City Council Preview - Sept 3

There are some big issues coming up for this Tuesday night, including the selection of the replacement for Tim Hughes and once again “the Brookfield Boys” are going to vote on  whether to let the developers who spent nearly $100,00 to get them elected should be allowed to do whatever the heck they want. Last month it was Brookfield’s turn. And now Trumark shows up to collect.

TRUMARK (Items # 4 and 5)

As if the City is already embarrassed enough about City Council members Voigts, Robinson, and Nick voting for the companies that supplied them with nearly $100,000 to get elected, we have to suffer through another presentation by a developer telling us how good they are and how much they are going to do for us. At the last meeting it was pointed out to Voigts and Robinson that they acted unethically by accepting money and then voting special exemptions to the companies that gave them the money. They sat stone-faced through it all, and whispered nary a word, except to vote exactly the way the developers wanted them to vote. It was a low point in a City that has seen other low points this year, but never so dark and so low down. This Tuesday night they get another chance to show Lake Forest where their priorities lie and they certainly aren’t with the people. The “Save Lake Forest” movement already has more than 1,000 signatures that testify to where the people’s best interests lie. Council members Herzog and McCullough have done the right thing, asking that Brookfield and Trumark back step and provide the study which the City staff asked for which shows whether or not the best use of the land is for residential or commercial. Now if only one of the “Brookfield Boys” has the integrity and courage to join with their colleagues, we might be able to heal the deep wounds inflicted upon the body politic. Stay tuned. We are set either for a revelation or one step closer to being the next City of Bell.

BTW - The last time the Council met, Councilman Herzog, an attorney or some note, gave a long and detailed explanation of how the Council was acting illegally. It convinced me enough to spend several hours with two different real estate attorneys, both of whom offered the opinion that Herzog appeared to be correct. The City's attorney, however, disagreed, which isn't exactly accurate in my view because he seemed to ignore Herzog's evidence and kept insisting that the Council was not acting illegally without ever answering Herzog's specific allegations. In the end, the "Brookfield Boys" opted to go with the City attorney, and incredibly, did not request a second opinion, leaving the City open to a lawsuit.

Of course, relying on the City's attorney may not be the best path to success. Not only does the City spend a higher percentage of its money on legal expenses when compared to other cities, but we have had the whipsaw of starting and stopping. First we say the day laborers can't walk our streets and then we say, oops, perhaps they can. First we say the sex offenders must stay out of our parks, and then we say oops, perhaps they can. First we say those medical marijuana dispensaries better stay out of Lake Forest before the feds invade our turf, and then we learn the feds have decided not to invade other people's turf in search of the wicked weed. Millions of dollars later, one has to wonder whether or not we are getting the best legal advice we can get. After all, if the City gets sued because it has acted illegally, doesn't the City attorney's firm make even more money? And why would Peter Herzog want to ring a false alarm about the threat of lawsuits when he is a resident of the City and surely would suffer along with the rest of us if/when the City gets sued for acting illegally. Stay tuned on this one. Perhaps Councilman Herzog will warn his colleagues one more time. If so, I hope they listen better this time.

PLANNING COMMISSION (Item # 11)

We’ve covered this topic in so much detail, it only remains to repeat, once more, the obvious selection to replace Tim Hughes is Dave Carter. But there are some other things to consider -

Establishing Background Checks on all Commission Appointments

Considering the creation of committees of the PC and Parks and Recreation to utilize the talents of so many Lake Forest residents.

The Council should "stop da music", do adequate background checks on all the candidates, and then have them return for the selection process. Meanwhile, let's put our thinking caps on and create some committees than can utilize the considerable talents that are on the table before us.

ELECTRONIC DEVICES DURING PUBLIC MEETINGS 

The battle to enter the 21st Century continues in Lake Forest as the Council debates whether or not Council and Commission members should use their smart phones and/or tablets when they sit on the dais. Council member Nick and Commissioner Brower are the chief users of this newfangled gizmo, and quite frankly, having observed both of them in action, my personal opinion is that they bring to the meetings some additional useful information that wasn’t already  there.

The fact is, even the best staff reports sometimes have glaring holes in them, and these sometimes become apparent while an issue is under examination by the Council or Commission. Access to new technology by our representatives allows new information to be introduced that is pertinent to the decision making process.

Of course there are potential problems. Instead of paying attention to a meeting, no one wants a Council member watching porn, or playing video games, or checking on the last  deposit that came in to their campaign committee. Goodness knows under Mayor Voigts the meetings go on interminably now, well past the bedtime of some of the members. If they stopped paying attention and the meetings went any longer, we’d have to be serving bacon and eggs  instead of cookies.

Of course, some members can be found napping or seeming to not pay attention even now, without the smart phone, so we aren’t going to eliminate the problem of lapsed attention by banning smart phones.

Another problem is receiving texts during a meeting. This violates the Brown Act because deliberations are supposed to be open, and a Council member being lobbied by e-mail during a meeting would be improper. Of course, at our City Council, the lobbying usually goes on well in advance of meetings, and instead of texts being exchanged, tens of thousands of dollars are exchanged. Hmmm. I wonder if getting a text or e-mail during a meeting is a more serious problem than accepting tens of thousands of dollars?

All things considered, we should take advantage of the latest technology and draw up some guidelines or regulations that insure our representatives can use them in a manner that doesn’t violate the law, or the spirit of the law.