Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle sued the owner of the Angels, Arte Moreno, when their name was changed to the Los Angeles Angels. He said at the time that he would boycott the Angels’ games. I guess he has changed his mind. The O.C. Register is reporting that Pringle and a bunch of his City of Anaheim cronies got in free to the first playoff game this week with the Red Sox.
The FPPC is considering forcing politicos like Pringle to report these freebies – which would limit them to watching only one or two games a year. But in the meantime they keep helping themselves. They just can’t help it.
Perhaps the Angels lost game one because Pringle was there?
To be fair, some tickets were donated to charities – in my opinion they all ought to be donated to charities. If politicians want to see these games they ought to pay what we have to pay – anywhere from $200 to $2,000.
Hmmm. Art, let’s do some basic math.
From the article:
The Angels may have lost Wednesday night, but there was a big local winner: Michael Baker, executive director of the Anaheim Boys and Girls Club, got six tickets from Mayor Curt Pringle and the city. Baker said he used them to take five children to the game, three of whom had never been to a major league stadium.
So, Baker gets six tickets from the Mayor, which he uses to attend the game with 5 underprivileged kids. Sounds like that adds up to six tickets given and six tickets used.
How did you turn that into Mayor Pringle attending that game?
For the record, by the way…he didn’t.
Jeff,
The Register reported that he did take a ticket, in his name. So take it up with them.
As I stated, these tickets should ONLY go to charities, not to you and your political buddies.
Art says: “these tickets should ONLY go to charities”
That is pure bunk Art. A lot of public business gets done at entertainment type events like this.
It is an opportunity for representatives of different organizations to get to know each other and begin or continue working relationships.
Sure, some tickets could – and probably do – go to charities. But the main purpose is to get people to work together. Businesses do the same thing.
This is in the public interest. I have no problem with it.
Hugh,
Ever heard of the Brown Act? Public business should NOT be conducted in this manner.
If politicians want to go to games so they can butter up their donors let them pay for it with THEIR money.
Regardless, the FPPC is about to shut this down – these politicians won’t be able to go to the game for free much longer. Good!
Yeah Art, I’ve heard of the Brown Act.
I think that it is a a great law. And of course it should be followed to the “T” – both to the letter AND the spirit of the law.
Too many electeds push the envelope and actually break the law with impunity. I think that you could do a post on the Brown Act – so we all know better how to keep tabs on the electeds.
If you noticed in my comment, I said “representatives of DIFFERENT organizations” – no Brown Act violation there.
I am a strong proponent of strict adherence to the Brown Act. I wish that more of our elected officials were as well. Open government it vital in conducting the public’s business.
Jeff -
When Baker runs for office, will you say it’s wrong then? Some may see this as a sharing of the tickets with another individual with an interest in the public sector, potentially even an elected seat, and not a gift to the children. That’s my perspective at least.
Pringle is getting ripped up by the base for Brown Act violations so he ‘charitizes’ 6 tickets to the Boys and Girls Club, an organization with a vested interest in public policy? It’s not like they’re the Make-A-Wish Foundation or something. The tickets should have been given directly to a few families or less politically motivated charities. I’m sure the kids would have preferred to go to the game with their parents, but then Baker couldn’t get the credit for getting the tickets from Pringle who got them from the Angels, could he?
Any way you look at it, the donation of the tickets served some politician well, didn’t it? GO RED SOX!
SMS
“Pringle is getting ripped up by the base for Brown Act violations”
I do not see any BA violations noted on this blog. Do you even know what type of activity constitutes a BA violation?
Hugh -
My apologies for the ‘brain fart.’ Please substitute ‘improprieties’ for ‘Brown Act violations.’ But really, does that sound much better?
SMS
SMS – As you can see from my posts to Art – I see no “improprieties” here.
The fact that a lot of charities end up with tickets raises a somewhat different problem. I don’t think that office holders should be giving away anything to the public. It reeks of old-time vote buying. Incumbents get to enhance their stature in the community by tossing around all these freebies; non-incumbents.
don’t.
As a citizen of Anaheim I would just as soon see the City sell or sublet these “assets” at the stadium and arena Failing that they could just hold lotteries for 501c3s (or anybody for that matter) and dispense with the politcal glad-handing.
“Incumbents get to enhance their stature in the community by tossing around all these freebies; non-incumbents don’t.”
That is the way it has been since the beginning of time. In Congress it is called the “Franking Privilege.”
I still say that these types of events promote the community and facilitate networking, all within the limits of the Brown Act.
Per Hugh:
That is the way it has been since the beginning of time. In Congress it is called the “Franking Privilege.”
Right, Hugh. Evil has been around since the beginning of time, too.
If you want to describe politicians dispensing publicly owned assets to look good as “networking,” then you go right ahead, although I hope you’ll forgive some of the raised eyebrows.
“Promote the community”? What does that mean, and how does handing out tickets promote anything other than the guy handing them out?
David,
Bottom line – the City of Anaheim owns the stadium and they can do what they want. If you don’t like it – write letters and show up at their City Council meetings and rant about it. Get the rules changed. That is what democracy is all about.
Like I said, I think that the practice has value to the community. If you don’t think so, get others to support your cause and go for it.
Hugh, I just want to pop in for a moment here- in your first comment you presented yourself as a sort of anti-corruption purist: I think that it is a a great law. And of course it should be followed to the “T” – both to the letter AND the spirit of the law.
And yet obviously what you’re busy defending certainly presents at least the appearance of impropriety, or this discussion wouldn’t be happening.
Vern,
You are using “anonyms” type logic now.
Hugh Mann
Hugh, I don’t “rant” anywhere.
Art…do we really have to go through this again? You wrote in your original post that Curt attended the game. He did not. You were wrong.
The Register did not report that Curt attended the game. They reported that he gave 6 tickets to a charity, which is what you said he should do in the first place.
Is your attempt to have zero credibility?
Jeff,
The Register stated “Click here to see a listing of all the people who got the freebie tickets for Game 1 between the Angels and Red Sox.” And Curt’s name was on that list. So take your beef up with the Register.
At any rate, the Pringle curse has doomed the Angels this year…