.
The “editorial staff” of the Liberal OC produced a surprisingly mature and balanced editorial yesterday entitled “Let’s See What A Republican Majority Can Do With the Great Park.” It was especially remarkable coming right on the heels of their typical piece of Agranista agitprop entitled, with characteristic LOC awkwardness, “Democrats Seek Rallying Cry in Irvine.”
That’s right, let’s do see what the Republican Majority can do with the Great Park. And let’s watch them closely (as we probably should have been watching before there was a Republican majority.) That’s all we can do for now.
Because the one big lesson most of the County learned this week – who knew? – was that this was never an “Orange County Great Park” in the first place, despite its name and despite the fact that we county voters approved it back in the 90s:
- Nearly all the land belongs to the city of Irvine – a fact for which Supervisor Todd Spitzer takes credit and blame;
- Every employee and dollar spent, as Councilman Lalloway won’t fail to remind you, is an Irvine employee and dollar;
- And, thanks to Mr. Agran’s *cough* unswerving faith in himself, every decision made regarding the Park, for many years now, has NOT been made by the (now-disbanded) nine-member Board, but by the Irvine City Council (which Larry may well have thought he would control in perpetuity.)
Who knew?
Dr. No at the Helm
The pain. The pain of sitting through the interminable droning of a meeting led by Irvine’s new Mayor Dr. Steven Choi. Especially the first forty minutes or so of his proclamation of Korean-American Day. Any swelling of ethnic pride was undetectable behind the Mayor’s monotone voice and blank countenance, as 30+ local Korean-American elected officials and public servants stood there dutifully, stoically, getting honored. If it was worth it for anything, it was for watching the irrepressible and dapper Assistant DA Susan Kang Schroeder fidgeting and rolling her eyes through the endless proceedings.
Next, “100 Black Men in Orange County” livened things up briefly with their MLK Day proclamation, and then it was time for the newly rejiggered council to finally begin hashing out all their grievances – beginning with the Mayor’s committee assignments.
The two brainy liberals, Krom and Agran, seated on the dais at “Do I have to separate you two” extremes, had just discovered to their chagrin that they’d been taken off the committees they loved and had been busily involved with, and stuck into committees that NOBODY wants, like the hated Vector Control Board up in godforsaken Garden Grove. Clearly, with electoral tables turned, the Republican majority was visiting upon them just the sort of indignities the Republicans used to suffer.
(At one point Mayor Choi pointed out “I had to do Vector Control for three years under Mayor Kang” to which Krom quipped, “And during those three years I had absolutely no issues with Vectors, which reflects very well on your work there!” A rare light moment.)
The liberals were also put out at having to learn their committee assignments by reading the agenda, not having been extended the courtesy of a meeting with the Mayor to even ascertain their time availability. Choi and Lalloway were quick to respond that that’s the way they’d been treated under the previous majority. Larry Agran bristled and insisted that when HE was mayor he ALWAYS met one-on-one with each member regarding committees. Gradually it became clear that it was only under the last mayor – Sukhee Kang, an Agran-allied Democrat – that such niceties were dropped and Republicans were flung willy-nilly into the vector. Finally Larry went so far as to say, “Well, if Mayor Kang did that, SHAME ON HIM!” That’s right – it was Korean-on-Korean rudeness, something we round-eyes cannot presume to fathom or judge. And fancy that – apparently Agran’s mayorship was in some respects a Shangrila of comity, at least in comparison to what’s come since.
But more problematic than Mayor Choi’s committee assignments were his planned Committee Decimations: As some sort of fire-ready-aim plan to “streamline” Irvine’s government he had proposed to 1) abolish the “Greenlight Environmental Committee” and 2) boot all the public volunteers off of a popular Education Committee. Krom, Agran, various distressed committee members and members of the public AND staff tried for ninety minutes to talk sense into the grim Mayor – these committees did invaluable work, and they did it at no expense to the city. And he just kept repeating, at first like a robot and later like a deer in headlights, the words “efficiency” and “streamline.”
Eventually Beth Krom, in one of her rants, observed that “If ‘streamline’ were a drinking game word, we’d all be on the floor by now.” Diamond, who must be a less close observer of council meetings and blog comment threads than I, recently penned the sentence, “There’s no love lost between Agran (and to a lesser extent Krom) and the Council conservatives.” To a lesser extent? NOBODY pisses off the political foes of the Agranistas more than Beth Krom. She is strident, theatrical, and loves to insult her opponents (as Christina Shea pointedly complained.) She can also be really fucking funny.
And Jeffrey Lalloway, with his Gandolfini grin, certainly at least APPEARS to be Mayor Choi’s brain. Maybe the Mayor thinks brilliantly in Korean, but he seemed clueless and paralyzed during this committees controversy, seeming to take in no new information, and repeating the same meaningless lines, while occasionally Lalloway whispered in his ear. I’d been told, by a Democrat, that these two are enemies, since Lalloway is “Don Wagner’s boy” and Wagner beat Choi for Assembly back in 2010. But then I was told, by someone who would know better, that that’s all in the past, that Lalloway busted his ass to get Choi in the Mayorship, and that they’re now tight as ticks. Which comports with what I observe.
At long last it was Christina Shea, she of the Olive Oyl eyes, who, weary of the impasse, offered a compromise forward. This might be something we see in the future.
So it was that, after all the squabbling, Mayor Choi ended up with only a small fraction of the dubious “efficiencies” he craved – the Education Committee was left as is, and the Environmental Committee’s meetings were merely reduced from bimonthly to quarterly. Pretty nearly a faceplant for Dr. Choi in the first two hours of his Mayorship. But on the other hand he did show that he can listen, even if it takes a while.
By now it was two hours into the meeting, Beth’s flying monkeys my Democrat friends were growing restive, and it was finally time to address the burning issue of the Great Park.
Coup? What Coup?
After the Mayor’s lengthy recitation of his reasons for dissolving the (merely advisory) Great Park Board, Larry Agran was allowed five minutes, which became fifteen minutes, to defend the progress made thus far. He did so using a truckload of boxes, documents and maps, as well as with a slideshow 
showing beautiful scenes of the bits of the Great Park that have been accomplished. This impressed those who wanted to be impressed, and impressed others not so much.
I was more impressed with the business plan which he keeps in his pocket everywhere he goes. The first item on that plan is “We will not spend money that we don’t have.” Of how many large public projects can that be said? We all know that the Park’s original plans were hit by a trifecta of economic body blows – the housing crash, the recession, and the abolition of redevelopment agencies. And this was always intended to be a long-term project, a couple decades long. So maybe folks should be more patient with the progress made. Or maybe not. I cannot say.
The millions of dollars in no-bid consultant contracts is another story, and I look forward to the results of the forensic audit – what DID Forde and Mollrich do for all that money? One bizarre spectacle this week has been to see all my Democrat, Agran-apologist friends theorizing, “They may have been secretly doing this great thing, they may have been secretly doing that great thing.” Don’t they keenly feel the absurdity of their position? Why should any of us – and why should the Republican majority – have to GUESS what the firm was doing? How does a PUBLICIST working for a PUBLIC PROJECT not PUBLICIZE that to the heavens?
The Fury of Spitzer
In attendance, and sitting restlessly in the front row, was the area’s new (and former) County Supervisor Todd Spitzer. Sworn in only the day before, the hyperkinetic born-again had hit the ground running on Monday with a press conference making it clear that he aspires literally to be SuperVisor. And ONE of the County’s many intractable problems which he resolved to take firmly in hand was the Great Park, partly because he felt a responsibility for putting it in Irvine’s hands rather than the County’s. And from his perch that day he had issued an ultimatum to the Council – either make serious progress on the Park THIS YEAR, or Todd Spitzer will put before OC voters the question of whether the County should take it back from Irvine. (Actually it’s not clear if that’s legally possible.)
Agran, during his presentation, reacted with defiance to that threat (even though the threat was mainly aimed at the Republican majority.) Waving the flag of Irvine pride, he reminded his audience of all the County’s grievous offenses against Irvine – the attempt to build an airport at El Toro, the attempt to extend a jail right up to Irvine’s borders, and more, I forget.
And Spitzer took THAT personally. The first public speaker, he strode to the microphone and THUNDERED at the whole Council for their childish bickering, and at Agran in particular for his attacks on the County (which Spitzer took as attacks on Spitzer.) I’M THE ONE, he declaimed, who SAVED Irvine from the airport, I’M THE ONE, he cried out, who turned the Marine base over to Irvine. He thundered at Larry for the lack of progress on the Park! He thundered at Larry for the no-bid contracts! Then he said, “I’m upset because you attacked me. Now I’m going to ratchet it down.” And next, demonstrating the emotional agility gleaned from both Christianity and Yoga, he dropped his voice an octave and calmly assured the whole Council that that all his resources as Supervisor would be at their disposal as they strove to “move forward” with Irvine’s Great Park, and wished all five of them well.
At this point I had to leave, so I missed all the keening of Beth’s flying monkeys my Democrat friends. But as I understand, the votes on the Park went as foreordained – there will be a forensic audit (that was unanimous); the current consultants’ contracts are terminated; and the Great Park Board is now the Irvine City Council, no more and no less.
So What Can Go Wrong Now?
Well… How do Republicans usually fuck up?
It seems unlikely after all the hooplah that they’ll again offer no-bid contracts, to their own cronies. But how are they going to continue to “make progress,” and better, quicker progress, with the Park? One tidbit that The Voice of OC‘s Norberto got on video, but hasn’t made it into print yet, is Lalloway’s answer: “public-private partnerships … an awful lot of land out there and an awful lot of people who want to build recreational facilities.”
[note on inspecting 2023: this video has disappeared, sorry]
That could mean many things, but I don’t really like the sound of it, do you? “An awful lot of land.” “Awful.” Land that they could do stuff with. Profitable stuff. “Public-private partnerships.” What could THAT mean?
Irvine residents – since this IS YOUR Park – you’d better keep a close eye on these characters this year. If they go too far, Lalloway will have to be defeated in ’14.
But, how much damage can they do – how much irreversible damage can they do, if damage is what they do – in two years? If the irreversible damage is fast-tracked, then maybe you lot need to gear up to Recall Mayor Choi. THIS year. I do not get the feeling he will be a very popular Mayor.
Nelson, over and out.
Did “the public” have any comment or response ?
Whatever happened to Irvine’s 10,000 unit deficit of affordable housing?
Any plans for housing?
DC M – As Vern so eloquently put it, “Beths Flying Monkies” also known affectionately as Agranistas, were out in number. They had been actively recrutied by Krom and Agran to show up and raise hell with the new Council. Two of the members, Choi and Shea are old hands at this Agranista tactic, but newby Jeff Lalloway seemed to be caught by surprise. Still, I thought Jeff did an excellent job in keeping his composure, throwing a few hard left jabs of his own and even adding a little humor to the mix from time to time.
This meeting dealt specifically with three issues that needed to be handled quickly. The housing development issues did not come up at this meeting, but are sure to arise in the future. The developer Five Points is currently approved to build ain the ballpark of 5,000 units. I could be off but as I recall, the Irvine Housing Elements requires 10% of those to be dedicated to low and moderate income families. Five Points wants to triple the density of the housing to be built. However, due to the negative impact it would have on North Irvine there will be major debate on that, regardless of whatever additional perks Five Points promises the Great Park. If we are very lucky, Five Points will follow in the footsteps of its predecessor Lenner, go bankrupt and sell the development rights to the Irvine Company. Then all development and infastructure would be done to the first class standards of all Irvine Company projects. Stay tuned for previews of coming attractions on Great Park housing. It won’t be dull watching.
“Eventually Beth Krom, in one of her rants, observed that “If ‘streamline’ were a drinking game word, we’d all be on the floor by now.””
I like that line by Krom – pretty funny. It gives me an idea for a Santa Ana Council drinking game. The oft used line there is “with that being said ..” That little stall for time until they can think something relevant to say line drives me nuts. Cheers!
Nope, Vern — I’ll stand by my opinion that they hate Agran more than they do Krom. Beth is funny and aggressive and a powerful counter-puncher, so their interactions with her may look like hatred. But Larry commits the worse sin — he’s been extremely successful in his political career. Your depiction of Spitzer shows how a lot of the noise-making in politics can be showtime. But when it comes to engendering resentment … well, to deploy an old phrase in a new context, there’s no arguing with success.
The big organic farming enterprise that you and I learned about while at Occupy Irvine (you were there for that, right?) is not a secret. It’s just not well-publicized. I have been critical of the previous majority for not publicizing better to the public what was so great about the Great Park, given what they spent on PR, but I realized in arguing with Patrick here recently that Forde & Mollrich were not supposed to be in the business of selling the public on what a shining jewel the GP was.
After so many years of Republican political administrations, we think of PR as another word for “propaganda.” But public funds really ought not be spent on that — and apparently were not, hence your complaint. (It’s like when a state tourist board advertises within the region of the state itself that they’re trying to market — I always think “aren’t you supposed to be getting other people to come spend their money here?) But of course, tourist boards do that so that the people who vote on them see what they are doing, even if what they are doing does little good.
PR doesn’t have to be that — and at it’s best it’s not. It’s part of what is sometimes called “External Affairs.” It can be a flavor of diplomacy (although that can be domestic, not just international.) Their PR efforts (like Townsend’s lobbying) were largely focused outwards — towards things like getting the franchise to the Solar Decathlon, as I discussed yesterday (http://www.orangejuiceblog.com/2013/01/choi-power-deployed-at-possible-expense-of-solar-power/). That’s not something that we homies would learn about until and unless it was successful — and it won’t even seep into the public’s attention until it opens in early October — assuming that it does….
Do I wish that more about the actual contractual arrangement with Fo&Mo were open to the public? I think that it should have been — because it is otherwise too easy to misrepresent. But I’m still not actually convinced that it was as hard for someone in Irvine to find the information as people claim that it was. The critics had a political reason for feigning ignorance. Maybe now we’ll find out if Choi was really out of the loop or not — and, if not, whether he was muzzled or could have cleared up mysteries any time he wanted to do so.
I think that the miscalculation that Agran & Co. made — pure supposition here, no inside info — is that if a new City Council majority ever tried to come in and not merely do a forensic audit, but prepare to chuck the whole Great Park concept overall — people would be enraged and ride them out of town. (You’ll notice that they didn’t actually campaign on “let’s trash the grand plan”; it was mostly on whether Agran was corrupt and helping out child molesters, and to the extent the Great Park came up at all it was just that it was too slow — possibly for good reason — and that they used no-bid contracts — also possibly for good reason. I remember arguing not that long ago at OCTA for the nicer name of “design-build.”)
I suspect that they expected the public to come out for them more and for the media to press harder on why the hell they were in effect throwing out all of those nice plans. Maybe if the election had happened after the success — or what would have been the success, as the case may be — of the Solar Decathlon, they would be right. Or maybe we in the media are just afraid of being accused of being someone’s flying monkeys.
Too bad if we never see anything like those plans built, though. On the other hand, it might be a great place for a Great Walmart.
Hey Vern, not a bad commentary and light years ahead of what Dan the “Spin Man” usually throws out in the OC Liberal. I enjoy your humor in some of the topics and even though we are on opposite sides of the political spectrum, I enjoy reading your work.
Just as a point of reference, we have been doing public-private partnerships in Irvine long before the Marines stopped flying at El Toro. Community Policing is one such example of that partnership. That relationship between the Police and their stakeholders is one of the key contributing factors why Irvine is America’s Safest City. I know that comes as a shock since all this time Sukee Kang, Beth Krom and Larry Agran suggested they did it single handedly. On the City side there has also been a number of partnerships with business stakeholders, multi-culturral groups, the School District and other entities.
The Great Park is in dire need of a long term funding strategy. The past Advisory Board was a rank group of amateurs in both major development and fund raising. Their abject failure at real Park development supports that theory. What is needed is a new Advisory Group of non-political experts on major development projects, creative fundraising, and business connections to bring in major players to the Park. In addition to the housing, there is going to have to be some commercial enterprise in Park sections to bring in long term money for development and maintenance. If the people want just a park of endless grassy fields with nothing on them, then such funding is not necessary. The point I am making from a layman perspective and speaking only for myself is, Jeff Lalloway is right on target with a goal of developing a public-private partnership. That partnership will make or break the Great Park.
In conclusion, I do not share your doom or gloom about either Steven Choi as Mayor or the Council going too far in making changes at the Park. Steven Choi is a honest dedicated public servant. Stevens heart is in the right place and he will get his feet on the ground and do well. People know and appreciate this, which is why he was elected. If the Council goes anywhere with the Park, they will be a mile ahead of what the Agranistas did. I believe with the public concern over the Park, the Council will make it their number one priority and make substantial progress during the next two years. The buck stops at their door and it is their turn to show what they can do.
PAR over and out
So, spike the grand plan and turn the area into not only just another park, but just another part of Irvine. (Well, except for the areas with toxic waste.)
I think that people would like something like the plan that was designed. Not enough profit in that, though, I suspect.
Let me correct something, Patrick. That’s not why he was elected. Political money laundered through out of state, and maybe some dealings in-state, would have a lot more to do with it. But that is a forensic audit for another day.
Not sure who the money backers of Steven Choi were, but having worked in his campaign, I am confident he even knew. That’s why it is called an Independent Committee, because the Candidate cannot have any control over it. Since you brought up the topic of money laundering, let me just state the saying, “Those who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw rocks”. Larry Agran has for the past fifteen years been the master of legal campaign money laundering schemes through the Measures and Initiatives he has written and placed on the ballot. This time out it was the “Schools Initiatiative” and Agran was the Chairman of the committee. Unlimited amounts of money were donated by Agran political supporters, many of them feeding at the Great Park trough. Add to that the Public Employee Union money and that from the Teachers Groups and Agran was in his usual “field of clover.” As usual that money funded many glossy slate mailers in our mail boxes with 90% extolling the virtues of the Agranista candidates and 10% devoted to the Schools Initiative. This usually allows Agran to bury the competition, but because of the opposition Independent Committee’s mailers, the Agran attack was blunted. In the end the good guys won the election. Such is the life in Irvine.
File a complaint against him, if you must. Many have. He’s never even been scarred by it. It’s not illegal.
What the backers of Choi did, by contrast, looks more like what the Arizona PAC that laundered money for the Prop 30/32 campaign did — and the FPPC went after them for it. So, you’re defending something probably illegal by attacking something legal.
Greg, you are getting to be as bad at twisting words as “Dan the Spin Man” at the OC Liberal. You were the one who brought up the topic of “money laundering” in the first place, trying to put the onus on Steven Choi, like he had done an evil deed. In fact the only deed Steven did was a good one, in upsetting Larry Agran. I merely pointed out the fact that my understanding was the money had come from an Independent Committee and Steven knew nothing about it. Since the money and the slate mailers it paid for were handled by a person completely detached from the candidates or their campaign, I can’t see how it would have been illegal. In fact, it is just as legal as the orchestrated process that the Agranistas use in every election to run their big money through. What I find most unethical in the entire process is vendors who do business with the City of Irvine or Great Park making large donations to an Independent Committee that directly or indirectly benefits any candidate, Republican or Democrat. Any way you slice the loaf, it is a conflict of interest. If Irvine is really interested in campaign reform and transparency, someone should figure out a way to plug that hole in the dike.
Hope I have cleared up this issue.
Pat, why is your car parked at Shea’s house overnight? Still have those handcuffs?
Patrick, if you want the above comment anonymous spiked, just let me know. (Subject to Vern’s override.)
*We suppose this all goes to prove: “Build it and they will come…..” is certainly an Irvine Mission Statement. They don’t say when ….of course!
I’ve been to the park a few times and one time saw Vern there and he played the piano in the tent visitor center.
There is a lot of parking and some stuff has been built. But I would question why there is not an adequate access road? A little two lane road for a great park?
I think that is proof that the focus was on spending the funds on reports and not a future park for the people.
“.. the focus was on spending the funds on reports and not a future park for the people.”
Don’t forget cook that Agran got a pile of papers in front of his desk for the $200 million $$. Larry is proud of his pile of papers – and he can use those papers to line his bird cage when he becomes the Bird Man of Alcatraz.
Parks don’t generally have highways through them genius. Little two lane roads slow people down so they can enjoy the park and hikers and bikers can be safe.
Have you ever even been to a park or is this just more cook cranky nonsense?
anonster (genius),
Apparently you don’t know much about the park. What cook is talking about is the access road into the park.
Sure. Cook (who usually hates cars) was complaining that there was ONLY a little two-lane road, and not something bigger and faster. Anonster said that a little two-lane road is just right for a park, and sarcastically suggested Cook was calling for a highway thru the park. It’s called hyperbole, scholar.
that is crap Vern (professor) .. you expect me to believe that?
Yes. Read it again, grasshopper.
Yellowstone has a highway running through it, as does Yosemite, and the Red Wood Forest in N Calif. to name just 3.
But that wasn’t my point, the lack of access to the park was. Next time you are in Irvine, stop by the great park and check out the access road.
I go to the Great Park once a month for the flea market and the short access road is adequate (for now).
I do see your point though, that it has not been upgraded and is not as nice as the new two lane roads inside the park itself.
I apologize cook, you had a legitimate criticism for once.
*We thought “Design and Consent” was the perview of the people. Since this is to be a City/County Park area……..why are not several designs presented to the people as options at the next election? Did they already do that ….and we missed something along the way?
Are you trying to reference “Advise and Consent,” which is the purview of the U.S. Senate in Presidential nominations? I’ve never heard of “Design and Consent.” Does everyone need to learn CAD now?
Yeah you missed something along the way. Several things in fact, including the public input period, the design competition, and selection of the master design about seven years ago. Smooth.
http://www.landscapeonline.com/research/article/6517
“We will not spend money that we don’t have.”
But we will distribute all the money we do have to our friends and political allies, for not doing much of anything.
I was there at the City Council meeting, thank you for the humor, that’s it, enjoyed reading it!
Katherine