POLITICS ASIDE:The tough work of choosing sides

I knew it would be hard.

I wrote here it would be hard.

I had no idea just how hard it would be though.

The Daily Pilot’s endorsement editorials published on Sunday (in case you missed them, they are still available online at www.dailypilot .com/opinion), and despite this having been my fourth time being part of the process, it absolutely was tougher than before.

There was more discussion among the board than before. Although we ended up unanimously agreeing on all our picks, we started from more divergent positions than I recall in the past. We went back and forth on a number of races before settling on our choices.

I suppose there are some clear reasons why.

In Costa Mesa, this election does seem to be a crucial one. The vision for the city’s future held by Mayor Allan Mansoor (yes, we did pick him as our most influential person this year) and parks commissioner Wendy Leece is decidedly different from the rest of the candidates — most notably the Return to Reason-backed duo of planning commissioner Bruce Garlich and former Councilman Mike Scheafer.

The pick — and voters’ choices when they reach for their ballot — is the most important I’ve seen since I began paying attention to Costa Mesa in 1998.

The school board picks were tough because, well, more than once candidates mentioned our Feb. 12 editorial when we asked for new faces to rise to the challenge of running. Having heard about that editorial a couple of times, I went back and took another look at it.

I kind of understand why it made an impression. Among the things we said:

“The second [piece of surprising news] was that any surprising news would come from this school board, which seemingly does so little in the way of major policy programs that it is difficult to think of any recent accomplishments other than the passage of two bond measures. And opponents probably could argue convincingly that those bonds represent the board’s failure to plan adequately for the district’s growth and needs.”

And:

“More seriously, school performances on state testing — the current gold standard by which districts and schools are judged — is hit-and-miss, with most of the misses coming in Costa Mesa, especially on the Westside. Twelve of the district’s 32 campuses did not meet the mandated performance progress last year. In as rich an area as Newport-Mesa — even accounting for the disparate economic climates that exist just miles apart — and where parents are so involved in their children’s education, such poor performance borders on the criminal.

“What all this adds up to is a sad fact: This board has accomplished little of lasting significance. The school district is not a dramatically better place than when the board members were first elected. Judging by test scores, many of the district’s worst schools are even worse.”

Ouch. OK. So we felt strongly about the need for a more active board, or at least one that does a better job communicating its accomplishments to the community.

Having had such fervor, how do we not endorse a whole new slate of candidates? Well, the answer was because, after much consideration, we found one of the incumbents, Judy Franco, made a strong case for backing her again.

Finally, in Newport Beach there were two races that really were tough to pick. The first, in District 1, was the choice between Michael Henn and Jack Wu. Both bring much to the political table — and brought much that was different. Henn has proven ability to run and manage large organizations. Wu has useful political ties and grew up and has lived most of his life in coastal Orange County. But we had to pick one, and we went with Henn.

And then there was the District 4 race between Councilwoman Leslie Daigle and Santa Ana Heights’ Barbara Venezia. That race was — well, it’s a cliche, but — turned upside down during our meeting with Venezia, when she announced she was dropping out of the election.

But because of the nature of that particular race and what appears to be dirty politics being played, we took a pretty drastic step. We endorsed a vote for Venezia as a vote against such politicking. (And, I hope, as a warning against other candidates not to start throwing mud around.)

We debated this decision seriously. It wasn’t one we made lightly. But it does seem to be one being shared by quite a few voters.

Next up? If I get all my work done, I’ll be at the Speak Up Newport event Wednesday night about Newport’s general plan update and Greenlight II, starting the serious homework for our endorsements of these issues.