.
.
.
Short Version! (which, believe it or not, this is!)
- This post mostly just lists the results of Orange Juice’s awesome deliberative process. Most of it comes from Greg (who actually read all of the ballot statements in undetermined races), some from Vern, and it will end up being supplemented with comments from Cynthia, Ryan, Ricardo, and perhaps a few others. We disagree on a lot of things; before Election Day, we’ll try to tell you why.
- Longer posts, each focusing on a smaller portion of the races, will appear between now and Election Eve and expand on all our thinking behind each recommendation.
- Greg is a member of the Democratic Party of Orange County Central Committee, which prevents him from actively opposing party recommendations. (His choices are support the nominee or take no public position. Republicans do this too.) When you see a post marked with a “◊” it means that Greg is sitting out this race and it is solely Vern’s endorsement (or in some cases the endorsement of one of our other contributors.)
- This is not intended to be “the end of the discussion,” especially in races from the small southern provinces where OJB has limited involvement. It’s meant to stimulate discussion. So please do weigh in — ideally (to have more impact) under your real name. Our endorsements have been known to be revised when confronted with a good argument!
NOTE: AS OF 6:30 AM ON TUESDAY OCTOBER 31, five days after initial publication, this is pretty much done — we still have to do the ritual review and purge from the endorsement list of anyone who hired “Despicable Dave” Ellis. (We like this part the most!)
1. THE BASICS!
STATEWIDE BALLOT MEASURES:
(It’s really easy: GREG: NO on 60, 65, and 66, and YES on everything else! VERN: ALSO NO on 51 & 56)
- (51) School Bonds – Greg YES, Vern NO.
- (52) Medi-Cal Hospital Fee – YES
- (53) Revenue Bonds to Voters – YES (though this will need fixing)
- (54) Legislative Transparency – YES
- (55) Extend Tax on Rich – YES
- (56) Raise Cigarette Tax – Greg YES, Vern NO
- (57) Sentencing Reform – YES
- (58) Dual-Language Ed. OK – YES
- (59) Lobby to End Citizens United – YES
- (60) Require Condoms in Porn – NO
- (61) Lower Prescription Drug Prices – YES
- (62) Repeals Death Penalty – YES
- (63) Ammunition Background Checks – Greg YES, Ryan NO, Vern unsure.
- (64) Cannabis Legalization – YES
- (65) Mandate Sale of Carry-out Bags – NO
- (66) Speed Up Death Penalty – NO
- (67) Ban Single-Use Plastic Bags – YES
Ryan, who will expand upon his thoughts in a later larger piece on these propositions, offers the following summary minority report: NO on 51, 53, 54, 55, and 56; NO THIS IS STUPID on 59; and HELL NO followed by some indecipherable slightly threatening muttering on 63.
Cynthia disagrees on 57, and would probably disagree with others if she thought more about them.
PRESIDENT:
- Not Trump. Beyond that, whatever. Hillary will win California no matter what you do, so don’t sweat it too much. (N.b.: We have among our ranks voters for Clinton, Johnson, Stein, and Other/Skip/Stop.)
U.S. SENATE:
- Split decision: VERN says Loretta, GREG says Kamala. RYAN says “neither, but in any event don’t vote for crazy” — so that’s one more for Kamala.
OC SUPERVISORS:
- 1st district – Michele Martinez (although thanks for the homeless shelter, Andrew Do!)
CONGRESS:
- 38 – Linda Sanchez
- 39 – Murdock
- 45 – Varasteh
- 46 – Bao◊
- 47 – Lowenthal
- 48 – Savary
- 49 – APPLEGATE!
STATE SENATE:
- 29 – Hello, NEWMAN! (Ryan explains why he’ll vote for this Democrat with a devastating final blow of “criticizing Josh Newman for supporting a needle exchange program in San Francisco during the height of the AIDS epidemic is not only stupid, it’s morally repugnant.”
- 37 – Grayson (despite Vern’s fondness for Moorlach)
ASSEMBLY (mostly Democrats):
- 55 – Fritchle
- 65 – QUIRK-SILVA! (Ryan supports Kim and will explain why later, after the flogging.)
- 68 – Panahi
- 69 – Velarde-Garcia◊
- 72 – (yer on yer own)◊
- 73 – M. Islam
- 74 – Onofre (Vern: “flake”)
2. SCHOOL BOARDS!
-
COMMUNITY COLLEGE BOARDS
North Orange County Community College District
- District 2: ED LOPEZ!
- District 7: Wishart
Coastline Community College District
- District 2: Patterson
- District 3: No recommendation
- District 4: No recommendation
Rancho Santiago Community College District
- District 1: No recommendation
- District 3: Mendoza Yanez
- District 5: No recommendation
- District 7: Diaz
South Orange County Community College District
- Area 3: Espinosa
- Area 4: Alpay
- Area 6: Dalati (note to Dalati: stop running for everything, it is unseemly)
-
UNIFIED SCHOOL BOARDS
Brea-Olinda
- Hobby, Lyons, Todd
- Measure K School Bond: Yes. This is a responsibly crafted bond with support across the spectrum. The “No” campaign is led by greedhead subsidy-hoovering commercial landlord Dwight Manley, the city’s would-be political boss who cadged a free parking structure from a terrified City Council. Even those generally opposed to school bonds should favor this one.
Capistrano
- Area 1: Hanacek
- Area 2: Workman
- Area 3: Holloway
- Area 5: Pritchard
- Measure M School Bond: We lean yes. Again, local property taxes are appropriate to use here.
Garden Grove
- Area 1: Teri Rocco
- Area 5: Paulsen-Reed
- Measure P School Bond: Yes. This School Board seems pretty trustworthy.
Irvine
- Hamid, Bokota, Brooks
Laguna Beach
- Vickers, Woolf
Los Alamitos
- Russell, Cutuli, Larson
Newport-Mesa
- Area 1: Schwarzmann
- Area 3: Peters
- Area 6: Bubb
Orange
- Area 2: Correa
- Area 6: Wayland
- Measure S School Bond: Neutral for now. We are concerned by Kris Murray’s support for higher taxes in Anaheim Hills. There must be a catch somewhere. (Note that Greg is supposed to endorse it, but here can only use his limited influence to achieve neutrality.)
Placentia-Yorba Linda
- Carmona, Padget, Downey
Saddleback Valley
- Wong, Johnson, Swartz
Santa Ana
- NOT Iglesias and Cano
- Unfortunately, five Democrats are splitting the vote for the three open seats five ways. DPOC endorsed Rodriguez, McLoughlin, and Alvarez. Lefties most seem to like Mendoza and Rodriguez. Bauer seems congenial, but had some unfortunate “party regular” endorsers that give one pause. DPOC policy prevents Greg from recommending anyone from among these five but their slate, so he’ll sit this one out. Vern will weigh in on this soon.◊
Tustin
- Singer, Teferi, Twaddell
-
JOINT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Fullerton
- Area 2 – Fawley
- Area 3 – Montoya
Huntington Beach
- Trung Ta, Henry, Lankster
-
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Anaheim
- Area 1 – Filbeck◊
- Measure J School Bond: We lean yes. Property taxes are appropriate to fund this needed construction.
Buena Park
- Area 3 – Michel
- Area 4 – Castaneda
Centralia
- no OJB recommendation, but Cynthia would like it to be known that she’s very pro-Trinkle.
- Measure N School Bond: Neutral for now. Candidates and Board Members, you’re welcome to try to convince us, as are opponents.
Cypress
- McDougall
Fountain Valley
- Collins, Weimer
- Measure O School Bond: Neutral for now. Candidates and Board Members, you’re welcome to try to convince us, as are opponents.
Fullerton
- Area 5 – Jeanette Vasquez (Ryan dissents because of her union affiliation. But she’s non-deplorable!)
Huntington Beach
- Sullivan, Burroughs
- Measure Q School Bond: Neutral for now. Candidates and Board Members, you’re welcome to try to convince us, as are opponents.
La Habra
- Dobson, Baltes
Ocean View
- CLAYTON-TARVIN and SINGER
- Measure R School Bond: YES. If Gina’s for it, we trust that it is good policy.
Savannah
- Brown
Westminster
- Power, Truong
- Measure T School Bond: Neutral for now. Candidates and Board Members, you’re welcome to try to convince us, as are opponents.
3. CITY COUNCILS & OFFICERS
ALISO VIEJO: Chun, Rios
ANAHEIM:
- District 1:
- VERN: Daniels! (update – Daniels has thrown his support to Barnes so as to prevent Lodge or Lahtinen.)
- CYNTHIA: Barnes (though she has a motherly crush on Van Stark)
- GREG: not Lodge
- (Read Thy Vo’s VOC story on the district’s candidates — including the comments!)
- District 3:
- VERN & GREG: Dr. Moreno!
- CYNTHIA: R. Nelson, or else Moreno
- District 4: ALL EXCEPT CYNTHIA say Ferreras, Cynthia is constrained by the OCGOP version of the rules that constrain Greg in other races and she takes no position on the race. The Anaheim Republican Assembly sure did, though, specifically endorsing against Kring due to her, essentially, ruining their brand.
- District 5: ACEVEDO-NELSON (Greg will not post a 2nd choice, because, you know….)
- MEASURE U (2/3 Council vote needed for tax increase): NOOOOOO!!! (They’re bankrupting the city, don’t make fixing that impossible outside of a bankruptcy court!)
BREA:
- Council: Marick
- Treasurer: Ullrich (the one who didn’t just get the DUI/hit-and-run)
- Measure K (school bond) — YES (we’ll explain why elsewhere)
- Measure L (reduce size of school board) — NO (it’s more Manley trickery)
BUENA PARK:
- District 3: Sonne
- District 4: No contest
COSTA MESA:
- Council: Sandy Genis, Jay Humphrey, and John Stephens!
- CANNABIS MEASURES:
- MEASURE V (Allow up to 8 Medical Marijuana Business): YES
- MEASURE W (Allow up to 4 Medical Marijuana Business): LEAN YES (competes with measure V, but if people don’t vote for both then neither passes)
- MEASURE X (Creates a “green light” district for dispensaries): LEAN NO (Ballot statement says that it also voids V and W, which make the sponsor of V’s joining Righeimer as a “Yes on X” writer puzzling. We suspect dirty dealing here!)
- CITY PLANNING GENERALLY
- MEASURE Y (Citizen approval of development bonds): Humphrey and Genis vs. Righeimer? Easy call! YES!
- MEASURE Z (“Sensible Development,” ratifying Council actions) Righeimer and Ramos vs. Genis, Humphrey, and Leece? Easy call! NO!
- FAIRVIEW PARK SPECIFICALLY
- MEASURE AA (Voter approval for changes to Fairview Park) Foley and Genis vs. Righeimer? Sign us up! YES!
- MEASURE BB (Disgusting fraud upon the voting public to neuter Measure AA) Seriously, read how this fraud is set up in the ballot argument against it. Trust Genis, Foley, Leece, Humphrey, not Righeimer and Monaghan. NO!!!
- DISTRICTING LINES
- MEASURE EE (Approving Council’s lines for new voting districts) Our buddy at A Bubbling Cauldron says he’s voting no, and no one worth spit signed the “pro-” ballot statement. We’ll trust Geoff on this one. NO, TRY AGAIN WITH A NEW COUNCIL THAT HAS RIGHEIMER IN THE MINORITY.
CYPRESS:
- Council: Schoppman and Blanco
- MEASURE GG: J. G. Ivler tells us to recommend a NO vote. Well, OK then! See his convincing comment, with which Ryan agrees, below. (If this is true about the tax-exempt church campaigning from the pulpit, someone needs a “come to Jesus” meeting….)
DANA POINT: Lewis, Wyatt
FOUNTAIN VALLEY:
- Council: Brothers and Tucker
- MEASURE HH: We’re not entirely convinced, but the proponents do a much better job in the ballot statement than the opponents, who point out that our state has high sales taxes without mentioning that we have low property taxes. Doesn’t look like a Stanton problem. LEAN YES!
FULLERTON:
- VERN: Rands, Whitaker, and Silva
- GREG: Silva, Rands, and Mansoori
- RYAN: Whitaker, Rands, Gapinski
- MEASURE II (ii): NOOOOOOO on the Terrible Gerrymander!
GARDEN GROVE:
- Mayor: Write in Bao Nguyen! Why not?
- District 2: John O’Neill (who is unopposed)
- District 3: Thu-Ha Nguyen
- District 5: Demian Garcia-Monroy (he is not a marketing consultant!)
- District 6: Rickk Montoya
HUNTINGTON BEACH:
- Council: Jill Hardy! VERN adds: Lyn Semata, Ron Sterud!
- City Clerk: no recommendation until further notice
IRVINE:
- Mayor: Democrats, vote for Gaido; those Republicans and independents who don’t like Gaido, vote for Daigle. No Wagner, No Chen. If you don’t like Gaido or Daigle, vote for David Chey — and we know nothing about Chey beyond his ballot statement. (Ryan dissents again, favoring Wagner over Daigle, because Daigle supported Trump from the outset. Doesn’t Wagner support him now, though?)
- Council: Farrah Khan + Melissa Fox (<== NEW!!!)
LAGUNA BEACH:
- Council: Mancuso and Rollinger
- Clerk: No contest
- Treasurer: Parisi
- MEASURE KK (Rescind Medical Marijuana Ban): YES! (Any “reefer madness” problems suggested by the hysterical opposition can be fixed in 2018. Get it onto the map first!)
- MEASURE LL (Emergency Services Measure): When even the local Chamber of Commerce wants to hike the Transient Occupancy Tax by 2% (from 10% to 12%), it’s probably not going to kill the local tourist business. LEAN YES
LAGUNA HILLS: Mark Jones
LAGUNA NIGUEL: Randall Aaron Morton, because he did not turn in a ballot statement; this decision was made right after reading the ballot statements that were turned in!
LA HABRA: You can actually vote for three Latinos in this heavily Latino city!
- Re-elect Rose Espinoza;
- Elect School Board member Ida MacMurray;
- Vote for their ticket-mate Jess Badillo!
- (Don’t worry — Huff Puppy Tim Shaw will land on his feet.)
LAKE FOREST:
- The other City Council members HATE pot-stirrer Adam Nick. He is indeed an odd duck. But he also takes on the city’s political establishment — and that’s a positive for us!
- Farh Semnani and Leah Basile seem like the best candidates. People of Lake Forest, please tell us which of them can win. If both have a better shot than Nick, vote for both; if not, then Nick plus the most viable of them.
LA PALMA: Three people running, three positions; I guess this is on the ballot only because it has to be.
- A-J, vote for Marshall Goodman
- K-X, vote for Gerard Goedhart
- Y-Z, vote for Peter Kim (alphabetic penalty imposed on him for his running against Roger Yoh for OCWD! — VOTE FOR YOH!
- This will save the county money by allowing the Registrar of Voters to count fewer votes.
- MEASURE JJ (One-Cent Sales Tax) — We are so sick of this sort of argument. Neutral
LOS ALAMITOS:
- OJB happily endorses Richard D. Murphy for re-election to the City Council
- OJB happily endorses business owner Josh Wilson for election to the City Council
- Why these two? Because neither one is the racist, dumb-ass embarrassment-to-the-city imbecile Dean Grose
MISSION VIEJO:
- Vote for Shelley Blair.
- Cathy Schlicht is the conservatives’ consensus choice and she seems honest. So there’s that. Sure, so long as you also vote for Blair.
NEWPORT BEACH:
- District 2: Shelley Henderson
- District 5: Jeff Herdman
- District 7: Will O’Neill
- MEASURE MM (Require 5/7 Notes for New Taxes): NO
ORANGE:
- No Council Election
PLACENTIA:
- Council: NOT Jeremy Yamaguchi. Instead, Fabian Fragiao and Robert McKinnell have the most compelling ballot statements. Chris Bunker trails behind because he emphasizes his opposition to “pot shops,” but he sounds like a reasonable third vote.
- Treasurer: Councilman Scott Nelson was squeezed out by the new majority. Having him balance them as Treasurer sounds good. And … he’s a Nelson!
- MEASURE NN (Set Up District Voting for 2018): OK!
RANCHO SANTA MARGARITA:
- Shawn Gordon and Carol Gamble — and not simply so that we can use a “Beall and End All” headline. (Although that too.)
SAN CLEMENTE:
- Swartz and Hamm. Beware Dan Bane, the guy whose ballot designation is “Environmental Quality Lawyer”; he is a new partner at a very corporate law firm and is endorsed by the most conservative interests around. We suspect that he’s not on our side of environmental cases!
- MEASURE OO (Increase Hotel Guest Tax): SEEMS OK
SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO:
- District 1: Nathan Banda
- District 5: Tentatively — tentatively — Mechelle Lawrence-Adams, based upon Mike Laux’s say-so. (But give us some time here! Six people running for one seat? We need to figure out who didn’t hire Despicable Dave Ellis!)
SANTA ANA:
- Mayor: Benjamin Vasquez! Did you hear us? ¡BENJAMIN VASQUEZ! It marks the Vasquez on its ballot or else it gets the Solorio again!
- Ward 1: We’ll go with Vince Sarmiento again. (Melahat, you owe us one. Owe Vern, of course.) We sure do hope that he actually lives in the district.
- Ward 3: This is a tough one for Greg. The DPOC commands that Greg endorse the unctuous grifter Jose Solorio of the “Solorio for Solorio” Party, if he endorses anyone at all, so he can’t tell you not to vote for him. He can, however, emphasize Solorio’s good traits: backstabbing, self-serving, carpetbagging, and regularly landing himself in Pulido-level ethical cesspits. (Note: these are his traits, and DPOC members endorsed him, so Greg presumes that these are considered to be positives in the dog-eat-dog world of politics. And anyway, who else is there? Democrats and lefty activists outside of the Council seem to be coalescing towards activist Ana Urzua Alcaraz, but we’ve also seen a lot of support for good guy David DeLeon, and teacher and Patrick D. “Mr. Patrick” Yrarrazaval-Correa, who earns respect not only for challenging Solorio in court but for having the presence of mind not to run as a write-in candidate. In the end, though, Greg must dutifully support Solorio on the theory that, if Ben Vasquez loses, he might edge out the far preferable Sarmiento for Mayor in 2018, get elected, and — if a competent new District Attorney is elected at the same time — get investigated for the behavior he would surely engage in while in officed, be disgraced, and fail to serve out his term, hopefully being removed from office too late for him to run for State Senate again and suck up all of the California Democratic Party money needed elsewhere. VERN WILL WEIGH IN HERE. (Ryan is giving me grief for even the above rococo endorsement of Solorio, in a very funny way that we shall not reveal.)
- Ward 5: This is the last time that we’ll support Roman Reyna unless he wises up on Poseidon. And we shouldn’t even give him this chance, but we hope that with the election past him he will have the cojones to do his homework and represent the people, rather than corrupt big donors. Be all that you can be, Roman! Don’t go down in infamy!
- MEASURE PP (Council Compensation Reform): Actually seems pretty reasonable. Proof: Mike Tardif is on the ballot argument saying no. We say YES!
SEAL BEACH:
- District 2: Ronde Winkler. Read the ballot statements. It’s not even close.
- District 4: Schelly Sustarsic. Her ballot statement says that she was appointed by former Mayor Gary Miller to push his stance on freeway issue, Her opponent doesn’t mention that issue. Sold!
STANTON:
- Council: Kevin Carr only. Republican Carol Warren re-registered as a Democrat and came to talk to DPOC “as a Democrat” to persuade us to vote against the ballot measure that Carr supports. So, if you want to cast a second vote, don’t make it her.
- MEASURE QQ (Roll Back One-Cent Sales Tax Increase): Kevin Carr makes a good case that Stanton has options to retaining its police and fire that are superior to squeezing the juice out of its poorest — such as not speculating in its own real estate. We buy it! YES!
- MEASURE RR (Term Limits): It’s rare that we support term limits, but sometimes — egads! YES!
TUSTIN: Letitia Clark. And no one else!
VILLA PARK: Kirschner — “he’s semi-retired!”
WESTMINSTER:
- Mayor: Margie Rice
- Council: Diana Carey and Sergio Contreras. Vote for them in that order so that if you suddenly fall asleep in the middle of voting, you’re more likely to have voted the the best (maybe tied for best) City Councilmember in Orange County!
- MEASURE SS (Emergency Services): Diana Lee Carey versus Carolyn Cavecche?! NOT EVEN CLOSE! Prior councils made a mess, Carey leads an effort to clean it up. It’s called “responsible governance.” Support the Brave Lady Di! YES!
YORBA LINDA: Smith, Haney, and Parker. Entirely by process of elimination.
4. SPECIAL DISTRICTS!
COMMUNITY SERVICES / REC & PARKS
Rossmoor — No candidate statements. No recommendation.
Surfside Colony — If Linda Garofalo is related to and supportive of Dave Garofalo, then vote for Rudy La Londe. If not supportive, then vote for her. (Anyone know?)
Silverado/Modjeska — Every time we write about Silverado/Modjeska Recreation and Parks Board, Linda May suddenly comes here and kicks our teeth in. Linda? You go first this time.
SANITARY DISTRICTS
Costa Mesa: Incumbents Art Perry and James Ferryman undoubtedly deserve reelection! AND NO ON MEASURE TT! THE FISLER WANTS THEIR TOILET WATER!!
Midway City: Al Krippner and Anita Rice (Margie’s daughter).
WATER BOARDS
El Toro: Goldman and Monin; third choice (between two decent candidates) is on you
Irvine Ranch: Margaret Brown, whose run for OC Board of Education spoiled the chance to remove a repugnant incumbent, is the only one to mention opposing Poseidon. We’ll endorse her and John Withers, although Matheis is also qualified.
Moulton-Niguel:
- District 1: They both sound good. Anyone have a preference?
Santa Margarita: no recommendation. Stanislaw Dzielcielski, purchase a ballot statement next time, ok?
Mesa Consolidated:
- Board Member: ALEX REICH!!!! MUST SUPPORT ALEX REICH!!!!!
- MEASURE TT: NOOOOOO!!! Keep Jim Fisler’s hand out of your toilet water! (Note: this is good advice not only for election time!)
Orange County Water District (highlighted due to extreme importance):
- Division 3: Roger Yoh!
- Division 4: Philip Anthony!!
- Division 6: Clem Dominguez!!!
South Coast Water District: (1) Oakley, (2) Erdman (3) Simer. Erkeneff is better than the other two not endorsed here, who are, as they say in the wastewater biz, execrable.
Yorba Linda: Note: Yorba Linda politics are capable of taking over the entire comments section. We will have a separate post dedicated to the Yorba Linda Water Board situation — which is complicated (oh, yes it is! Don’t argue.) Comments made here will be moved to that item, if allowed to remain at all. Do not pollute our commenting environment! We’re just going to note who is on which “team” here and will hash our our endorsements on that separate item.
- Full term seats: Collett and Hall are the incumbent aligned candidates; Parker and Miller are the Yorba Linda Taxpayer Association aligned candidates.
- Recall of Richard Kiley: Of the potential replacements, Barme is aligned with the incumbents and Jones with the YLTA.
- Recall of Gary Melton: Of the potential replacements, Wren seems to be more aligned with the incumbents and Nederhood with the YLTA.
Municipal Water District of Orange County:
- Seat 4: Kelly Rowe is the alternate appointment of Fullerton’s OCWD representative Jan Flory to its Citizens Advisory Committee on Desalination — and that’s a great sign of worthiness. Incumbent Joan Finnegan is puro Poseidon. We endorse Kelly Rowe.
- Seat 6: Incumbent Jeff Thomas is more conservative than we’d like, but this is a South County district, after all, and the taint of an Ed Royce endorsement is alleviated by a John Moorlach endorsement. Thomas’s greatest asset is that he’s running against demagogue Frank Ury, whose endorsers are worse and whose qualifications are questionable. We recommend Thomas.
- Seat 7: This is an open seat being vacated by Susan Hinman. Based on the candidate statements, award-winning Water Engineer Megan Yoo Schneider is the clear standout, Richard Gardner and Ray Miller are next-most qualified. Evan Chaffee is the least-qualified, with his “water-related” experience being … a City Planning Commissioner. Where professionals are available alternatives, this is not the place for an a mere politician.
Are we done yet? We think that we’re done! Happy voting, if you haven’t! Remember, early in-person voting is now available in several different places within the county — bring your own completed ballot or start one from scratch! — including on Saturday and Sunday!
San Juan Capistrano District 5 the best choice is Mechelle Lawrence-Adams. She has done amazing work enhancing the Mission, while preserving the warmth and character of the neighborhood.
There is a lot of development being proposed for the city, and she has the knowledge to manage it with a clear vision to the future. She won’t let development run amok.
29 – Hello, NEWMAN! (Ryan explains why he’ll vote for this Democrat will a devastating final blow of “criticizing Josh Newman for supporting a needle exchange program in San Francisco during the height of the AIDS epidemic is not only stupid, it’s morally repugnant.”
Amen.
Mark Lopez gets no points from me, Cynthia. He told Nancy Francis of the Anaheim Island community group that somehow I was responsible for the low income housing project at Cerritos and Gilbert – not only an impossible goddamned lie, but protecting Shawn Nelson who resurrected this awful project after the developer – Payne Development maxed out to Nelson back in 2012 – which makes him a chickenshit liar, but a lackey, too,
Only someone not from Fullerton could recommend Mansoori. I am very impressed with Josh Ferguson, and I’m not very impressed by much.
I agree.
That said, my endorsements this round are for RANDS, WHITAKER, and GAPINSKI.
Though, if I had four, it’d go to Josh. For being new to the scene, he is razor sharp.
Mansoori seems like he wants to do good. I appreciate his willingness to put himself out there, particularly the physical part of his campaign (dude has touched a lot of doors). I think his style of campaign is what we’ll see more of going forward.
Various people from Fullerton recommended Mansoori to me, aside from the DPOC itself, so your statement is incorrect.
I thought that Ferguson wrote (or presumably wrote) an excellent piece on crony capitalism, which we republished (and which got a lot of hits.) Why don’t you expand on why you find him so impressive? This will be interesting, in a Merry Wives of Windsor way.
Yes that’s right, I expect Mansoori to get zero votes so there was nothing implicit in there whatsoever.
Google Ferguson yourself, you’re the one who fetishizes their own prose, not me. Since we’re handing out assignments, compare his position statements and analyses of Actual Problems in Fullerton to Mansoori’s. In fact, compare them to anyone’s, incumbents included.
Zero votes would be pretty impressive. You think that he’s too cool to vote for himself?
No, you fetishize your own ability to criticize people anonymously while (presuming for a moment that you are not actually Tony Bushala) apparently not doing squat for the community other than rumbling or fulminating.
You want to write a piece in favor of Ferguson? You’re welcome to. You want to tell me who I should and shouldn’t endorse? You’re welcome to piss off.
You won’t give a shit about this, of course, because you’re bigger than party politics — Google “solipsist” — but I’m aware that if I don’t endorse both DPOC-endorsed candidates I’m arguably not allowed to endorse Jane Rands, which I’d like to do. And because I post under my own identity and am willing to take on powerful nasty targets, I have people gunning for me, while you won’t even post your actual identity or email address, maybe for fear that the terrors will make you wet the bed.
OK, done. We’re back to square one — for a while you can go back to poking at me while I’m trying to be a polite host, as per usual.
“blah blah…but I’m aware that if I don’t endorse both DPOC-endorsed candidates I’m arguably not allowed to endorse Jane Rands, which I’d like to do.”
Yes I won’t give a shit about that, because endorsing DPOC ciphers devalues your endorsement to the point of worthlessness. You want to help Jane? Donate to her campaign like I did in this and each previous election cycle.
So what you seem to have running around in your pinhead is that giving money directly to Rands is good but including her in an endorsement that is usually read by thousands of people is not an acceptable substitute.
OK, so apparently you think blogging is pointless. Do you have any really compelling reason for being here for the next ten days? Because all you’re doing here is shitting on the virtual carpet and we have to walk around here and do things before the election.
How much did you give Jane, anyway — $100? If so, wow-de-wow. With the level of high esteem you have for yourself, it should be at least a couple of thousand, plus IEs.
The Register endorsements are read by a few more people than that, and they warrant all the derision they get. Your point was?
You evaded my question. I guess that we can stop now.
No, please don’t stop. We’ve already reached the point where you’ve
1) accused someone else(!) of having an inflated sense of self worth, and
2) suggested that someone else(!) doesn’t put their money where their mouth is, which is pretty rich(!)coming from Greg ‘I was only a few hundred dollars away from a ballot statement, but didn’t spend it’ Diamond, and Greg ‘I have a $5K secret plan to beat Rackauckas, but still didn’t spend it’ Diamond.
This is the mother load, err lode, of comedy BS. Keep it coming, clown show.
Keep blowing that shit out through your gob, punky. You don’t want it to stay any closer to your brain than absolutely necessary.
And we’ve established that you can’t or won’t answer a direct question about a claim you made.
Let’s agree for the sake of argument that I have “an inflated sense of self worth.” Does that mean that other people don’t? Does that mean in particular that you — whoever you are underneath your cosseted shell — don’t? Of course not. And I’m as entitled to say what I see as anyone else. To use an analogy: I’m fat. It’s a fact. That doesn’t mean that I can’t state as a fact that someone else is fat. Facts are generally fair game, except out of politeness, and you’ve done nothing to earn politeness.
Back in NYC when I was making in the neighborhood of a couple of hundred thousand per year — peanuts next to you, most likely, but more than I made in half a decade of teaching college — I gave $8,000 or so to the John Kerry for President campaign. (I didn’t even like him, but I was afraid of who George W. Bush would appoint to the Supreme Court if he got the chance. With good reason.) So I am perfectly willing to put my money where my mouth is when I have it. Of course, back then I wasn’t responsible for helping five kids and seven grandchildren, as I am now. Luckily, I’ve been able to avoid expensive alimony.
It’s nice that you’ve been following me so closely for so long. As I recall, I did have a ballot statement in the State Senate general election (though not the primary) in 2012, so I didn’t say that then. And I did have a ballot statement when I ran for water board in the general election in 2014, so I didn’t say that then. I didn’t have a ballot statement against Rackauckas because I jumped into the race the last day when none of the couple of dozen people I’d tried to recruit would do so, and the ballot statement cost $29,000, which I did not have anything near, so I don’t think I said it then. When did I make that first statement? I expect that something has been lost in context.
As for having “a secret $5K plan to beat Rackauckas,” I think that I may have said something like that, but if so that was before the Orange County Labor Federation decided not to endorse me because I (with Cynthia and Chuchua) led the effort to derail the Convention Center expansion until it went to a vote, and all of the pro-union sentiment in the world wouldn’t outweigh an unwillingness to help them circumvent the public will so long as it created some mostly temporary jobs. So instead of beating Rackauckas, all I was able to do was wound him politically, as people saw that someone with no prosecutorial experience and no ballot statement and almost no money could still get almost 30% of the vote against him.
It’s too bad that (as Vern has assured me) you aren’t actually Tony Bushala, because if you were I could ask you why the hell YOU didn’t recruit an attorney to run against Rackauckas in 2014 with a well-funded campaign that could have given that cabron Technicolor public hell over his munging the Kelly Thomas investigation and the Kelly Thomas trial — and much else. That would have been a really effective use of one’s money. But, alas, you aren’t Bushala, whose writing is generally smarter than this.
So, back to the matter of Mansoori vs. Ferguson – and also the matter of evading, which one of these candidates flat out lied about the source of the vast majority of their campaign war chest? hint: it’s not Joshua Ferguson
https://fullertonrag.com/2016/10/12/the-big-money-behind-jonathan-monsooris-campaign-for-fullerton-city-council-and-his-unexplained-denial-of-it-part-1/
https://fullertonrag.com/2016/10/12/the-big-money-behind-jonathan-mansooris-campaign-for-fullerton-city-council-and-its-charter-school-supporting-origins-part-2/
And who broke the story? None other than Jane Rands’ better, wait, worse(?) half.
Mansoori reminds me of a mini Marco Rubio – an affable, pleasantly or at least palatably ethnic corporatist at heart with a gift of evasion, happy talk platitudes and doublespeak which were finely honed without even having held office yet. Yeah, that bodes well.
(I edited and combined your two comments to include the correction.)
Worse half. You have to ask?
Interesting information about Mansoori. If that’s true, then it looks like he may not win!
I hope that my other two picks do better.
nipsey, that Mansoori dude strikes me as bad news with a capital B. Right out of the gate he tries to hide his funding because:
1) he thinks (rightly) it will make him look bad, and:
2) he’s 2 dum to realize that he’s going to have to report it anyhow.
So now he’s front man for some kind of cultish operation AND he’s a proven liar. Yikes.
P.S. “the mother load.” I’ve got to remember that one.
Blah blah blah Greg, I love that story. Project much?
You lose. You lost. Good day, sir.
Bushala’s also less immature.
“I thought that Ferguson wrote (or presumably wrote) an excellent piece on crony capitalism, which we republished (and which got a lot of hits.)”
This is just a “for the record” point that I in fact did write the Open Letter to Fitzgerald that you cross-posted on this site and the “presumably” isn’t really needed.
I haven’t reached the point in my career of having people write things for me to put my name upon.
BTW – It was a little hurtful to have you take my 1/9th of an Endorsement away. I know politics ain’t beanbag but come on now.
I presume that you wrote it yourself. I don’t know that, though, and I wasn’t prepared to state it as a fact. You’d be surprised at how much gets ghostwritten even below the City Council level.
You’re getting a hell of a lot more play than that the 1/9 of an endorsement would give you, so cheer up!
Your essay (written in epistolary form) was excellent and actually pointed to the rather grim long-term structural budget deficit Fullerton faces. It’s unconscionable (although appropriate color-wise) for any incumbent to paint a rosy fiscal picture after four straight red ink baths.
Good luck.
Threatening comments on 63, not 61.
NO ON 51
Join Gov Jerry Brown, The LA Times, and the SF Chronicle in opposing this expense gift to the construction lobby at the direct expense of our schools’ needs.
Our schools need support, not additional buidlings and debt that will draw resources away from students and teachers.
Someone remind me: when he was on the San Jaun Capistrano Board, which side was John Alpay on?
What would you describe the sides as having been?
I remember that we ran an ad for him four years ago, so he was on the side for which we ran ads.
Hey Everyone –
I understand your not endorsing Steve Faessel because of his support from SOAR.
Perhaps Ms. Ward should consider rescinding her endorsement for Mark Lopez.
Many of you attended the Anaheim City Council Forum on Monday and thought that you heard Mr. Lopez claim he supported making Anaheim a sanctuary city.
There is even a video and two articles from the Voice of OC and OC Weekly corroborating what you thought you heard him say.
Well, he just sent out a robo-call to District 5 Republicans in which he flatly denied supporting turning Anaheim into a sanctuary city.
I have a recording of the call and I’m going to try to send a copy of it to Vern’s email.
You may not support Steve Faessel, but at least you know where he stands.
Do you know if Lopez has claimed that he opposed the Ball Road peaker plant – as has been written elsewhere?
While precinct walking, I came across a house in the southern portion of our district (off Sunkist) that had two Lopez signs in the yard.
The guys were working on their Harleys in the driveway, so I thought I’d talk to them.
They had thrown their support behind Lopez because of what they had heard from him while attending a fundraiser at Zitos Pizza.
I spent a good 20 minutes talking to their leader.
I spoke about how Steve Faessel was involved with protesting the power plant.
The leader replied that Lopez has said that he was involved with the effort to stop the powerplant.
After a few more conversations that involved Steve, the homeowner and his club removed the Lopez signs and replaced them with a Faessel sign.
“The leader replied that Lopez has said that he was involved with the effort to stop the powerplant.”
Yeah, well, the peaker plant was the brain child of OCWD board member Denis Bilodeau – who just happens to be Lopez’ mentor and immediate boss. There’s no way he did anything to stop that project.
There are some people who can only tell others what he/she thinks they want to hear.
P.S. The opposition to the peaker plant was orchestrated by PringleCorp® because his client (Hardin Honda) wants the site to park cars. The opposition was foolish ginned up hysteria, frankly, and chock full of lies from people like Kris Murray who support Faessel – such as the site was going to be a sports park!
Come to think of it, maybe the opposition FAKE foolish, ginned up hysteria.
I wonder which is worse: being hysterical or just pretending you’re hysterical.
Next door to our banner, right?
Vern –
Email with robocall attachment sent to your chezvern address.
Enjoy!
Thanks Bartash. Geez, what a liar this Lopez is. This merits its own story — Did you hear his first sentence? “I am the only candidate in this district who joins Mayor Tait in opposing the hotel giveaways.” YOU KNOW Donna and Sandra both do, vociferously.
And he flip-flops immediately on Sanctuary Cities. At the Arab-American forum he said what he felt the audience wanted to hear. And then he backtracks once the OCGOP gets pissed off, and doesn’t even say he misspoke, but pretends everyone else is lying about HIM.
But worst of all, at that same forum, he claimed Anaheim’s notoriously high rate of fatal police shootings are “accidents.”
I know you’ve been out of this town a few years, Mark. But you’re saying that the shooting in the back of the head AND butt of Manuel Diaz was an accident. You’re saying the RIDDLING with bullets of both Caesar Cruz and Monique Deckard were accidents. You’re saying the killing this year of unarmed Gustavo Najera was an accident. You’re saying the tasing of Vincent Valenzuela in the heart was an accident. I can go on and on. Do you know any of those names?
This dude, Mayor Tait should trust him less than he ever trusted Lucille. The Mayor is getting lied to, again. Sorry Mark, this merits a story.
I know that the OJ’ has a secure niche in the “Marginalia of Effective Electoral Politics ” realm and this list is a bright shining example of why this is so. The Lawyer’s inability to credit any union endorsements, not surprising given the fact that union members actually engage in physical labor, once again consigns poor Vern to the doghouse of self- marginalizing kooks.
First: piss off. Then, when you’re done pissing off, you can do something constructive.
“Union endorsements” are not all of a piece, which should be obvious because they contradict each other. And they range from strongly reliable (UFCW) to good indicators (teachers and general public employee unions) to spotty (Trades and Teamsters) to generally counter-indicators (police and — sadly, where highest pensions are at issue — fire unions.)
If you want to pick union endorsements in specific races that you think warrant attention, bring them up and I’ll consider incorporating them on a case by case basis. If you think that we should simply reprint all union endorsements because they engage in physical labor, then return to pissing off. The Trades also engage in trying to make the public endure enormous costs, most of which go to connivers and con men rather than workers, in order to produce even a paltry number of jobs. It is, among other things, politically short-sighted. And unfortunately, right now the Trades dominate the OC Labor scene (with some VERY honorable exceptions), so they deserve no automatic deference.
And finally: piss off.
Greg & Vern (scoundrel) thank you for your support, as always, I appreciate the message.
Very sorry to read about the other item. Honestly, shocked is all I can say. Never expected either candidate would have that in their deep dark closet.
I was always led to believe that only the three narcissistic hard line republican slate, eat their own –
56 should be called “Raise tobacco taxes enough to make a black market profitable.” Yay for organized crime!
63 should be called “Exempt former cops from ammunition background checks, and lock it in as an initiative, very difficult to change.”
56: theoretically possible, but is there compelling reason to think that this would be the straw that breaks the camel’s back? This argument can be levied at any level of taxation whatsoever; do you suggest a rollback of taxes?
63: Say more, write (or let us cross-post) a piece. This doesn’t seem like the intent of the proposal, but I’m open to argument. Just not conclusiry argument.
63 is just dumb, Greg.
To Mudge’s point, why exempt former LEOs from the regulations applicable to their former citizens?
It’s simply pandering. If we’re going to take unprecedented action to restrict access to the 2nd Amendment, we should apply it equally to everyone. Establishing a separate class of citizen with preferential access to civil liberties is infuriating and undemocratic.
*fellow citizens
“why exempt former LEOs from the regulations applicable to their former citizens”
And why grant LEOs special workplace priviledges – POBOR – that nobody else enjoys?
It’s the new normal.
repeal POBOR
“Just dumb” is not an argument, Ryan.
Practically, the reason for that exemption is that without it it wouldn’t pass. It’s not pandering, it’s electoral politics.
If pro-gun forces wanted better gun control legislation, the should have cooperated in crafting it. You can always cavil against any proposal on some basis; this is a smaller one than most. But you guys have blocked reasonable reforms. That means that we either have NO reforms, which is what you (the institutional “you,” not necessarily you personally) want — or else we have reform that is going to be in some ways suboptimal. And frankly, no reform is no longer acceptable. You don’t get to win by default.
So, suboptimal reform is what we’ll have. It’s still an improvement — and maybe it will encourage y’all be be less obstructionist.
First of all, I’m not part of “you guys”.
Second, dumb is indeed not an argument.
Third, I stand by the claim this is dumb.
You’re generally opposed to gun control, yes? Those guys.
You can stand by whatever conclusory statement you want. It doesn’t provide a basis for more than a conclusory argument: “DUMB!” “SMART!” “DUMB!” “SMAAAART!“
Hundreds of millions of rounds are sold in this state annually. A extreme minority are used in crimes, on the order of magnitude of thousands of one percent.
The idea that we need to impose new bureaucracy with the most heavy handed approach to the 2nd Amendment in the history of the state with the expectation we’re going to move the needle from thousands of one percent to millions of one percent is entirely ridiculous.
We need to stop treating the 2nd Amendment as a second class liberty. The idea we can’t require identification to cast a vote but can require a detailed dossier before purchasing 1oz of lead, again, is entirely ridiculous.
I’m all for fair and reasonable gun control. I’m opposed to arbitrary attacks on individual liberty. This proposition is an arbitrary attack on responsible gun owners who literally complete millions of transactions a year without issue.
Then the gun lobby has had the responsibility to come up with a viable alternative. And it didn’t.
My reasoning here is similar to why I’m supporting Measure 53, even though I think that it too will create an unreasonably cumbersome process. “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.” I trust neither the bond-happy legislature nor the powerful and complacent gun lobby to facilitate (or even allow) “peaceful revolution” unless it involves their walking back some voter overreach — which, for the sake of argument, let’s presume that this is. They’ll both come forward with repeals in two years, but they’ll have to “sweeten the pot” considerably to get it.
Unfortunately, in both cases, it has come to this.
*RC is right on all counts.
A more complete explanation can be found here:
https://acgreens.files.wordpress.com/2008/09/gpac-vg-11-16-web2.pdf
Page 18
Thanks for the endorsement, guys! And for all of your work on this, Greg!
“I didn’t have a ballot statement against Rackauckas because I jumped into the race the last day when none of the couple of dozen people I’d tried to recruit would do so, and the ballot statement cost $29,000, which I did not have anything near, so I don’t think I said it then. When did I make that first statement? I expect that something has been lost in context.”
It was exactly then. so let’s say March 2014. I even remember posting a comment excoriating you, I think I said something like ‘snatching defeat from the jaws of victory’ because you purportedly raised within several hundred dollars of the ballot statement fee, but couldn’t/didn’t put it over the top.
I tried to google it by filtering it by date and still haven’t found it, but I have a good memory and I’m not making stuff up. I don’t have to. Any other old timers remember this story? RC? Zengster? Vern?
Then I think that there must have been some error in communication, because there is no way that I had raised $28,700 (or whatever) in one day. I don’t recall raising more than 10% of that overall, though I don’t recall. I would have gotten Vern to join me in giving blood to raise money if I were that close.
Yout comment appears here. You apparently never read my reply.
Here they both are:
I don’t at the moment recall what the “stunt” was, but I may have notes about it elsewhere.
*Good Grief……you did such a good job….EXCEPT on Prop. 63 and Prop. 64. Both of those don’t even rate Merritorius Bullwag. Gavin Newsom’s attempt at Firearms Legislation is totally worthless. If he had a pair he would have been pushing for Mandatory Drug Testing for every NEW or Transferred Firearm instead of making people sign up for licensing and registration just to buy AMMO. As if you can’t get your girlfriend or older brother that has a real job to do that. We will be responsible for tracking every .22 Long Rifle bullet to be sure some legal person bought it. Meanwhile, the sound of the Smoking Bongpipe #64….is really a hoot. Can’t wait to have Merck or Bayer take over the Distribution Networks, control the sub-contractors and have you Punahou Pot Heads crying that they are charging too much – now that they have you hooked on opiods….
Do you know what an opioid is?
*Is that like “round like a donut”? Aren’t you the local Vicodin Salesman in Fullerton? You should probably know, especially if you are a Member of the Rush Limbaugh Club! People just hooked on prescription drugs are certainly not Law Abiding Citizens and should not have a CCW…..under any circumstances. You have a problem with that? Do you do know what a CCW is…right?
I’m trying figure out which is worse – your incomprehensibility or your ignorance.
Speaking of pills, maybe if Anna kept your medicine cabinet locked you wouldn’t be wandering around OC blathering idiocy.
*Weak Sister Dave….weak….. We really expect better responses from you that the old tired and true diffident responses. Hey, its Sunday…be generous with yourself.
Cue the off-key merry-go-round music.
Yes, the entire DPOC seems to have been entirely ignorant of Mansoori”s campaign being funded by a PAC that is in turn funded by major national charter school advocates. Just curious, how did this obvious fact slip under the radar of a political party that supposedly supports public education?.
Did you also not notice that Fullerton School Board candidate Jeanette Vasquez, who supposedly authored Fulleron’s City Council voting district map 2B, has also received thousand of dollars from the same PAC? And that she was endorsed by public school teacher Sharon Quirk-Silva?
No on Measure GG in Cypress.
To see what’s happening on Measure GG in Cypress, please take a look at losalnews.com. This is getting VERY Ugly. On Sunday the Pastor at Seacoast Grace Church spent over 5 minutes telling the Congregants to vote Yes on Measure GG from the pulpit. And then told them to grab lawn signs on the way out by the door. Why? Here are two quotes “we have made an arrangement with the track if this passes” “it would benefit us greatly”. If Measure GG passes the Church would get land potentially worth millions of dollars so the Pastor is telling the congregants to vote for the windfall. Not that it would be good for the community (it isn’t, it removes the ability of the community to require any changes to the open space to be voted on by the citizens and puts all the decision back into the hands of the City Council, which can be bought off by the developers, basically undoing Measure D, passed by the citizens of Cypress in the late 1980’s to protect 300 acres of open space from development), but because his church gets free land.
If Measure GG was a good deal, then they wouldn’t have to lie about what it was, and buy off local ministries to sell it to their flock with land deals.
This is what, the third or fourth time the city has voted on a rezone plan for the old golf course?
The original Measure D has been trampled over so many times I’m surprised anyone remembers it. A real shame, too.
As a long time and former resident of Cypress, good for you for standing up against it.
Measure L. Measure A. Measure GG and that doesn’t include using the former Cypress Redevelopment Agency to get around Measure D to put in Costco.
Originally 300 acres of land, now down to 170.The owners paid about $75million for 300 acres and an operating profitable business on land that was already locked in to a PS zoning that required voter approval to change. They have already sold enough land to make their original investment back. They have also operated a profitable business making even more during that time period. If they were to sell all the land at current market value for PS zone they would make an additional $150+ million in profits.
You would think that would be enough, but clearly it isn’t. With the up-zoning they look to make profit of more than 5 times that.
So calling the Measure GG is somewhat right as it stands for “unmitigated Greed Guys”.
Greg should just speak his mind, who cares what the “party” wants if someone isn’t a fan of the “party” choice, make their voices heard. Come on Greg, don’t let them silence you.
That’s part of the deal. It has its positive sides, too — like shutting DPOC members up about supporting Loretta Sanchez (at least theoretically.) Where I don’t like the party choice, I simply don’t endorse. If Vern doesn’t want to endorse and Ryan and Cynthia don’t step up, then we don’t endorse. I think that this post makes pretty clear that I’m quite far from being “silenced”!
Hell NO on 64
THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Go Greens!
Hey thanks guys-I appreciate you picking my name 🙂
Hey — want to express an opinion on Measure S while you’re here?