Mission Viejo recall council candidate Dave Leckness
Good afternoon folks. The election to recall Mission Viejo Councilman Lance MacLean is starting off like a “3 stooges” comedy routine.
On Thursday Nov 19th Dave Leckness submitted his documents to become the second candidate to replace Lance MacLean if voters kick him out of office. While two other Mission Viejo residents did “pull” papers they failed to turn them in which automatically ends their entry into the February 2nd 2010 recall election.
The very next morning I received an email whose title reads:
“What the recall in Mission Viejo is all about.”
The one page hit piece has a photo of candidate Dale Tyler in the City Clerk’s office signing an election document alongside another photo of council member Cathy Schlicht at a council meeting while presenting her concern about EMF exposure to our children in local parks prior to her being elected.
The very first line below these photos reads “With Tyler in the third seat, John Paul Ledesma (who is termed out in 2010) and Cathy Schlicht (who was elected in 2008) will have three votes and will control the city council.”
Think about that remarkable statement for a moment. The recall election is being held on Feb 2nd. My guess is that the results will be official 30 days later at which time the winner, assuming Lance is defeated, will not take his seat until March. As such John Paul Ledesma will only remain in office for around 8 months as we go dark during part of the summer.
In the “Answer of Lance MacLean to Statement of Reasons for the Proposed Recall ” Lance responds saying that “this self-serving group wants to open a seat on the City Council and insert their hand-picked candidate so they will have a majority rule.”
What majority rule? Some thought we had a council majority after the Nov 2002 General Election when John Paul Ledesma was re-elected and we carried challengers Trish Kelley and Lance MacLean over the finish line placing 1st, 2nd, and 3rd in that city council election.
Fast forward to 2009 where there have been times when councilmember Schlicht made Motions which died for lack of a second. Note: John Paul was in attendance at those meetings.
“Control the city.” What were they smoking in the back room where these geniuses concocted this flyer?
Let me also point out that in checking John Paul and Cathy’s official voting record, excluding their approval of the Minutes, check registers or Routine Consent Calendar items that almost every member approves, they have rarely voted in agreement on OLD or NEW Business Agenda items during the 10 months that Cathy has been on the council.
One glowing example is the topic of introducing “round-abouts” in our city where John Paul was very animated in his opposition while Cathy was tasked by Mayor Ury to conduct ad hoc committee meetings to evaluate the pro’s and con’s of that concept.
At no point in his reply does Lance admit or deny the charges against him which is the reason for the recall starting with his being handcuffed “by Police for assault and battery on a co-worker.”
On November 9th I interviewed candidate Dave Leckness in a restaurant adjacent to his print shop for a solid hour. During that cordial discussion, prior to his November 19th filing with the city clerk, I asked for his input on a wide variety of city issues for which he stated not having an opinion.
Questions such as his knowledge or opinion on the multiple allegations in the recall which enables him to be a candidate now rather than waiting for the traditional election cycle. Dave said he was “not familiar with any of the charges against Councilman MacLean.” Whether he agrees with any, all, or none of them, voters would expect him having an opinion of same.
Dave said he was not for the recall yet in the same sentence told me “its time for a change.”
Is that response controversial?
You don’t support the recall of Lance yet feel he needs to be replaced?
Dave. Why is it “time for a change” in Feb 2010 rather than Nov 2010?
Does that remark confirm that even Dave Leckness believes that Lance needs to be removed now rather than at a future date?
Another issue is the Mission Viejo “Right to Vote” Initiative in our city that, after 11,000 petition signatures were turned into our city clerk on Jan 26th, qualified to be on a future ballot. This Initiative is not a minor issue. It’s not every year that we have city specific ballot measures in Mission Viejo yet Dave was not familiar with that ongoing “grass roots” effort. This Initiative, modeled after one in Yorba Linda, relates to voter approval of major zoning change proposals.
While we should not expect candidates to be up to speed on every possible scenario in the city there are some that are vital to retaining our quality of life.
Let me also point out that both candidates, Dale Tyler and Dave Leckness, each asked me to sign their Nomination papers. Although I know them both for many years, I felt that would restrict my ability to fairly cover their campaigns.
A final thought in this first of two reports on the three stooges.
Go back to my Nov 9th interview of Dave Leckness, look at his Candidate Statement of Qualifications, turned in 10 days later, and the hit piece which I reference above.
Part of Dave’s Candidate Statement is a Readers Digest, reduced copy of the “hit piece.” Other than his personal opening and closing remarks he has included some of the same text such as the allegation of “getting rid of Kid’s factory” which is directly from the flyer referenced above. Another problem with the hit piece and his statement is that they have thrown out a wide net of charges against many activists in our city while only Dale Tyler is the candidate. I do not believe that he has expressed any opinion on the Kids Factory as charged above.
Part 2 of 2 of his recall election should be in your incoming mail sometime tomorrow.
MacLean had the chance to resign when presented with his options — leave willingly or be taken out. It was his choice to stay and burden everyone else with the trouble and expense of removing him.
I am impressed with the tenacity and resolve of citizens — everyone who signed the recall petition — to improve their city government. Thank you, Mr. Gilbert, for interviewing Dave Leckness, as your interview made a lasting impression of his candidacy.
Maybe my question will be answered in part two, but why is Dave Lecness putting his name on the ballot? I read the blogs and newspapers, but I don’t understand this. Is Dave Lecness pretending to be Mr. Nice Guy and then cranking out hit pieces?
Gloria.
No. Dave is not pretending to be Mr. Nice Guy. Dave is being used by current and former city council members as an insurance policy if Lance falls on Feb 2nd.
Part 2 will incude some other comments from Dave during our interview.
I am angry that he is being used.
I know Dave and I’ve been a good customer of his. Whether or not I will feel sorry for him will depend on how he reacts to finding out his “handlers” set him up. If he denounces their dirty campaign, then I will conclude he innocently took the bait when they asked him to run. If he doesn’t denounce them, then I will conclude he knew from the beginning that he was a sham candidate for a bunch of flame throwers.
Congratulations to the watchdogs for immediately being on to this charade. I also rec’d a copy of the hit piece, and I know who sent it, thanks to the diligence of the watchdogs.
What amazes me is that Dave’s “handlers” couldn’t wait even 24 hours so Dave could bask in the glory of his campaign before they started trashing Tyler and Schlicht. They turned Dave’s campaign into a train wreck the day after he filed, and that might be record time for self-destruction.
Let me see if I have this straight, Larry. You’re in favor of costing the city over a quarter million dollars to have a special recall election when Lance is up for election in November. By the logic you used in paragraph four the council can do much between February and November anyway. So why are you and Dale costing the city that much? I know it’s you guys because you signed the petition before anyone else. At least Dale did. He was the first. And he tried to explain it away in his candidate statement with the weakest logic I’ve seen since Dan Quail, by talking about benefits that have never been paid out because no one other than Bill Craycraft has qualified for them.
From what I understand, Lance isn’t well liked and wouldn’t win in November anyway. I always understood our system of government to be the voters elected someone and then we were stuck with them until the next election. You clearly think recall is the way to go, which undermines democracy. Seems like an awfully lot of money to spend to vote out someone who was going to lose anyway. Logically it doesn’t make sense. I must be missing something.
Seems like you like the kooks, Larry. You originally backed Lance Maclean. You backed Cathy who wore a tin foil hat to address the city council. Oh wait, those are all ad hominem arguments. But then so are yours aren’t they?
Here let’s take a critical look at one of Cathy’s contributions: privatizing the library. The other 98% of us call that a “book store.” Libraries and book stores serve two different purposes in society. Now you are clearly backing Dale Tyler, who is a lonely man who has nothing in his living other than a card table his computer sits on. Not a rosy picture of mental health if you ask me. Right up there with Cathy and her tin foil hat.
Is “Avery” also known as Marion? How is it that “Avery” bragged about the same photo that Marion sent on a hate flyer that is now tied to the campaign of Dave Leckness?
Marion seems to be engineering the train wreck mentioned above in post No. 4.
Who is Marion. Dan Avery is my real name, unlike you there Go Hawks. I stand by my words. The photo of Cathy appeared in my blog on Open Salon. You really should try to keep up, dude.
http://open.salon.com/blog/daniel_avery/2009/11/16/if_i_only_had_a_brain
Greetings Mr. Gilbert, I called Dave’s print shop today and asked if he could fax or email me any flyers or brochures he has on his campaign. He said they were developing one as we spoke. I pressed and asked if he had anything. He said in two days he will have a beautiful brochure. So Larry, where are you getting the idea that Dave is putting out a “Hit Piece”? I’ve know Dave and his crew at Kwik Kopy for 7 years and he’s not one to bash anybody. I also checked out his candidate statement and he doesn’t mention anybody’s name but his own. It looks like you’re trying to make him into something he’s not.
I’ve read Dave’s ballot statement and the hit piece, and I agree they were written by the same person. I would call the flyer a hate piece, created by Team Leckness.
Joe Schmo. Nice name.
Where did I say that Dave Leckness sent out the hit piece?
What I did uncover is that he used an off the wall reference that appears in the hit piece in his 200 word candidate statement that was submitted to the City Clerk one day earlier than my receipt of the flyer.
Let me show the linkage:
In the referenced hit piece it reads that a new council majority will among other allegations “severly curtail or entirely eliminate funding for Kid’s Factory”…
Now let’s look at Dave’s 200 word Candidate statement of Qualifications. Go to the third paragraph where it reads “getting rid of Kid’s factory”..
Folks. I have been closely following virtually every issue in our city for the past 16 years. I do not recall any reference to the Kid’s factory.
When I interviewed Dave on Nov 9th he never mentioned any concern of our after school programs no less the Kid’s factory.
Dan Avery. You are clueless but do have the distinction of being the second person to sign Dave Leckness’s Nominating Papers which I reviewed at city hall earlier this morning.
For that reason Juice readers must recognize that Dan is attempting to use this blog to promote his friend and one of the two recall candidates. Interesting. Dan. As a big supporter of Lance why were you so anxious to sign his potential replacement’s papers instead of devoting all your time and energy opposing the recall?
Even Dave Leckness feels that he could do a better job than Lance based on his comments.
Folks. My name does appear second in the “Notice of Intent to Circulate Recall Petition” that was submitted to the city clerk on Feb 5th.
Mr. Avery’s BS comment that Dale Tyler and I signed the Petition before anyone, creating this recall expenditure, is a lie.
The petition circulator left that space open for me to consider. I was one of the last 30 or so to add my name but did not sign until weeks later and I have witnesses to my signing to verify this response. In fact council members Cathy Schlicht, John Paul Ledesma and I all signed that document in the same gathering on the same date yet the names are not consecutive as some earlier signers left blank spaces. None of us were in the first 11 listed to sign as it appears in the legal petition.
It is appropriate for the Juice to permit Dan Avery space to defend his friend Lance. And while I have no intention to delete his comments, I will call him out when he is not telling the truth.
Notice that Mr Avery is attacking Cathy Schlicht, another council member who is not the subject of the recall.
Perhaps Mr Avery can deny that Lance was handcuffed by four police at UCI which apparently didn’t happen? Lance skipped over that charge in his response that will appear in our special election ballot.
Mr. Avery. When and if Cathy Schlicht runs for re-election in three years, and we cover that election, you are welcome to comment on her performance.
Difficult for Lance to get re-elected? According to my research 90 percent of incumbents running for re-election do prevail. And if Lance were to win in November he would be eligible for $270,000 in lifetime health care benefits for a part time position. Source. MV Treasurer.
Mr Avery. Recall is part of Democracy. Perhaps you should read the CA Constitution. If you need a personal copy I have several and will gladly hand you one for free at the next council meeting.
And yes, many of us supported Lance MacLean in 2002. I will be the first to admit that mistake and have stated that error in vetting out his candidacy to hundreds of people.
Go Hawks.
Dan Avery is not Marion.
Marion might be former Mayor Sherri Butterfield’s husband Marion who was 5th to sign Dave Leckness’s Nominating Papers.
As this point I will shift the story to part 2 of 2 where I will “name names.”
SC Lawyer.
There is no question that the author of the hit piece has tarnished Dave’s campaign before he even get’s started.
My sense is that the author is one of those who signed his Nominating Papers
Marion ??? So has Sherri (Butterfingers) emerged to lead this campaign of hate and abuse ???
Let’s see. Dan implies he has no idea who Marion is. Duly noted.
Can’t wait for, part 2 of 2 where you will “name names.” I’m sure everyone is scared and shaking in their boots YAH RIGHT!!!!. The only truly scared people are those who think your candidate will win. Why do you have such one sided postings? You pump up those you like and tear down those you don’t like. It’s people like you and your small group that keep good people a way from our local politics. It is really sad to see someone who has run and been defeated to think he (and his group) are the spokespeople of our community. What makes yourself the voice of the county?!?!?! You call yourself the “watchdogs”? The only part I agree with is the dogs part………. I am anxiously awaiting the next set of lies coming from the person who couldn’t get elected and now spends his free time spreading BS on these blogs!!!!! I see the only consistent hit piece you hold onto tightly is the fact MacLean got arrested at UCI. It appears he made a mistake and paid dearly by no longer being employed at UCI. I’m not saying the was right or wrong but I am able to get past that point in his life and let him continue doing the yeoman’s job he has been doing for our community.
When it comes to KIDS Factory, it was your Gail Reavis who wanted parents to have to pay for this program or not have in it MV!
Get real –get a life.
No one ever accused me of being soft in asking questions. If you enter the political arena you better be prepared. I learned that over 60 years ago as a Boy Scout.
Dave Leckness is a friend. If you don’t believe me ask him.True friends are not afraid to tell each other if they are making a mistake. It’s called accountability. I simply do not believe that Dave Leckness’s entry into the recall election was of his own making. He should have been preparing for valid policy questions regardless of which reporter he speaks to. You might read part two which is now posted as promised.
And I do “name names” which is an inside comment from my public record requests in Mission Viejo a few years ago.
My group? what are you talking about. I have no group and was not involved in gathering any of the signatures of the recall election. Please refrain from giving me credit for the volunteer efforts of others. It simply is not warranted.
As to Lance’s episode at UCI. I am glad that you can acknowledge it while Lance does not. Have you read his rebuttal to the charges? At no point in that document, that every Mission Viejo voter wil be getting in their mailbox, does he admit to the incident or even mention it. If he can’t even address the first charge why do I need to focus on the other allegations? Have you ever been in litigation? Did yo ever hear of multiple charges such as in the case of Mike Carona where some may be set aside but others stick. I do believe that Lance’s anger is cause for alarm in our city, which was just acknowledged as “the 3rd safest in America (with population over 75,000).”
What message does that send when we give the mayor a pass for his conduct as we promote public safety as job one? I guess it was OK for the University of California to dismiss Lance but you feel we don’t have the same option?
Be carefull here. If you continue calling me a liar I will hit the delete key on your comments whomever you are.