Mesa

Don’t turn Costa Mesa into a low-rent city

Certain Costa Mesa City Council members and candidates are open to

the idea of implementing a “rent stabilization” program in Costa

Mesa. In principle, programs like this limit the rights of the

property owners to raise rents and evict tenants. This may sound

attractive to tenants, but for anyone who has lived under these

conditions, it is actually quite a blunder. In cities where these

programs have been enacted, such as Los Angeles, Santa Monica and San

Francisco, the results have been very much the opposite of those

intended. Slovenly tenants, drug dealers and others are often allowed

to stay in the apartments despite the best efforts of the owners to

remove them. The rents are held flat, while the property taxes,

utilities, assessments, maintenance and rent-control fees (paid by

the owner) endlessly increase. These financial realities lead to

deferred maintenance and a negative owner-tenant-city relationship.

The final result is a decaying city wherein the property values start

to reverse downward, and the tax base is eroded as the city finds

itself swamped in the red ink of balancing its commitments to city

services in the face of lower property tax revenues.

I would encourage everyone in Costa Mesa to seriously evaluate why

they live here. I am sure that most find it clean and safe, which are

features not found in low-rent cities like Los Angeles. Enact rent

control, and Costa Mesa will become just another slum like L.A. After

all, who would want to live in Santa Ana when they can live in Costa

Mesa for less? What are the real implications for life in Costa Mesa?

I have not even touched on the unconstitutional aspects of these

programs, namely that they are illegal takings of property and that

they impose taxation without representation in violation of the U.S.

and California constitutions. These issues result in lawsuits against

the city, for which the taxpayers must pay for defense.

There are only two members of the current city council that have

been on record as opposing these measures, and they are Gary Monahan

and Chris Steel. In this election, incumbent Monahan and candidate

Allan Mansoor are the only two that have taken a position against

low-rent initiatives. If you do not want to see Costa Mesa become the

next L.A., vote intelligently, not emotionally.

DAVID WILLIAMS

Newport Beach

Rental housing poll raises concerns about candidate

After reading about the slimy telephone “poll” performed by Costa

Mesa City Councilman Gary Monahan’s largest ($8,850) campaign

contributor, Rental Housing Independent, I couldn’t help but compare

it to the mailer I got from Monahan that day.

His mailer slogan said, “Integrity, Straight Talk, Common Sense.”

Really?

Where is the “integrity” in making calls to city voters to slam

one of your opponents instead of, oh, I don’t know, talking about

something worthwhile you’ve achieved in your eight years on the

council?

Where is the “straight talk” in saying that one of your opponents

is against residential remodels, when only one of the over 100

remodels applied for in the city this year has been denied by the

Planning Commission?

Finally, where is the “common sense” in thinking no one would

realize you were behind this “poll,” where the “pollsters,” instead

of seeking public opinion, were very obviously trying to sway it

against one of your opponents.

As to the last, perhaps you went to the same school of campaign

tactics as the city council candidate who thought it was a good idea

a couple of years ago to dress up in drag -- short skirt, black

fishnets, high heels and all -- and stand on the corner of Newport

Boulevard waving a large sign questioning the sexuality of one of his

opponents. He didn’t think anyone would recognize him, either.

This “poll” was just as obvious. I hope your supporters at the car

dealerships and repair shops, in the Costa Mesa Chamber of Commerce

and elsewhere around the city take this behavior of yours into

consideration when they decide who they want to represent them for

the next four years.

And, in closing, a memo to Bill Perkins: Is this really a guy you

want to team up with?

MARY FEWEL

Costa Mesa

Monahan should only have one, not two seats

I don’t know your relationship with Linda Dixon, but your

endorsement of her for another four years may prove very costly for

Costa Mesa. Gary Monahan railed for two years about Libby Cowan’s

having “two” council seats and that a few of his council cohorts were

ill-prepared for the job.

Now, in addition to reelection, Gary wants to win a “second” seat

for his crony, Bill Perkins, a nice guy who’s clearly not ready for

the job. Your endorsement of Dixon increases the probability Monahan

will get his second seat. Haven’t you wondered why Monahan’s the

first sitting council person in Costa Mesa’s history to run a slate

against another incumbent? Are you aware someone’s been making smear

calls to Republican voters trying to turn this election into a

party-line vote?

We need Monahan on the council; he plays an important role and

leads a vital group of the community. But we can’t afford to give him

two seats. His constituency isn’t that large. And, we can’t afford to

give Dixon another four years. We know what she’s done and not done,

and Katrina Foley can ably represent her constituency.

We desperately need Foley on the council now because she is the

future of Costa Mesa, as Monahan is the past. It’s extremely

disappointing to see you argue that the future for Costa Mesa can

wait another two years, because that’s exactly what Monahan wants.

(Isn’t it curious that Gary talks about a Westside solution, but

after eight years we’re further from a solution than ever?) I don’t

think you’ve given any consideration to what another two years of

this council (or one with Perkins or Allan Mansoor instead of Dixon)

could cost Costa Mesa.

I don’t know one person in Costa Mesa who believes our City

Council is doing even an adequate job. Now is the time for change,

and there’s nothing “sudden” about it.

Residents of Costa Mesa have watched Dixon flail about on the

council for four long years. Our present council is a leaderless

hodgepodge of special interests, unable to argue the simplest issue

without making it personal. Yet, you’re recommending we keep them for

another two years, that this council is better than one with Foley on

it. You rightly applaud Foley , but, you don’t provide one reason why

“the timing is not right” or substantiate why Dixon deserves another

four years.

I’ve tried for two years to submit pieces to the Pilot to elevate

the argument for aggressively pursuing opportunities to improve our

city. Foley is a leader and a consensus builder, and Monahan knows

this.

I’m tired of hearing about absentee slumlords’ property rights,

and I believe Foley will act against them. (Why else are Westside

property owners lining up against her? Monahan heads the city’s

Redevelopment Agency -- why aren’t they against him?)

I’m tired of hearing council members say our schools are fine.

They’re not. I believe Foley will act to dramatically improve Costa

Mesa kids’ educational opportunities.

I don’t know why you endorsed Dixon, you never really say. I don’t

know why you say Costa Mesa’s future can wait; I previously argued to

you it can’t. You would have been well advised to endorse only one

candidate as to embarrass yourselves with the poor argument you put

forward.

DOUG SUTTON

Costa Mesa