The Liberal OC recently ran an article in which they accused Mayor Tom Tait of “taking credit where it wasn’t due.” I understand most of our readers don’t visit that blog (even though we provide an RSS feed to it) so I will cross-post my reply here – I think it is information worth repeating, as Anaheim decides who to back for the most important and most contentious election we have faced in decades.
Dan, I think you forget, I have been watching Galloway for a long, long time, and apparently paying closer attention to her actions than you have. I didn’t want to go there, but you want to bring this stuff up, then the info is fair game. First, in defense of some previous remarks of others which Dan takes exception to:
Jason Young: Galloway has “turned on a man of integrity.”
Gee, what else is it called when you publicly rip on the guy who put his own reputation on the line for a decade defending you against your worst enemies?
Greg Diamond: Tait supports traditional Democratic issues.
I would argue that Tait supports what we would consider traditional “Good Government” issues, and I know Greg’s view of Democratic issues are based on his desire for “Good Government.”
Is Galloway is too stupid to be Mayor? (Cynthia Ward: “And if Galloway was so dumb as a rock that she didn’t know any better, or failed to find out if she was unfamiliar with [The Daily Show], what makes her think she is smart enough to run this City?”)
Dan, are you telling me her appearance on the Daily Show was the work of a genius? The role of Mayor is to be the spokesperson for Anaheim, representing us on national and sometimes international television. Watch this and tell me this is how you would allow your city to be represented, Hell Dan, you wouldn’t let one of your clients appear on a program without vetting it and prepping the person for what they should expect, Galloway just blindly marched in, cute shoes and all, and made an ass of herself, or allowed Stewart’s crew to make an ass of her. Go ahead, have you forgotten what a disaster that was?
Dan C: “Comments on her decorating from someone who never set foot in her Colony home during her BoS run (Dave Zenger, ‘I seem to remember this was shot in her second fake new home. Just check out the thrift store furniture. Even a bad house stager would be embarrassed’). Note to Dave, it wasn’t cheap furniture and the home wasn’t fake, but you certainly are).”
Zenger was not ripping on her décor so much as he was ripping on the carpetbagging of a woman who bounced from borrowed house to borrowed house, both owned by a known supporter with real estate to spare, in search of at least one that was zoned residential so she could legally claim to reside there. Dan, what is your definition of “home?” Did you open closets? Was there laundry in the hamper, female product in the medicine cabinet, leftovers in the fridge and not just the catered food brought in for the day? Or were you taken in by a staged home?
I have friends who live there, like RIGHT THERE Dan, and other than someone coming and going every now and then during the day to lower blinds, etc. there was no sign of someone running out to get the paper in a robe at 6 am, no glow of TV late at night, no Bella barking at the mailman, no sign of life unless she was having an event for those like you who needed plausible deniability.
Dan continues…
- “what did she really do during her time on the council?…
- “I can keep bringing up her work on affordable housing that helps working class families in Anaheim…
- “She helped create the Anaheim Family Justice Center to help curb domestic violence…
- “served on the OCTA…
- “and has received numerous awards for public service…
- “So if an elected conservative Republican mayor takes credit for something they actually voted against, is that a mark of integrity?”
We’ll come back to all those….
Dan quotes the Mayor saying, “When I took office, the city was losing $56,000 a day and had been for two years. If I didn’t do anything, we would have run out of money. We had eaten through $30 million in reserves. We had to make immediate cuts. A lot of people didn’t like that but it had to be done.”
Dan: “ ‘If *I* didn’t do anything’ is the key phrase here. As it turned out, Tait didn’t do anything.”
AHEM. From the minutes of the March 2011 meeting:
RESOLUTION NO 2011 030 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ANAHEIM approving a Letter of Understanding between the D1154 Anaheim Municipal Employees Association General and Clerical Units and the City of Anaheim Council Meeting Minutes of March 22 2011.
That’s not the budget. Indeed, the overall budget that got us in over our heads, budgets loaded with pork barrel projects for the special insiders’ groups, was approved repeatedly under Galloway’s watchful eye. I have not gone back to check her votes, I will say that I cannot recall a single time that she called attention to the insane spending habits of Pringle’s world class crony capitalism, but I know one need only to scratch the surface to see her own friends loaded up with enough goodies to get her to go along. That’s not good government, that’s not creating consensus or collaboration, that is simply being cut in on the take, after robbing taxpayers blind and putting us in the deepest hole Anaheim had been in for years.
- “…Mayor Tait responded his concern was that for a two week period an employee would work for 9 days and be paid for 9-1/2days and he would not be able to support this unless it was a one for one exchange…”
For a guy who signs the fronts of paychecks, how can you not get that? He was right to oppose it, I thought it at the time and I believe it now. Would you pay your team for 9 ½ days, work them for 9, and call it a cost savings?
- “…wished he could have been part of the decision making process earlier on however he would not be able to support a concession that provided an hourly rate increase. Council Member Murray remarked she had given this proposal a great deal of consideration and also would have liked to have been part of the team coming up with the terms of this negotiation…”
I am not clear on how the City conducts their negotiations, I am only familiar with the smaller government entity where I am privy to the Closed Session process and we are all involved in negotiating MOUs from the beginning. So I am baffled as to how this gets so far without input from the Mayor and at least one Council member. Perhaps there is a committee that negotiates and then it comes back to the full Council? In which case your explanation that Galloway made the deal but Tait and Murray were out of the loop would make sense. That Galloway would offer staff more pay for less work is not a win. Tait’s reasons for rejecting what was negotiated are valid, and the fact that the same majority also unable to do the math on the Stadium, streetcar, and hotel giveaways actually approved the MOU does not make it a good deal.
To dismiss the cuts made by Tait to the overall budget for years at a stretch because he wanted MORE cuts from one component of the process is bad math, Dan.
Instead, let’s look at what your gal DID do at CityHall.
Dan:
- what did she really do during her time on the council?
- I can keep bringing up her work on affordable housing that helps working class families in Anaheim.
You mean like the Elm Street Commons?
On November 28, 2006, SADI, the developer for Elm Street Commons, was scheduled for DDA approval, where the Housing Authority’s standard split is 85% to the City, and the developer keeps 15% as profit. The 85% is then recycled into more housing projects, which keeps Anaheim building apartments for the working poor. In addition, Elm Street Commons, received many millions of dollars in incentives like a sewer project and other mitigation measures on the City’s dime. Nobody took advantage of SADI development.
Yet during the 11-28-06 meeting, Richard Chavez pulled the item from the Consent Calendar, and after a truly bizarre song and dance act between Galloway, Chavez, and Sidhu, the City Council changed the agreement, bumping the developer’s profit from the standard 15% to a whopping and unprecedented 50% profit! Go watch the video and tell me the fix wasn’t in from the beginning. None of the three are very good actors.
This item begins about 38 minutes into the meeting.
Mayor Curt Pringle went postal, saying (correctly,) “By taking money out of that pot and not returning it to that pot it limits the amount of affordable housing we will do in the future.” The change meant that the developer would not be paying back 35% of the cost of the project to a revolving fund, and therefore that 35% would not be available for housing the working poor in the future.
This is how Galloway serves the poor with affordable housing projects, by diverting the pool meant for the population of Anaheim’s workforce, and instead lining the pockets of a developer who was later investigated by the FBI. After approving the vote, Lorri admonishes the developer, “I hope you acknowledge how much Council has been supportive of you.”
Meanwhile, SADI funnels money into a shady PAC (Hometown Voter) just before the 2006 election, funding an Independent Expenditure on behalf of Richard Chavez’ failed re-election. And they certainly didn’t forget Galloway, in 2008, funneling money through PAC filings with that paragon of virtue, Treasurer Kinde Durkee, Elm Street put up $15,000 to fund the Clear Channel billboards promoting Lorri’s re-election. They also underwrote a large mailing, and the graphic arts for the mail piece.
But wait, there’s more! Jump over to the filings for Orange County Leaders for Change, where Elm Street money mixed with a donation from SunCal, again using Kinde Durkee, was spent on the campaigns of both Lorri Galloway and Diane Singer. If you recall, both Diane and Lorri backed SunCal’s development that prompted the formation of SOAR. I guess this is the “compromise” and “bridge building” Galloway wants us to understand she can bring to City Council…again. Oh and try going over there, the project is the epitome of POS construction, the Styrofoam building details are already showing through the thin stucco barely sprayed over, it is a mess and the City is now stuck with it. At the time I called it “the slum of tomorrow” and it didn’t take long for “tomorrow” to become now.
- “…She helped create the Anaheim Family Justice Center to help curb domestic violence…”
There is no doubt that the Center does a great deal of good in the community, I understand it to have been Chief John Welter’s idea, which is why they named the Center after him when he left the Chief’s office:
I do know that the City had been leasing the building at a very nice, affordable rate, and then spent big bucks from that diminishing pool in order to buy the building from the developer…coincidentally the same guy who provided the “homes” for Lorri to “live in” while running for Supe. There was a lot of questioning at the time regarding the value of the building versus what was paid. You want to ask her about that or should I go dig up the paperwork?
- “…served on the OCTA…”
Yep, she did. And the boondoggle we both agree is a complete POS was done under her watch. I have the documents, boxes and boxes of them, showing that staff kept Pringle much more up to speed on the project than they did Tait. Tait had nearly no knowledge of the project when he came on board and staff appears to have kept it that way. Many, many months went by in which he was not briefed at all, and he had no reason to believe the project was anywhere near the point it was at.
Do you know who would know? The one person on Council during the Pringle years, who then served as OCTA rep under Tait’s administration. While your pal Galloway did vote against the streetcar, she brought up few relative objections other than she really, really likes MagLev. Where was her concern for the lack of public process?
She was the only one who would have known the staff was flat-out freaking LYING to their own Council, and she failed to catch it and alert the Mayor that they had a problem. And at the next vote, she approved-along with Council-moving forward with the next phase of the project by giving Hill (Steve Lodge’s contract) over NINE MILLION DOLLARS to complete work that had been promised to the public in Phase one in 2008 (where your girl was there, Tait was not) and was not delivered.
Never mind the many millions of Federal dollars sandwiched in the middle, approved under Galloway’s seasoned and watchful eye. Galloway was THE biggest bridge between the administration that began the project and should have known what was promised for the money, and where it ended up while she was OCTA rep, I would not call her service a resounding success. I had to do the research and bring the info to the Mayor (after the fact) that our OCTA rep should have been on top of. So should Anaheim end up with the one project you and I agree should never be built, at least one of the stations could commemorate Galloway the eagle-eyed champion of the taxpayers’ dollar.
- “…and has received numerous awards for public service…”
…where she is now taking a salary, where I understand at least one daughter is on salary, where her best friend is on salary…while THEIR husbands serve on the Board!
Dan, I have grant deeds showing Galloway allows the Eli Home real estate holdings, donated by others, to be transferred to Kim and Robin Tulleners, who take equity out of the properties claiming them as their own primary residences, and then transfer them back to the Eli Home, worthless.
I also see the grantee/grantor records are pretty busy lately when I run those names in more recent searches, I will be checking those shortly to see if there are sources of revenue etc that have recently come in. In short, if someone is propping up the dying charity, I am going to find it. Any bets on who might be behind her run? How did Galloway go from begging to keep the doors open, to being in a position to run for office? Has she explained that? Nobody jumps in without some promise of support, and the only visible support I see right now is Dan and John S, both men I generally admire, but neither of you is going to run an IE campaign for her from your own pockets. So who talked Lorri into this suicide mission? Who has the most to lose should she run for Council, where she had a clear shot, and even I would have left her largely alone, I would not have supported her, but I’d have left the thermonuclear war at home, and that is saying a LOT considering our history.
- So if an elected conservative Republican mayor takes credit for something they actually voted against, is that a mark of integrity?
I don’t know Dan, you tell me, because your choice for Mayor does it ALL THE TIME. Again, from her 2008 re-election campaign; materials sent from Galloway’s own campaign showed her taking credit for the following projects:
1 New Police Station.
2 New Libraries.
2 New Community Centers.
1 New Police station has indeed been added to the streetscape. The new Police Station on Beach Blvd. held its groundbreaking on September 13, 2002. Lorri Galloway was not elected to office until November 2004. She had nothing to do with the planning or funding of the new Police Station and her only connection was in attending the Grand Opening on March 31, 2007.
1 New Library was indeed added in Anaheim while Galloway was in office. The Haskett Branch Library was demolished in September 2004, a month prior to Galloway’s election.
Plans for the new library were underway before Lorri Galloway even filed papers to run for City Council, and the grant application shown here reveals that funding was requested in the year 2000, without involvement from Lorri Galloway. Lorri did attend the opening. Maybe that is what she takes credit for.
The West Anaheim Gymnasium, attached to the West Anaheim Police Station, was constructed with the Police Station, and funding was approved before the election that put Lorri Galloway into a City Council seat.
And let’s not forget a Family Center that was the idea of a Police Chief, but she did get her buddy cut in on the pork so maybe that is what she means…
Dan, again I wasn’t going to go there, but if your girl wants back in the game, then game on. I had packed everything into the attic, hoping to never see it again. I have good friends who believe in her, and I don’t want to personally disillusion them, but I’m not going to let you drag down a good man of integrity in order to build up someone I have watched for a lot of years, with a very sour taste in my mouth.
That sofa still had barf stains on it.
P.S.
So I was ripping on her decor. I doubt if the Princess ever laid her precious head upon a pillow in the house.
A rebuttal had already been posted by the LOC : ” Cynthia — a rebuttal for you; took some time to research….”
I am looking forward to Cynthia’s clarification of this rebuttal. One of the puzzling thing for me is the support of people like Prevatt and Santoniani for Ms Galloway’s run, which seems an operation designed by the Pringle/Brandman camp. I may understand their partisan loyalty, but to end up supporting the Pringle types of policies and accomplishments is confusing, to say the least.
Ricardo that was no rebuttal, someone wake me up when Dan gets serious.
As I perceive the Eli Home’s rebuttal to have the look of an “Open Letter,” I’m reprinting it here in full:
People now have the opportunity to view the rebuttal in proximity to the article, which should make it easier to evaluate its merit and responsiveness.
Um… I’ve been led to understand that there is a bigger more serious rebuttal on its way to me via e-mail.
OK. It has been five days, though, so I thought that it was past time for us to post what’s publicly available. It doesn’t foreclose on our publishing something longer later. Or, if you think it does, you can delete it.
As I’ve said repeatedly, I want both Tait and Galloway on the dais next term — along with one or two like-minded colleagues, enough to form a majority.
Obviously, we are not moving in that direction. Hopefully, that will change before long, but this is not a moment of great hope.
Who do we thank for that? More than anyone, Dan C. Let me just sully our site with a quote from the Lummox at Liberal OC (http://www.theliberaloc.com/2013/11/04/the-cherry-picking-of-the-economic-impact-study-of-angels-baseball/):
For the record:
(1) Tait holds positions contrary to the Democratic Party on some issues such as pension reform, but only an idiot or a liar, or both, would say that his views are “completely contrary to the position of the Democratic Party on just abut everything.”
(2) To say that I “openly support[] a conservative Republican mayor for election to the Anaheim city council for 2014” is a lie. I have told both Tait and Galloway to their faces that I won’t support Tait over Galloway for Mayor, at least so long as I’m a DPOC officer.
(3) The Lummox thinks that a school board race is “truly” non-partisan but a City Council race isn’t. This is going to be a surprise to both major parties. Neither is partisan; the former is of interest to parties in part because it’s a stepping stone to the latter; and both are equally treated as partisan if and when a party endorses local candidates. So does the Lummox not understand this — or does he just think that he can bullshit his readers?
Moving on.
The Lummox followed up this November 4 call to greater incivility with enough attacks on Tait that finally, a week and a half later, Cynthia has felt the need to go take her anti-Galloway grenades out of storage. I’m sure that Lorri Galloway is just thrilled at Dan’s deft political strategy here. A month before the election, there has been NO GOOD REASON for these longtime allies to be duking it out. It doesn’t help either of them.
It DOES help newly announced Mayoral candidate Lucille Kring, though. And that may be the point.
Lucille Kring is one of Jordan Brandman’s three Republican allies on Council. She has disavowed her previous anti-Pringle positions and for the past year has been increasingly integrated into the Pringle Ring. The Pringle Ring contains so-called “business Democrats” like Brandman and Dan C. — and that’s where Dan C’s actual alliances lie. He doesn’t give a damn about Galloway; he cares about Brandman.
For the Lummox to call me a “bad Democrat” for not wanting to see this ENTIRELY FORESEEABLE warfare between Galloway and Tait partisans come into being is a cruel joke. Galloway was smart enough to tamp down the conflict after the PBS piece on their conflict came out. Other of her supporters have done the same. Only Lummox Dan has ramped up the fight.
That could be because he’s stupid, but it could also be because he’s willing to promote the position that Jordan Brandman — who has already endorsed Gail Eastman without waiting to see if any Democrats enter the race! — can’t acknowledge publicly even if he believes it: that he’d be happier with Kring as Anaheim’s Mayor than Galloway, because that’s what Uncle Pringle wants.
As I wrote here recently (http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2013/11/galloway-apologizes-to-tait-after-pbs-report-on-race-now-what/), I will not support Tait over Galloway for Mayor so long as I remain a Vice Chair of DPOC — a position that I plan to continue to hold. That doesn’t stop me from saying that I think that Tait is right on these critical issues of giveaways and the like — as is Galloway — even as I say that he and Jordan Brandman’s best Council buddy Kris Murray are wrong on public pensions. But calling for non-aggression between these two allies isn’t a matter of promoting Tait for Mayor, it’s a matter of not being an idiot. (Or, in Dan’s case, an apparent de facto supporter of Pringle’s choice, Kring.)
Here’s my analysis, coming from someplace a little more sophisticated and Democratic than the Lummox’s spinal reflex (or his cunning treachery, whichever it is):
.
And I end up by saying this:
.
The Lummox’s response is apparently that I used too many words.
So, in summary: I’m not happy to see Cynthia’s attacks on Galloway, although I can’t begrudge her wanting to counterpunch after the Lummox’s many provocations. But she had been staying mostly on the sidelines regarding LoGal — until Dan C made it impossible for her to stay out of the fray.
Great move, Lummox. Kring and Pringle really owe you. And I’m sure that you’ll collect.
Greg, could you explain how the DPOC nominates candidates, and policies at the local level? Putting aside the personal goals and national partisan adherence, Ms Galloway’s campaign does not offer any meaningful contribution to reform the city, all the contrary. Who is in her team, besides Dan C? As A DPOC officer, it seems that you may eventually end up being unable to change what Brandman has accomplished on behalf of Pringle.
It depends on the office.
We don’t endorse for President; we follow the DNC choice at the convention.
For Congressional and legislative offices, we follow the endorsements made by the California Democratic Party.
For local (county, city, commission/board) offices, Democratic candidates may apply for our endorsement, which we then vote on a couple of months before the election.
I would expect the DPOC to endorse Lorri, presuming that she stays in the race.
I’m not sure what you’re saying with your last sentence. So far I’ve been doing OK.
Just to clarify, the question was on nominations, not endorsements.
The party no longer nominates candidates in this state, given Top Two. Endorsements are as close as we get.
The question was about the nomination of candidates for city government’s office.There are no primaries, so I guess anybody who pledge allegiance to the party’s values can run as a Dem. What I said about your capacity of DPOC officer is that you can not oppose a nominee, while a candidate, that you personally may not agree with her/his position This seemed to have happened with Brandman.
Yeah, you have the rules correct — at least so long as he is endorsed. I could have challenged his endorsement, but given his support from the Building Trades (with whom I was already fighting over Poseidon, San Onofre, and the 405 Toll Roads) I would not likely have succeeded.
Also, I was ambivalent about Brandman (and all other leading candidates in the Anaheim race except his de facto running mate Lodge) at the time. His record on the School Board, so far as I understood it, was fine. I knew that he “hung with a bad crowd” (in my opinion), but the extent to which he has completely latched on to Pringle like a newborn kangaroo (look it up) has been a surprise to me. I didn’t think that a Democrat could get away with it — and, of course, with many of us in the DPOC he hasn’t!
So it was not hard for me to stay out of that race, as I was concerned with several others. I vaguely remember being a candidate myself.
” I vaguely remember being a candidate myself.”
Well, you were only vaguely a candidate.
Yeah, I remember your saying so. But my candidacy helped Sharon get elected, among other things, so I’m pretty satisfied with it. If you aren’t, so sad for you. If you want to run for office as a Democrat and do it better, let me know.
“but the extent to which he has completely latched on to Pringle like a newborn kangaroo (look it up) has been a surprise to me”
Apparently he was always attached to Pringle like a newborn kangaroo. You really need to invest a wee bit more skepticism when it comes to assessing Democrats. If you do you’ll end up with better office holders. I promise.
Yes. I was gonna say. Pringle became his surrogate father way back when his mother died. Not sure how many years ago that was, but I’ve heard the story from various sources.
And stoopid partisan Dan is over at the LOC fantasizing about SOME WAY to get a “Democratic majority” in Anaheim with Mayor Lorri and Councilman Jordan. What would a Democratic majority including Jordan even do, different from now? Honor more civil rights heroes?
That’s pretty funny to hear given my perceived role in the party. I’m skeptical, but I try to stop short of completely cynical.
“Pringle became his surrogate father way back when his mother died.”
Wouldn’t that make Pringle his surrogate mother? Just sayin.’
Not sure how that works, but that’s the way two very different sources described it to me.
“But my candidacy helped Sharon get elected, among other things…”
It did, and among other things? Like what, did it help pick up her dry cleaning?
“If you want to run for office as a Democrat and do it better, let me know.”
Yep, it’d be hard to top that. I’d have to, for instance, post more than ONE entry on my own purported campaign website (that this is in the context of your tireless jabbering elsewhere about whatever-the-hell goes without saying)
Or perhaps you simply realized that had you actually tried to “connect” with “voters” you would have inevitably fared even worse at the polls.
No, but it gave her a place to store it. One thing that I did was make the difference in deciding to lease (along with Jay Chen’s campaign and Democrats of North Orange County) our campaign office on Commonwealth. If I hadn’t gone in on it, we’d have had no coordinated campaign office (at least for a long time, and not in such a good location.) I committed pretty much all I had raised at the point to it.
Most of my help, though, came from work I did on FFFF, absorbing huge amounts of abuse from mostly anonymous people (some of whom I suspect may now be my friends — bygones!) and making it much harder to build up a head of steam against Sharon. Jan Flory also deserves a lot of credit for taking the heat off of Sharon, of course. Good times, good times — at least ultimately.
That’s true of many candidates, of course. I didn’t have a webmaster; I directed anyone volunteering for me towards either Sharon or Jay. But it became clear after a while that the website — especially the blog portion of it — just wasn’t going to be decisive to my race (nor to what I wanted to achieve more broadly), so I put my efforts into what was more effective. As I recall, you’re the only person who thought that this was a big deal (unless Moxley or Gusty also mentioned it.)
This actually IS true, but not for the reasons that you think. I had caused Huff to spend more money than he has in the past on the campaign just for him to be on the safe side. That’s money that didn’t go to other candidates he liked — good! My concern was not that I’d do worse than 44.9% — I had never expected to get that much in the first place — but that by drawing his fire back into the district it might have negative effects on Sharon and Jay. (I still thought that Jay had a chance.) So that was one of the two reasons that around August 1, I stood down from campaigning and decided to cancel the fundraising pitch I had planned for my old friends in Manhattan legal circles. By that time I had made enough for my ballot statement — which was a relatively cheap ad on the issues that mattered, one that I could feel confident that many people would read — so then it was just a matter of “signs or no signs.” (In the end: some signs.)
The other reason that I shelved my plans to push my own campaign was probably more significant. Almost alone in the state, I picked a fight with the craven powers that be over Prop 35, the anti-human trafficking initiative that eventually won with 89% of the vote. My writings on the topic — mostly first appearing here — were among the most distributed on the impoverished “anti” side of that battle, rivaled only by those of a former prosecutor and member of a local politician. I’m very proud of the volunteer work I did at the time — scandalously, some of it in alliance with a group of sex workers — to educate the public on this sweet-smelling but nasty-tasting initiative.
I got hammered and denounced within the Democratic Party itself at the Anaheim Executive Board meeting in late July 2012. One DNC member — who was politically involved with proponent Chris Kelly — spoke in front of 500+ at the convention and all but accused me of being a child molester for opposing the initiative. Vicious stuff, fueled by panicked cowardice over how seeming to oppose the Prop 35 juggernaut might hurt the party overall. After I threw myself on that grenade, most people in the party would have nothing to do with me for a month, but hits on my writings on Prop 35 skyrocketed.
A month later, many people were telling me that they were convinced that I was right and that they would personally vote no on Prop 35 — but that they hoped that I’d understand why they could not say so publicly. And I did understand — it was the right move politically for the party — being craven in that respect was the safer move for the party — but it was also damned important for historical reasons that someone from the party go on the record AT THAT TIME as to how rotten Prop 35 was. I’m sorry that it had to be me — not least because I pretty much had to shutter my campaign as a result — but on the other hand I’m also pretty proud that it WAS me.
Now people have come to understand that Prop 35 was going to do little or nothing about human trafficking. (The tools for that already existed.) As predicted, it would instead provide a fig leaf to make the likes of Kris Murray and Ed Royce appear that they cared about women’s issues while cleverly expanding the definition of “human trafficking” to include many instances of statutory rape between high-school age kids. And of course, it would provide Facebook some legal protection against being accused of facilitating online molestation — which is the real reason that Chris Kelly got involved in this fight in the first place.
So, all in all, I’m very proud of what I did in the 2012 election cycle. And you can imagine how easy it is to brush off the caviling of “profiles in courage” commenters such as yours, who don’t have the guts even to post under their own name. But hey, throwing stones from behind a wall is your right, so have fun with it. Whatever floats your dinghy.
“As I recall, you’re the only person who thought that this was a big deal”
I was the only person aware of its existence.
“[paragraph upon paragraph of self-serving nonsense]”
I love it, failure is recast as martyrdom which is recast as success.
Granted, who wants to cop to being some two bit cipher hack when you can instead, in a notable feat of denial/projection/grandiose narcissistic delusion, portray yourself as a mastermind, where every ‘move’ – hell, even non move – is brilliant, even pivotal. Truly a legend in your own mind.
Hat-tip to Jason of saveanaheim.com:
See this?-
http://ocpolitical.com/2013/11/14/tait-unseats-eastman-from-octa-brothers-edges-beall-for-lafco-after-los-alamitos-flips-and-other-fun-city-selection-committee-vote-break-downs/
I know! Eastman supported the 405 Toll Roads. I don’t recall ever talking to Tait about them, but I suspect that he’ll be an opponent of this boondoggle.
This calls for a Tait OCTA interview… I’m on it!
Cynthia, I’m only going to say this once. When you so obviously lie with ill intent, twice, you lose ALL credibility.
At this point, your posts are meaningless. For all we know, you and some others with history, are playing both sides. Those with integrity should be the ones advocating for our Mayor.
And your writing is too wordy and hard to digest.
Before you respond, Cynthia, note Daniel’s promise that he’s “only going to say this once.”
I like Galloway in the race, even apart from the comedic value.
Ms. Ward, in the myriad of criticisms and allegations you have made here, I believe I can help clarify some things. But before I go there, let me say this. I had the distinct pleasure of serving as an Anaheim Council member with both Lorri Galloway and Tom Tait, and I have to tell you, they are two of the finest people I have ever known. They are extraordinarily kind, virtuous, compassionate, reasonable and intelligent. In my opinion what separates them as candidates for Anaheim Mayor are philosophical / political beliefs, leadership styles, and their individual abilities to build relationships to get things done.
Now, anyone can use their keyboard courage as a shotgun to blast away at candidates, and in part that is the reason many good people don’t seek to serve as elected officials. The incessant, mean spirited style of yours is contrary to what these candidates are all about .
As for the Elms Commons affordable housing project; I read the rebuttal to your post, posted by Dan C. on the Liberal OC, and he is correct. The norm for the City of Anaheim was an 85% to 15% split with affordable housing developers on the residual funds from affordable projects (with the city receiving the 85%). The truth is that the industry standard was a 50/50 split. Galloway, I and many affordable housing professionals believed that the split used by Anaheim was a roadblock used to discourage the development of affordable homes for families. In fact at the point in time this council agenda item was heard in 2006, Anaheim had not built a single affordable unit for families in Anaheim – not one! The set aside funds for affordable projects had all gone to senior housing, special needs housing and land banking. I pulled the item, and asked that we make the split 50/50 “to encourage the further development of affordable family projects in Anaheim”.
As for the Anaheim Family Justice Center: As a council member I introduced the concept of a one stop center to address family violence to the council in 2003. At the time Lorri Galloway (not yet on the council) and I were lobbying local and state officials in an effort to improve the handling of child abuse cases in Anaheim. This was because of death of Baby Samantha Gutierrez, who died as the result of child abuse and starvation in a little house on Harbor Blvd in Anaheim. I as a firefighter, I responded on the 911 call to Baby Samantha in 2002. There is a sculpture in the lobby of the Family Justice Center honoring her. Chief Welter was hired by the city council in part because of his participation in the development of the family justice center in San Diego. I asked him about the possibility of developing such a center in Anaheim when I interviewed him for the position of Chief. After he was hired, a committee was developed to discuss the potential for a family justice center, with Gallawoy and me taking lead for the council. Chief Welter was given the charge of developing center – he did a great job.
The Eli Home. I talked to the President of the Eli Home, Fernando Negrete this morning, he tells me that Lorri’s husband is on the board as an advisor only – for construction and development issues. He is not a voting member of the board. As for your allegation regarding the Tulleners’ taking equity. Negrete told me that they have a thorough financial audit conducted yearly, and refused to discuss “arbitrary allegations”.
Cynthia, there is no doubt you are putting more 12 gauge shells in your keyboard right now. But, perhaps the type of kindness both Tom and Lorri practice might be in order.
Richard Chavez
Mr. Chavez, what about the neighbor in Anaheim Hills who claims the house is just a vacant prop once stocked with residents once in a while to coincide with important visitors?
If I only knew two people, and Lori Galloway was one of them, she still wouldn’t make my “two of the finest people I know” list.
That’s sort of an empty criticism. You could write it as “and ______ was one of them” and reuse it with anyone you want.
Blee blah. Anyone can say anything about anybody, but ol’ Lori’s rap sheet, as it were, is hardly empty and suggests anything but fineness of character.
“But, perhaps the type of kindness both Tom and Lorri practice might be in order.”
I hate to say it but ripping off your aunt and fronting a Potemkin homeless shelter are not acts of kindness.
Mr. Chavez, I appreciate the very civil tone of your reply, I admire that you have the courage to comment under your own name and not a screen name, thank you. I will try to offer the same civility to you in return. I will try very hard to understand where you are coming from, if you can perhaps understand my view of Anaheim. Can we try that?
I believe I hear you saying that Anaheim is facing some tough circumstances but they are policy disagreements, and overall it is business as usual, fixable by simply being “nice” and compromising with one another to find middle ground that everyone can live with. You appear to believe that saying anything critical of a leader is “attack” and that the definition of “kind” is to look the other way and say nothing.
Mr. Chavez, please understand that I believe my city is being robbed blind by the worst administration in the history of Anaheim! I believe that the previous leader spent two terms lining up major multi-million dollar deals which he is now finalizing as a lobbyist, to great profit, and being aided by a Council majority whose campaigns enjoy the benefits of his friendship. I have seen staff flat out lie about information that Council relies upon to make their decisions, and when we in Chambers point out the mistakes, Council does nothing to correct them or hold staff accountable for projects that will cost hundreds of millions of our dollars, being spent against the will of the majority of those attending meetings and sending emails and phone calls. I am not alone in that belief, and those others end up at Council Public Comments (most of whom I do not know and who are not called to Council by a scheming Mayor intent upon disrupting decorum)
I am at a loss as to how either Kring or Galloway intends to make that civic robbery more palatable to the public so that we cease our attempts to hold our leaders accountable, given our 3 minutes each to be ignored. I fail to see how Galloway or Kring will stop the looting, and in my mind compromise and consensus sounds a lot like “getting cut in on the take.” Stop me if I am incorrect, but you had best offer solid examples to counter me.
I believe that if we continue spending these massive sums to benefit the clients of a certain lobbyist, the city will be unable to maintain future service levels. I know your background as a Fire fighter, I admire your career, and I know you want what is best for Anaheim. What happens to public safety when there is no money left in 20 years? Anaheim should be the wealthiest community in the county, bar none, that she looks like a third world slum in many areas is the result of poor leadership and skewed priorities of the past, and it MUST stop before we are past the point of salvation.
In my mind the most unkind thing I could do is to say nothing or to couch my words in such a way that any voters would mistake the gravity of what we are dealing with. When one is trying to stop a mugging it doesn’t matter if the weapon you use is a 12 gauge shell or a keyboard, what matters is to stop the mugging.
We can easily come to the agreement that the Family Justice Center does excellent work and it likely does not matter how it came to existence, I have supported them in the past although I wish I could do more than I have been able to do lately. Mr. Chavez I will even go all out and admit that ESCRI appears to be a vibrant and viable project, that actively helps people. One day a friend mentioned help she got at ESCRI…at which Vern Nelson began backing up, my friend asked what was wrong, Vern just pointed to me and said, “Her head’s gonna explode, and it’s a hard thick skull I don’t want to be caught by the shrapnel.” But he’s our Vern. So perhaps this is where we can see eye to eye, the Center does good work, how it got here isn’t as important as the fact that it is here and should be supported. Can we agree on that?
I am sad to hear the President of the Eli Home would call it “arbitrary” that past transactions involved transfer of property held by the non-profit, into the ownership of private individuals who were on staff and serving on the Board at the time of the transactions, and then back again to the corporate entity after refinancing. Mr. Chavez do you have an answer for that?
This is not my wild opinion, sir, these are documents recorded at the County. I have included them at the bottom so readers can get through an already long response.
This is an indication of how Galloway, as Executive Director, operates her business. Is this an example of building consensus and compromise in order to “get the job done?”
Mr. Chavez I hope you can understand why this is not the leadership I am looking for, and reaction to Tait standing up to these bullies has shown that the public does not want more of it either. The community is ready to stand up and fight back against the special interests intent on dividing up the pie for themselves, cutting out the public the funds were supposed to serve. We do not want, nor need, leadership that compromises with evil behavior, we need more people like Tait who stand up and call attention to it.
If you don’t believe me, ask yourself this-why are they so concerned with getting rid of Tait? His lone NO vote doesn’t stop them from doing what they want, and the only reason he is successful at calling attention to their shameful deeds is their reaction and retaliation to him. They are afraid of him, and committed to getting rid of Tait, because his honorable behavior is a stark contrast to their own. Like Joseph’s brothers selling the evidence of their misdeeds into slavery before Father could find out, they will do what they can to unseat him.
Lorri had the chance to stand with an old friend who has put his own reputation on the line repeatedly in defense of her, against her own enemies. I will tell you that the one and only time Julie Tait stands up to me is on behalf of Lorri Galloway. That takes immense nerve given our history, but that is the loyalty the Taits have shown to Lorri. Instead of coming to the rescue and standing to help him, perhaps turning a 4 to 1 vote to a 3 to 2 vote with more power to grab that 3rd vote and turn the tide, (as we once hoped Lucille would do) Galloway knifed the Mayor in the back. She could easily have used the Council seat that was hers for the taking to build consensus, she is the one who said she didn’t need a title to get the job done. So now she suddenly can’t do the job without the title? Forgive me for thinking less of her, it began with our history, but of late it ended with the hurt I see in the eyes of my friends Tom and Julie when her name comes up. I detest anyone who can willingly choose to hurt those good, kind, decent people, and the excuse offered is, excuse me, nothing short of bullshit.
Mr. Chavez, they say character is who you are when nobody is looking and I agree. But I also think character is who you are when EVERYONE is looking. When it seems the whole world believes evil of you, what do you do with that? A person of character uses it to hold up a mirror on their actions, examine how people came to believe such things about them, and perhaps uses the revelation to either become a better person or do a better job of communicating their intent, so that they will not be seen in evil light again in the future.
I do indeed use the critique received here for my own good, I do take even the hardest of insults to heart and examine if I had earned the rebuke received, and I do appreciate your remarks. More often than I want to admit I have accepted the rebukes of critics and tried to become better for it. NOBODY likes that feeling. The only thing worse than being called a bitch is realizing the other guy is right and I was. I eat a great deal of humble pie as the product of my well worn keyboard. On the other hand, my husband likes to remind me that all of the RIGHT PEOPLE think I am a bitch, that I should wear it as a badge of honor, and if they liked me I would have to question my own moral compass.
So I also examine whether the rebuke is genuine or simply someone deflecting blame from their own misdeeds, and this is where you and I part ways Mr. Chavez. I have provided documents for why I believe Galloway is not the strong leader Dan C (and apparently you) want us to believe she is. Had I only offered my opinion, you would be right in your assessment that I am mean-spirited and incessant. But you have offered nothing I can see that would lead a reader to believe I was not truthful, and if I am telling the truth then my words are not unkind, they are meant for change in our community. You were eloquent when speaking at the last few meetings Mr. Chavez, I am sorry our efforts to change the city will not be on parallel tracks.
http://cr.ocgov.com/grantorgrantee/index.asp
The property located at [address redacted] was purchased on June 2, 1994 Doc # 1994-redacted (2 pages) The purchase price was $125,000.
The Eli Home had received grant money from several sources, including a sizable grant from United Parcel Service to purchase the shelter, I believe so that they could operate free of the worry of payments. Yet Eli Home recorded a Deed of Trust Doc # 1994-redacted (3 pages) on the very day escrow closed.
A few years back the Eli Home conducted the following transactions, again as recorded at the Clerk Recorder, not in my mind.
Doc # 2006-redacted (2 pages) On December 20, 2006, The Eli Home Inc granted the [redacted] shelter property to Robin and Kimberlee Tulleners. According to the Eli Home website, Robin Tulleners serves on the Board of Directors as Treasurer. Robin also works in the mortgage industry. Kimberlee Tulleners serves on the Eli Home Advisory Board, as Program Director.
Doc# 2007-redacted (19 pages)
Robin and Kimberlee Tulleners sign a Deed of Trust with National City Bank (Robin’s employer at the time was National City Mortgage Company) in the amount of $582,000.00, essentially stripping the house of its remaining equity.
Document # 2007-redacted (2 pages)
On May 30, 2007, the Eli Home Inc and Robin and Kimberlee Tulleners granted the [redacted] property, now worthless, back to the Eli Home Inc.
The same transactions appear in those County records in relation to the Orange shelter as well.
[Cynthia – it should not be public knowledge where these homes for endangered women and children are located – Vern]
[PPS document numbers now also redacted. Thanks for the heads up BIGBOXOFREDWHINE. Mr Chavez has had enough time to look anyway and if he still has an interest Cynthia can e-mail him.]
A friend sent me an e-mail today with a link:
http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/2010/the-lorri-galloway-experience-monterey-county/
This is just bad anyway you slice it.
Oh I had totally forgotten how much fun the Fullerton boys had at Lorri’s expense. http://www.fullertonsfuture.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/middle-pg.jpg
Another target-rich environment. What I don’t understand is all the blind adoration given to Galloway in the face of some pretty damning evidence.
She’s just so nice!
In Anaheim, Yellow Dog Democrats are now Red Dress Democrats!
Now as a guy who pilloried Julio Perez and Michele Martinez for their personal financial failures, Dan Chmielewski seems willing to overlook Lorri’s past.
Just another example of (moral) bankruptcy.
Let me balance things off here. This is a photo I took of Mayor Tait listening to kids at Hermosa Village complaining about the brutal private security guys there; I almost used it as an illustration here but it didn’t seem quite right….
And then I realized why it didn’t seem right – the Mayor was there because Lorri asked him to come, just like when he came to Anna Drive. Our whole image of this white patrician mayor coming down to the troubled neighborhoods to listen to the poor people, is to a large degree the doing of Lorri, or at least a product of their alliance. Which makes it that much more tragic to see that alliance terminated. Unilaterally.
There is another side this. Which will eliminate Cynthia, Greg and Dan C’s hatred of anonymity:
Let the people of Anaheim elect the next mayor!
The answer is the ballot box.
Oh.
That answer is only valid presuming an informed electorate, which anonymous, unchallenged disinformation, where present, does nothing to support.
It is, however unfortunate. reality fellow anonymous poster.
Given that brilliant piece of commentary, I can see why you remain anonymous.
Let the people vote??? Sorry, but I continue to favor “trial by combat.”
Who are you voting for Diamond?
He doesn’t have to choose, silly, he lives in Brea.
Neither do I.
Well since it’s a free for all, how about we look into the BOD of Eli House. And consider that in support for Lorri.
I heard some interesting things about one of them this week and givin this mornings Los Angeles Times (who I consider the newspaper of “record”) article on “Non-Profits” use and abuse of Non-air to ask Profit’s it might be fair and reasonable to ask ELI House to open their books and let it’s board members speak openly and freely to the press.
Just sayin’
Gotta say … all this alleged corruption of the Eli Home was looked into by Mayor Tait at length, and he found no there there … and then looked into by Gustavo for a possible Weekly story and he also saw no there there … I suppose I should give my friend Cynthia the respect of looking myself at what she’s got … but I doubt I’ll see something Tom and Gustavo didn’t see.
And hey, I’m not shillin for either party as of right now.
I talked to the neighbor who claimed that nobody ever stayed at the house in Anaheim Hills – until some tour was arranged. Then people were moved in and then quickly moved out again.
He claimed that toys in the yard were just staged. This was one of the properties that switched hands after equity was removed. I saw the trust deeds, too. Something funny was going on there.
Dave — it’s certainly possible that such things happened (although I have no personal knowledge of them and would need to credit you and your unnamed source.) I don’t like that sort of thing, but after the brazen Mimi Walters getaway last year, I’m not going to want to pick on every individual who might be so accused just because they lack Mimi’s level of connections.
Unfair enforcement of a fair law can be almost as bad as unfair law. I’m not inclined to play along with the former (for which, if it’s not obvious, I do not consider you personally culpable here.)
You two are talking about two different things now. Dave is talking about the story of one of the Eli Home homes not really being used to house endangered women and children, but Greg seems to think Dave is still talking about the Carpetbagging for Supe story.
I don’t remember the guy’s name. He lived next door or across the street and he seemed credible. I don’t know if any laws were even broken, but that’s not the point as it sets the bar of ethical behavior too low.
Critics of politicians are inevitably told “then go to the DA” a recourse that is unnecessary and inevitably futile anyway.
When I said: ” it might be fair and reasonable to ask ELI House to open their books and let it’s board members speak openly and freely to the press” I didn’t mean the Liberal OC! (They do have a press card you know.)
Vern, I don’t think Galloway was a carpetbagger because I don’t believe she actually lived, in any meaningful sense, in the 4th District.
As with Sidhu I believe she was a faux carpetbagger – which is even worse. A open carpetbagger at least creates a real residence and stays there – even after the election.
Oh, I think that Brown has clearly earned re-election. And you?
Vern:
You stated that Mayor Tait looked into the allegations of corruption at Eli Home?
Did he specify what allegations he looked into or perhaps his “looked into” possibly meant only talking to some Eli Board members?
What is “there, there”?
I just wouldn’t want it to be out there, everywhere that the Eli Home passed at length a look by the Mayor, when it didn’t. Please clarify the “length”, audit, or scope.
I read Gustavo write that someone gave him a lot of information on Lori but he did not seem to include that he actually looked into it (or cared about looking into it.) I might be wrong, he probably mention this a few places.
ALL: I’m told by e-mail that “The Board of Directors of The Eli Home is sending a response to Ward’s allegations.” I will post that here as soon as it comes.
Good time of the season to get all this shit out in the open! And this is the Mosh Pit where it will happen, not the LOC or Cunningham’s sty.
Well, if it had to happen at all — which in my opinion it didn’t, but Dan C. apparently was bent on precipitating it — then I suppose that it’s better that it happens early. I hope that before long allies again become allies with minimal permanent harm done.
I wonder which board member will be participating? The bank teller or the one dating the (married) Santa Ana city councilmember?
This is looking more and more like Lorri is a plant to water down the Tait vote.
Vern, the Eli Home board replied to Dan Cs blog regarding the grant deeds, claiming it was a refi to lower interest rates, when I return from a conference I will pull the rest of them, and double check that, as well as whether it was done legally. So far I have had no answer about the rest of the allegations, and frankly there are many of us posing these questions for years without answer.
The name of the guy across the street is Secrest (sp?) and at one point lorri sued them for saying these things….and lost…big…I think the Galloways had to pay costs of Secrests if I recall, will check, I know I have that lawsuit available.
The “rebuttal” doesn’t start well:
“Ms. Ward’s assumption that Kim and Robin Tulleners have personally benefitted from an Eli property transfer is far from the truth.”
I don’t think that was an assumption, let alone accusation, that you ever made.
I believe the question was whether equity was removed from the properties and where it went.
Answering questions that were never asked is not a good way to clear the air.
Um… well, that was a whole bunch of nothing. I had been expecting a thorough, to the point, rebuttal of Cynthia. But what I just got via e-mail was exactly what they already posted on the LOC, which Greg posted above:
http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2013/11/galloway-versus-tait-cynthias-retort-to-dan-chmielewski/comment-page-1/#comment-477829
And see Zenger’s comment directly above.
Was looking forward to something that could have been its own story. I would have presented it that way, out of fairness. Oh well…