Letters to the editor: The real argument against Newport Beach ballot measure

Editor’s note: This letter refers to a November ballot measure in Newport Beach that seeks to require voter approval for a certain level of use of certificates of participation, a funding mechanism for capital projects.

On Friday, the real opponents of the ballot measure being advanced by “Team Newport” will go to court to displace the phony arguments filed by Team Newport supporter Bob Rush.

The following is the ballot argument Team Newport is trying to keep residents of Newport Beach from reading:

“Don’t be fooled, this measure may sound good, but consider that no other city in California has adopted this restriction. That should tell you that it is not a good idea.

“Lease obligation debt by definition does not increase taxes. A special election could cost over $350,000, project costs will be increased as projects are delayed, and politics, not fiscal analysis, will decide which projects are sent to the voters and which are funded with cash.

“This measure will require projects be submitted to the voters without going through a competitive bidding process; alternatively, bids will be padded by as much as 30% due to election delay.

“This law is so bad, the authors have tried to exempt all of the projects such as seawalls and disaster repairs that might actually fall under these provisions. Seawalls may still need a vote if they are not in imminent danger of failing. Do you really want to vote on a new police headquarters building or vehicle replacements? Do you want to have to raise campaign funds to get a new park near your home?

“City staff did not recommend this, our financial advisors did not recommend it, the city Finance Committee did not recommend it and no ‘best practice’ supports this. It’s just a cynical effort by some members of the City Council to give them an issue to run on in the absence of any real accomplishments.

“They will use the ballot measure campaign to raise funds in excess of the contribution limits to augment their personal campaigns. They do this without regard to the impact of the future ability of the city to maintain its essential public infrastructure. Don’t buy this con. Vote no on Measure ___ and restore good government to Newport Beach.”

Mike Henn, Rush Hill, Keith Curry, Jean Watt

Newport Beach

Councilwoman Foley is watching the Costa Mesa store

I have read the June 20 Daily Pilot article “Costa Mesa council approves $163.7-million city budget after closing $40,000 hole” and I appreciate Costa Mesa Councilwoman and 2018 mayoral candidate Katrina Foley watching the store when it comes to the Costa Mesa city budget.

At the June 19 City Council meeting, Foley presented a 10-point plan to reduce the budget. She identified nearly $2 million in the capital improvement project budget alone. The $2 million was in the budget for projects that had already been canceled or found to be non-viable. Foley proposed the money be reallocated from the CIP budget to other budget categories. Katrina was the only council member to identify this unique source of budget reduction.

It was proposed to transfer $625,000 from the discontinued Costa Mesa High School bleachers account, which had been canceled because the Newport-Mesa Unified School District decided against taking the funding. However, after a lengthy discussion, the council approved an operating and CIP budget that directed staff to transfer only $40,000 from the discontinued bleachers account and asked the staff to bring back for council consideration a reevaluated CIP program. Hopefully, more of the nearly $2 million will be reallocated.

As a woman business owner who has helped scores of franchise systems grow and thrive, I know the importance of watching the budget and making sure it balances with the needs of the system (or in this case, the city).

As a result, I plan to vote for Foley for mayor in November so she can continue her diligent and detailed watching of the Costa Mesa store, as she always has.

Mary Ann O’Connell

Costa Mesa

Most council members and candidates are late in expressing opposition to needle exchange

The Orange County Needle Exchange Program approved by the California Department of Public Health had a lengthy 90-day comment period, open to the public, to aid in the decision process.

Four cities — Santa Ana, Orange, Anaheim and Costa Mesa — were targeted for the needle exchange program.

In the past week, two Costa Mesa council members submitted published letters to the editor that were in equal disdain for the needle exchange. As a candidate for City Council District 4, I have been very concerned because of the proximity of the exchange site to my neighbors and the potential for negative impacts.

In trying to understand the state’s thinking in approving this project, I submitted a public information request asking for all council members’ and current candidates’ letters sent to the state that would have have been considered in the decision process. I was shocked to learn that council members John Stephens, Katrina Foley, Jim Righeimer and Allan Mansoor apparently did not submit a protest on behalf of their constituents.

Mayor Sandy Genis sent a comprehensive and thorough counter against the program. Of all the district candidates, only Arlis Reynolds, Michelle Figueredo-Wilson and myself wrote comments in an attempt to protect our city and stop the needle distribution.

My inquiry and public information request indicated that the entire council, except for Mayor Genis, did not address this issue directly to the state, instead remaining silent, then jumped on the train after it had left the station.

I felt it was my obligation to address the needle exchange because of the dire consequences it would have on my city and my district. I expected those in public office and those wanting to hold public office to have the same concern. I was wrong and disappointed on both counts.

Steven Chan

Costa Mesa

(Editor’s note: Council candidate Rebecca Trahan provided the Daily Pilot with an email she sent to the City Council on April 28 opposing the needle exchange and said she submitted a complaint about it on the “Contact us” page of the state Department of Public Health’s website. Her email to the council states: “I represent many voices in Costa Mesa, CA, specifically in District 5. We do not want any needle exchange programs in our city. While we understand the drug problem, addiction, and don’t want diseases to spread, this program is not the answer. The answer is better addiction treatment, counseling and mental health treatment. Regarding this program we say no!”)

Local election coverage provides great service to voters

I want to thank you for highlighting local elections well before Election Day. Keep it up.

In the 21st century, we no longer vote on the first Tuesday of November. Most voters vote by mail well before that date. Down-ballot elections are often overlooked and won by word of mouth. We may stop at the top of the ticket because we don’t know anything about school board, city council or even congressional candidates. You are doing a great service toward voter education.

Interviews with candidates that include who supports them and funding sources contribute to our opinion of how a candidate will transform into a legislator.

I look forward to more incisive articles about our local candidates by the Daily Pilot.

Patricia Goodman

Huntington Beach

The ‘middle’ will put Rouda over the top

Once again I agree with another Barbara Venezia column (“Harley Rouda thinks the sweet spot is in the moderate middle,” Aug. 10), but she fails to make one salient distinction.

Rouda’s opponent, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Costa Mesa) has completely abandoned representing the “moderate middle,” a sizable slice of the electorate in the 48th Congressional District. This is not to say Rohrabacher ever represented anyone to the left of the “moderate middle.”

While so-called liberals and progressives can moan about backing a “centrist” candidate, Rouda is doing what it takes to represent everyone in the district. This will make him a winner.

Tim Geddes

Huntington Beach

Enough is enough with Rohrabacher

Dana Rohrabacher believes Democrats were behind the white nationalist riots a year ago in Charlottesville, Va., and said calling them “white nationalist riots” is a liberal media deceit. Under his scenario, a former Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders supporter got Civil War reenactors to gather there under the guise of protecting a Robert E. Lee statue.

“It was a setup for these dumb Civil War reenactors,” Rohrabacher said [in a San Francisco Chronicle article last year]. “It was left-wingers who were manipulating them in order to have this confrontation” and to “put our president on the spot,” a scenario also touted by conspiracy theorist Alex Jones of InfoWars.

Close ties with Russia, a 93% positive rating with the NRA, doesn’t believe in [man-made] climate change, voted against the Affordable Care Act and equal pay for women, doesn’t support equal rights for the LGBTQ community, refuses to meet with his constituents, the list goes on and on. When is enough just too much?

Rohrabacher does not represent most of us in Congressional District 48. It’s time to elect someone who will — Harley Rouda.

Michele Burgess

Huntington Beach

UPDATES:

5:50 p.m.: The letter from Steven Chan was updated with an editor’s note about Rebecca Trahan’s position that she sent messages opposing the Orange County Needle Exchange Program early in the process.

This article was originally published at 10 a.m.