Council Preview - July 16

The City Council agenda for July 16  has two appeals coming forward, both of which were covered in my previous article “The City Wants More Booze and More Traffic” For the full story, click on that article, but here I will list the main points why the City Council (CC) should sustain the decisions of the Planning Commission (PC)  –

MORE BOOZE (Item 13)

The applicant (Foothill Ranch Car Wash) seeks to add another alcohol selling store into a tract which is already over-saturated by 300% with stores selling alcohol. By itself that’s reason enough to deny the permit, which the PC did with a 4-0 vote. But consider that Lake Forest averages nearly 200 DUIs a year along with 10 arrests for public drunkenness and nearly 50 liquor law violations. Among almost all of our neighbors, that makes us #1 on a population basis in DUI arrests and arrests for alcohol law violations. With alcohol being such a serious problem for the City, surely we can’t condone adding more stores selling alcohol into an area that is already over-saturated by 300%?

BADLY DESIGNED HOMES (Item 14)

Just about everyone who viewed the plans put forward by Brookfield Homes believes that the plans are inadequate. City staff believes it. The vast majority of Lake Forest residents who attended several long PC meetings believe it. And the PC believes it, as they voted at the June 6 meeting. So what grounds would Brookfield have for an appeal? Maybe it’s the nearly $100,000 they and their partners poured into the coffins of City Council members’ election campaigns in the past two elections. That ought to count for something. The last time they asked the Council for a favor, 3 of the 5 members rolled over and said “yes”. Let’s see what they do this time.

BTW – the “recommended action” listed in the agenda on the city’s website says “Continue this item to a regular adjourned meeting of the City Council on July 30, 2013, at 7:00 p.m.” Maybe this is designed to give Brookfield one last chance to make a campaign contribution?

ANTI-CORRUPTION PROVISION (Item 16)

At the CC meeting June 4 while discussing the RFP for trash collection and recycling (Click Here for my article on that subject), Council members asked to be able to meet privately with applicants for the contract. The RFP contained a provision that required no contact between applicants and Council members, a standard clause which is meant to reduce the chances of corrupting influences. But some members of the Council wanted the chance to visit some of the onsite assets of the companies and to speak, at length, with their staff. At the time, Mayor Pro Tem McCullough objected to the idea. She wants everything out in the open so no secret shenanigans can go on out of the public’s view. On July 2nd she asked that the issue be re-considered and hence it’s coming back Tuesday night.

First, kudos to Mayor Pro Tem McCullough for her concerns for transparency. But, sad to say, transparency and no-contact provisions haven’t prevented dozens of companies from giving in excess of $100,000 over the years to City Council members for their election campaigns. It’s a rare City Council member who doesn’t rely on these “contributions”, and it’s done right out in the open. Even worse, it’s extremely rare for a City Council member to vote against the interests of anyone whose check they cashed.

Our current Trash contract holder, Waste Management, has given Council members in excess of $12,500 over the years, and this money has gone into the campaign hoppers of Richard Dixon, Mark Tettemer, Marcia Rudolph, Peter Herzog, Scott Voigts, and even Kathy McCullough herself.

If we really want to do away with corrupting influences, the best policy to adopt would be “Just Say No” to any financial contributions from anyone doing business or hoping to do business with the City, and if by some chance money does reach a Council member, that member should abstain from any discussion or vote when that person or business comes up at the Council. That’s the best way to stop corruption. It’s money that corrupts, not meetings.