Kool Aid drinkers out in full force tonight
I figured that tonight’s OC GOP Central Committee meeting was going to be a quick one. Boy was I wrong. The main item on the agenda seemed to be a slam dunk. All we had to do was approve a list of incumbent non-partisan elected officials who were seeking the endorsement of the OC GOP. However, the machine flexed its muscles again.
The Central Committee members have the right to “pull” or withdraw the names of anyone on the proposed endorsement list, without giving a reason. Our deadline for doing so was Sunday night, at midnight. However, nothing is ever that easy when it comes to the OC GOP Central Committee.
Adam Probolsky, an ex-oficio alternate to the OC GOP Central Committee, decided that he wanted to pull the names of two San Clemente council members off the list. I immediately figured that he was getting revenge because they supported Lt. Bill Hunt for OC Sheriff instead of Probolsky’s friend and client, Mike Carona. I was wrong.
Tim Whitacre asked Probolsky point blank why he wanted the two south county elected officials pulled from consideration for endorsement. According to Whitacre, Probolsky is a paid lobbyist/consultant for some kind of building association, and they want the unfettered right to build huge two or three story structures nearby the beach in San Clemente – thereby obscuring the view that so many others paid dearly for. The two council members in question, G. Wayne Eggleston and Joe Anderson, will have a chance next Monday night to plead their case at the OC GOP Endorsement Committee.
Of course Whitacre and I tried to stop OC GOP Chairman’s decision to allow Probolsky to withdraw the names. Whitacre talked about how the ex-oficio alternates should not be granted special powers. I said that Probolsky’s patron, Mark Weyland, should have had plenty of time to read the list of possible endorsers, since he got it on June 26, and ask that specific ones be pulled from the list. My argument fell on deaf ears as most in the room were OC GOP Kool Aid drinkers, unfortunately. Kermit Marsh however actually disagreed with Baugh on this one.
Afterwards, Whitacre said he wanted the two who were taken off the list to be discussed and put to us for endorsement. However, Baugh then said he had a guest speaker who was very important, and then Scott and his posse left, ostensibly so Baugh could catch a plane. Their exodus of course cost us the quorum, and after the speaker was finished, Baugh’s second vice chairman took over and declared that as we had no quorum, the matter of the two San Clemente councilmembers would be resolved at next week’s Endorsement Committee meeting.
Sure enough, Baugh returned to the meeting afterwards, but by then I was hightailing it out of there. And that is when I ran into Jon Fleischman. I offered him my hand, just to be nice, but he did not take it. Instead he asked someone else why I keep ripping him in my blog. Sorry Jon! I just cannot stand your boss, Mike Carona. Make that ex-boss. Fleischman admitted to me that he has left Carona’s PR department, ostensibly to make more money as a political consultant. Apparently he is also getting married. Good luck Jon – hope you pick better candidates to work with now that you will be on your own.
Art,
Kool Aid drinkers out in full force tonight?… How about Orange Juice drinkers in full force every night?.
Stanley,
I’ll drink to that!
Art:
I’ve noticed a distinct hostility to developers in your postings during the life of this blog.
First, you were opposed to One Broadway Plaza because it is too big, and now you dismiss Probolsky’s complaint out-of-hand because he’s allegedly doing work for a property owner who wants to build “huge” two- and three- story buildings.
Is there something in the Santa Ana water that makes GOPers there hotile to property rights?
“Is there something in the Santa Ana water that makes GOPers there hotile to property rights?”
The “massive” properties in question infringe on the property rights of others.
Its easy to be in favor of property rights when it doesn’t impact you.
I agree with Brock. “Property rights” is just a conservative smokescreen for letting developers have their way. I’m glad guys like Brock and Art aren’t knee-jerk property rights advocates.
Funny graphic!
“I’m glad guys like Brock and Art aren’t knee-jerk property rights advocates.”
Just doing my civic duty, anon.
Thank you, Brokc. Quality of life is just as important as property rights, don’t you think?
Hell yea!
Isn’t Brock In Anaheim really Ryan Gene Williams?
Brock:
If OBP had been 25 stories tall instead of 38, would it have infringed on your property rights? What if it was 20 stories? Or 15?
Jubal:
1 Broadway Plaza was only given a special variance because Mr. Harrah very wisely spread campaign donations around to all of the City Council. Then, it only passed because there was a very well-funded special election by Harrah and his allies.
The fact is that 1 Broadway, a 37 story office building – the BIGGEST one in Orange County, is being built where City Codes only allow for a maximum of 3 stories – that’s right, I said 3 stories!!!
It is too big, unnecessary and in the wrong place. Santa Ana does not have the infrastructure in place to support buildings of this kind. We are over-crowded and under-modernized as it. Our streets are disgraceful and our Mayor, City Council and Chief of Police are unwilling to do anything about the rampant graffiti problem that has returned. Additionally, there are numerous other commericial buildings owned by Mr. Harrah that he should be required to bring up to code and fill to capacity BEFORE he should be allowed to bring more discomfort to the quality of life in Santa Ana.
That being said, Art was right on in his comments regarding last night’s Central Committee meeting. The making up of the rules as you go on must stop. If it had been me or someone else seeking the special consideration that was granted Adam Probolsky, it never would have made it to the floor.
No wonder three members have resigned as well as all of the internal staff at the HQ. The Executive Committee has got to find its moral compass fast or else we will continue to lose ground.
Semper Fi,
Tim Whitacre
“Isn’t Brock In Anaheim really Ryan Gene Williams?”
Hahaha, I doubt it.
“If OBP had been 25 stories tall instead of 38, would it have infringed on your property rights? What if it was 20 stories? Or 15?”
The problem that I have with OBP, much like what Tim said, is that its too big.
For instance, the tallest building in downtown Santa Ana currently is the Reagan Courthouse building at about 15 stories.
If one were to stack that building upon itself twice you would have the ultimate height for OBP. It WILL stick out like a sore thumb.
I always use the visual aid of flicking someone off.
Typically when you shoot the bird to someone, the middle finger sticks out and above all the rest of your digits. When I do it, my index finger also rises slighty but to make a point, that is how the Santa Ana skyline will look like.
If one were to develop a typical city skyline, you would normally try to build slightly higher then before.
The Central Business District of Los Angeles is a perfect example of how to slowly develop a “tall” skyline.
Although, I don’t think nor pray that Santa Ana ever has a 1,030 ft tall building in downtown… but in order to get to such a height a city would typically develop and construct projects of a similar/sightly taller height than previously before.
Ah, what I nice bunch of central planners we have here. So glad you guys know exactly how other people should or shouldn’t use theior property.
Tim:
A property owner shouldn’t be forced, in order to use his or her own property, to wield influene withlocal elected officials in order to obtain approval and fend off NIMBYs.
One doesn’t lose property rights when one acquires a lot of property.
And why is it up to you to decide that Harrah can only build another office building after he’s filled the ones he has?
What your saying is hardly different from the excuses given by Brea councilmembers for their property rights abuses. It’s another variation on “I’m all for property rights, except…”
Jubal,
You are missing the point. Lobbyists and consultants should not be able to vote on OC GOP Central Committee matters when they have a conflict of interest – such as any matter involving their clients. Probolsky, for example, should not be able to pull the San Clemente council members off the endorsement list just because his clients paid him to do it. That is WRONG – and if you cannot see that then you too have an ethics problem.
Jubal:
I would agree with you regarding your NIMBY comments IF, and let me say it again IF a property owner wanted to build something that CONFORMED to the building codes and zoning requirements of the city.
You are either overlooking or refusing to see one very important fact here:
A VARIANCE WAS GRANTED TO HARRAH TO BUILD A 37 STORY EYESORE IN AN AREA THAT IS STILL ZONED FOR ONLY 3 STORIES MAXIUM.
In case you have a problem with basic math, that is 34 stories taller than what is normally allowed for ANYWHERE in Santa Ana.
Regarding your comments about “central planners etc
Lobbyists and consultants should not be able to vote on OC GOP Central Committee matters when they have a conflict of interest – such as any matter involving their clients.
Really? Did Adam violate a bylaw? If not, aren’t you and Tim just “making up the rules as you go along”?
Tim:
Property owners ask for variances all the time. Are zoning laws immutable laws of nature that can never be changed?
Look around Santa Ana. There are quite a few buildings in excess of 3 stories. Clearly, 3 stories has not always been the rule in Santa Ana, and there is no objective reason why it should always be the rule.
Can we cut throught the rationalizations and get to the real objection to One Broadway Plaza: the subjective belief that it is too big. Opponents don’t want to look at it. Which begs the question: is there a height that the project’s opponents wouldn’t object to?
And so what if Harrah lives in Newport Beach? Last I checked, this was a free country in which you can live where you choose and buy property where you choose. Is it to be required that if one owns property in Santa Ana and wants to build a tall building on it, one can only do so if one lives near the property — and only if one gets a permission slip from all the Santa Ana residents who don’t pay a dime toward the cost of that property?
Probolsky, for example, should not be able to pull the San Clemente council members off the endorsement list just because his clients paid him to do it. That is WRONG – and if you cannot see that then you too have an ethics problem.
Art, you should consider changing the name of your blog to Sanctimony Juice.
Would you and Tim have leapt from your seats if it hadn’t been Adam Probolsky who asked to have those two councilman pulled?
As you yourself wrote, Adam has every right to pull whomever he wants. Does he only get to exercise that right if you and Tim give him your blessings?
Let’s say Central Committee member John Doe is running for city council, and John Doe pulls the name of incumbent councilmember Jim Foe — against whom Mr. Doe will be competing for the council seat. Would you and Tim get in that member’s face and confront him for his egregious conflict of interest?
Or say the Central Committee member was campaign manager for Councilman Foe’s opponent. Would it be unethical and corrupt for that Central Committee member to pull Councilman Foe’s name? Isn’t that a conflict of interest — there’s even payment involved!
I don’t have an ethics problem, Art. You have a bitterness problem — you’re still bitter that Carona won, and this attack on Adam is a lame attempt at payback. My impression is you don’t really care about the rules so much as you care about personalities and settling scores.
Just like last night’s Central Committee meeting; there are established By-Laws for a reason. When leadership arbitrarily sets them aside for special favors, it hurts the very body that the By-Laws were established to protect.
Again, what bylaws did Adam violate? What bylaws were “arbitrarily set aside for special favors”?
“My impression is you don’t really care about the rules so much as you care about personalities and settling scores.”
Sounds like the mission statement for The Machine.
Oh yes — “The Machine.” The bogeyman for people who regularly find themselves on the losing side in politics.
Jubal,
You nailed it – the OC GOP Central Committee endorsement process is deeply flawed. I would like to change it such that anyone who pulls someone from the list should have to explain why he is doing that.
Moreover, we should not pull anyone for the reasons you provided. The only reason someone should not be endorsed is if they have not lived up to Republican principles.
Doesn’t our party have a platform? Why can’t we use that as a, dare I say it, litmus test?
One more thing – there is indeed a machine – our local party is entirely run by lobbyists and consultants. Scott Baugh, Michael Schroeder, Curt Pringle, John Lewis, yourself, Jon Fleischman, Matt Holder and Adam Probolsky. And I am sure I forgot to mention a few. Need I go on? All are lobbyists or consultants. You all answer to your clients – not to the public good – and thereby none of you should be able to participate in Central Committee activities. Together you are all a massive conflict of interest – and the media has given you a pass for far too long. This blog won’t.
Art,
Finally, an OC blog where real Republicans can be informed on the Central Committee. Their backdoor antics have been providing the lobbyists and consultants with meal tickets at the party’s expense for too long. We definitely need a change.
Jubal,
You nailed it – the OC GOP Central Committee endorsement process is deeply flawed.
That’s funny — I don’t believe I said any such thing.
Moreover, we should not pull anyone for the reasons you provided. The only reason someone should not be endorsed is if they have not lived up to Republican principles.
I would think using government to interfere with someone’s property rights is failing to live up to GOP principles. Art, maybe you don’t agree that that is the case with these two San Clemente councilmen. Adam felt differently and he had every right to pull their names, whether you agree with it or not.
Doesn’t our party have a platform? Why can’t we use that as a, dare I say it, litmus test?
Are advocating denying the OC GOP endorsement to any Republican who isn’t pro-life? That’s one practical effect of your recommendation.
One more thing – there is indeed a machine – our local party is entirely run by lobbyists and consultants. Scott Baugh, Michael Schroeder, Curt Pringle, John Lewis, yourself, Jon Fleischman, Matt Holder and Adam Probolsky. And I am sure I forgot to mention a few. Need I go on?
Well yes, Art — you should go on and provide some sort of evidence their is a Machine in any meaningful sense of the word. The people you named are long-time GOP soldiers and leaders who have worked together over the years and have become friends. And because they are effective and actually know how to win — as opposed to just complain — those on the losing side try to explain that reality away by labeling it a Machine and blaming said Machine for all their woes.
All are lobbyists or consultants. You all answer to your clients – not to the public good – and thereby none of you should be able to participate in Central Committee activities.
Lighten up, Torquemada! Who made you Pope? Lobbyists? Gasp! Consultants? Horrors! You’ve been a consultant yourself, Art, so don’t be too quick to throw stones.
Last I checked, party members — Democrats, Republicans, etc — choose who they want to be on their respective Central Committees. And a party Central Committee’s job is to increase their party’s registration, turn-out their party’s voter and elect their party’s members — not “answer to the public good.” Perhaps you can form a new party, Art — the Holier-Than-Thou Party.
Together you are all a massive conflict of interest – and the media has given you a pass for far too long. This blog won’t.
Great, Art — I welcome the discussion.
If Probolsky didn’t have a business interest in SC then he would have never pulled them. Jim Lacy routinely votes against developers building. Why didn’t Probutsky pull Lacy? He doesnt do business in Dana Point.
Art, Jubal:
Back to Machiavelli!
“For Machiavelli, politics was about one and only one thing: getting and keeping power or authority. Everything else
and only if one gets a permission slip from all the Santa Ana residents who don’t pay a dime toward the cost of that property?
Jubal. The residents do pay a price in the burden on infrastructure. They pay a price for the numbers of new people that will be commuting to and from the structure. Is Harrah picking up the tab for those as well? Or is he passing it off to the Santa Ana taxpayer?
Does a person buying property now have the right to put anything on it to the detriment of those living in surrounding areas?
Jubal:
You ask, “Again, what bylaws did Adam violate? What bylaws were “arbitrarily set aside for special favors”?
I don’t think you really want to know or really care. However, for the edification of others who are reading this dialogue, I will answer your questions:
1. Probolsky is an Alternate Member. As an Alternate, he does not have the right or authority to pull names off of an endorsement list prior to a Central Committee meeting. ONLY a duly elected/appointed member, or an ex officio member may do so.
THERE IS THE VIOLATION OF OUR BY-LAWS.
2. Baugh, as Chairman, made an arbitrary ruling citing “Chairman
Tim,
Matthew is way out of his league on this issue. His typical response will be juvenile ranter about his vast knowledge of his Central Committee’s “Machine” idols, and their few accomplisments for their own good.
I strongly disagree with Art’s comment about “developers” wanting to build “massive” third stories to their homes in San Clemente. These are NOT developers, these are families who would like the option to improve and expand their homes within the same rules of the city zoning laws that apply to everyone. This area in San Clemente already suffers from depressed real estate values and poorly maintained homes. The city started on this road, knowing it was always about private view protection and now they have fabricated a “private view protection ordinance” that NEVER existed under the original CC&R’s.
There is something going on behind closed doors that would push this through – and Eggleston and Anderson have something to do with it.
Isnt it ironic that Whitacre and Pedroza assert their conspiracies to be true that Probolsky only wanted his rights as an alternate for personal gain.
What about a real ex-officio in attendance (Chuck DeVore) who spoke on behalf of alternates recieving rights? He has nothing at stake financially for supporting the claim, except for his concern that he trusts his alternate (Mike Schroder) to vote and act on his behalf when he is off in Sacramento. The ex-officios alternates are right to expect equal rights as elected members because they would be muting their opinions if there were not. The assemblymembers, senators, and congressmen who are unable to attend meetings for obvious reasons should have a voice in the going-ons of their party. I’m sure they are also very careful with whom they trust with their voice on central committee as well.
Art, it would have been a realitivly short meeting hadn’t you and Mr. Whitacre been so difficult. Whether Probolsky was acting on alteror motives or not is a different issue, the right thing to do was allow the ex-officios alternates full rights as regular members, if you cant see that in the big picture you’re drowning in your own cool-aid “orange-juice”
Dave,
You know, you are supposed to mix the Kool Aid with water, not just snort it right out of the package.
As for DeVore, the fact that Michael Schroeder is his alternate speakd for itself. Schroeder is the poster boy for the OC GOP machine and the corruption that they are mired in.
I am pretty sure that DeVore stood up at that meeting because his masters in the machine told him to. He is going to need money for his next campaign, and they hold the purse strings. That is also why he endorsed Daucher in the primary, even though her views and his are so diametrically opposed. He needs money from the New Majority too.
Your last comment is particularly inane. ARe Tim and I just supposed to roll over and let the machine have its way? The meeting lasted too long because: 1) Tim and I had to fight Baugh’s attempt to give Probolsky rights he should not have, 2) Baugh allowed a speaker to get up and waste our time even though there were still party matters to vote on, 3) the party screwed up and did not pass out copies of the endorsement list at the meeting – forcing Schroeder to have to read them all more than once, while garbling most of the names in the process.
Dave Swanson:
I assert no “conspiracies,” rather I correctly assert meandering in and out of the By-Laws for a chosen few.
Problolsky was in his right AT THE MEETING to pull any name, but that required the body to stand behind his request with a 2/3 majority vote. He DID NOT have the right to attempt to pull any names before the meeting UNLESS there was bonafide proof that the Member (Ex Officio or not) was geographically out of the area for the entire 20 days that our By-Laws speak off.
WHAT IS SO HARD ABOUT READING THE BY-LAWS AND ADHERING TO THEM?
You do agree that we should abide by the By-Laws don’t you?
You do agree that the oath of office all Central Committee Members take, includes upholding the By-Laws don’t you?
Because Chuck DeVore (who I know and like) is an Ex Officio, does that make him any more elected to office than I am, or does that mean that an Ex Officio’s vote or voice should have more weight than an duly elected Central Committee Member?
Dave, the right thing to do is ALWAYS the right thing to do. The By-Laws are there to insure that no matter who is in a leadership capacity, the body is governed correctly and CONSISTENTLY.
We were not consistent with our By-Laws (AGAIN) last Monday. A vote didn’t take place that should have.
That was WRONG.
Semper Fi,
Tim Whitacre