The City Council meets again this Tuesday, following last week’s special meeting in which Brookfield Homes was given carte blanche to go ahead and build a project that was opposed by residents, staff, and the Planning Commission. Click here for the sad details.
This week, there are several interesting items on the agenda.
Find out what's happening in Lake Forestwith free, real-time updates from Patch.
PARADE COMMITTEE (item 4)
Dozens of members of Lake Forest’s Parade Committee will be on hand to accept recognition for their part in this year’s July 4th celebrations. In addition, award winners will be recognized and 10 year (Myron Drinkwater) and 20 year (Sharon Hanson) participants will get special attention.
Find out what's happening in Lake Forestwith free, real-time updates from Patch.
CITY MANAGER RAISE (Item 13)
I’ve reported earlier about the performance of the City Manager. In rating his performance some of the factors I considered included
· We have the highest crime rate of any city around us.
· We have one of the lowest rates of solving crime.
· We spend more (per capita) on legal fees than any of our neighbors, even while we end up reversing ourselves on issues like day laborers, sex offenders in the parks, etc.
· We have fewer amenities (e.g., senior center, civic center, activities center, dog park, etc.) than any of our neighbors.
· We did poorly on a recent investigation by the OC Grand Jury on transparency.
Of course there are many good things about the City, but in light of all these problems it’s a wonder that the Council has seen fit to give him a 3% raise. This means his new base salary will be $247,876, and that doesn’t include tens of thousands of dollars in benefits. This is hardly the “sound fiscal management” Councilmen Robinson and Nick promised us.
U-TURN FOR U-HAUL? (Item 19)
On June 27 the Planning Commission approved a plan to build a U-Haul storage and rental facility on Jeronimo Rd in the space currently occupied by the Nursery. It was a contentious meeting and residents opposed the project, but the pro-business/ pro-development new kids prevailed, partly because Commissioners Hughes and Zechmeister were absent, and as everyone knows, when the cat’s away the mice will play.
The basic question is whether or not this type of project is suitable for this area. Some of the concerns raised by residents were –
· The building is tall and unattractive, despite good faith efforts by U-Haul to do the best job they could.
· The parking lot where trucks will be stored will make the area look like a used-car lot.
· There are substantial problems with traffic in this area making the rationale for the site problematic.
Thank you Council members Nick and McCullough for listening to the residents and asking that the project be re-examined.
BTW – Am I the only person who thinks it’s strange that homeowners in this area are opposed to a truck business next to residential, while up in Foothill Ranch residents are fighting to keep homes from being built in an auto center? Wouldn’t it make a heck of a lot more sense to put the U-Haul business in the Auto Center area and put the new homes in Jeronimo right across from the existing homes? Or is that too sane an idea?
PARKING RESTRICTIONS (Item 20)
There are many places in the City where parking is a big problem. In fact there really isn’t any place where parking isn’t a problem, but when it comes to parking we have to talk about, big, bigger, and “holy cow.” The good folks on Midcrest Drive have reached the “holy cow” stage. Overflow parking from two nearby apartment complexes has made parking difficult along a 1,000 foot stretch of Midcrest, beginning at Pittsford, and after several surveys the City is recommending a 24-hour parking permit system be established.
NO CONTACT OR NO PAYOFFS? (Item 21)
The City Council is once again considered the “No Contact” provision in the upcoming RFP for the waste disposal contract. The question before them is whether or not City Council members should meet privately with potential applicants. Any time spent on this issue masks the true concern – whether or not City Council members should accept money from applicants is a far better question. Even better – should City Council members accept money from anyone who does business with the City or proposes to do business with the city?
FWIW - I reported elsewhere how much money Waste Management (WM) gave to City Council members, usually at $1,000 a pop and by my accounts, Voigts, McCullough, and Herzog all profited from WM’s largesse as did Rudolph, Tettemer, and Dixon when they were sitting on the Council.
Note to City Council – stop blowing smoke and do the right thing. Let’s reform the way “campaign contributions” are being used to influence City Council decisions and don’t worry so much about who talks to whom. Talking is good. Accepting money from people who are trying to influence your vote is bad. It’s as simple as that.
OTHER STUFF
Go to the City’s website where you can find all the items on the agenda. And try to show up at the meeting Tuesday night at 7 pm. It’s your city.
