Sure. I'm looking out for your interests, not "special" interests
A few council meetings ago Mission Viejo councilman Frank Ury suggested changing from a General Law to a Charter form of city government. At the time he was expressing a desire to take diminish control of the state government as it related to raiding our redevelopment agency bank account. That issue could have opened Pandora’s box if voters were convinced that this was his only agenda. Don’t be tricked as happened in the city of Bell.
I need to refresh readers on a prior action of this very same chameleon council member who justified doubling his monthly stipend based on a state formula that applies to General Law cities where he was credited for years dating back to 1988 before he was elected in 2004. The justification is that no prior city council voted to increase their part time compensation for the 20 years of our existence.
At the time of Mr. Ury’s proposal I was concerned that changing to a Charter form of government would be an excuse to justify what KFI radio addressed on their program at noon today. I refer to the Charter City of Bell in which the city manager is paid close to $800,000. What some readers might overlook is the compensation of their city council members that is around $8,000 per month for serving on Boards.
From the Internet. What are general law cities? What are charter cities?
All 468 California cities are municipal corporations. Their formation is provided for in the state constitution, and they fall into three categories: general law cities (more than four out of five cities in California), charter cities, and one consolidated city and county (San Francisco).
General law cities derive their powers from and organize their governments according to acts of the legislature. The fundamental law of these cities is found in the state Government Code, which enumerates their powers and specifies their structure. Charter cities are formed when citizens specifically frame and adopt a charter or document to establish the organization and basic law of the city. The constitution guarantees to these charter cities a large measure of “home rule,” granting to them, independent of the legislature, direct control over local affairs. There are 83 charter cities in California.
The basic difference between general law and charter cities is found in the degree of control which the state government may exercise over them. Charter cities have more freedom to innovate and to pass ordinances according to local need. General law cities nevertheless also have considerable choice in their form of municipal government, and fairly broad powers over local affairs. Because the legislature has tended to give general law cities the same control over internal matters that the constitution grants to charter cities, the original distinction between the two forms of city authority has been somewhat blurred.
Bottom line.
Do not be so quick to make a change of this magnitude. This bedroom community of 100,000 residents has done OK for the past 22 years as a General Law city.
The expression “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” applies here.
Larry,
If you’re intimating that Frank Ury wants to change from a general law city to a charter city to give himself and city staff a big pay raise, that’s a pretty thin reed. I do agree that I don’t see a need to make such a dramatic switch for our city.
Newbi needs to get educated on Frank Ury.
Ury is user–let me repeat that–URY IS A USER.
Ury raised his salary, and voted himself lifetime health care. When he saw his “Binki”–Lance MacLean being exposed for the violent person MacLean was/is–Ury saw his own power being challenged. He supported MacLean only to keep his own power in tact.
There is no doubt in my mind that Ury saw an opportunity to raid the treasury again for his own personal benefit by going to a Charter City. Newbi might also go back and examine the school board record of Ury. There are also indications there that self enrichment was Ury’s motivation.
Laughing at Ury.
As this post addresses possible motivations of Frank Ury I would like to add some comments about Frank by our former city manager Dan Joseph. Dan begins with a recap of Frank’s public service:
1992-96 Served on the Saddleback Valley Unified School District Board of Trustees. Dan adds that Frank “Persuaded the School District not to renew its busing contract with Mayflower Contract Services and to stop a one year $1.29 million agreement with Santa Barbara Transportation (SBT). ” Dan adds: “Cost=$99,740 to settle a contract dispute with SBT and sever the relationship.”
Note:I was not aware of that litigation.
Who is Frank Ury anyway? Dan provides some of that background by mentioning that in 1995 Frank “Attempted to run for a California State Assembly seat but abruptly withdrew from the race.”
In both 1996 and again in 1998 Frank “ran for reelection to the School Board and lost.”
In “1998 Frank ran for a seat on the Orange County Republican Central Committee and lost.”
Dan closed by stating that Frank Ury “Alienated parents, teachers, firefighters, police officers, and sheriff deputies by coauthoring a series of freedom-limiting ballot measures.”
Take note. The above data was not created by me. It was written by our prior city manager Dan Joseph as Dan said “you are owed an explanation.”
Isn’t public service grand.
Like everything else, the devil is in the details. By adopting a charter a City CANNOT increase its powers, limit state or federal control or otherwise act contrary to provisions of state law. The charter allows the city to replace portions of the California Government Code – largely relating to process and procedure. For example, a charter could increase the number of seats on the City Council, create a position of mayor or change the process by which committees are appointed or elected.
The horror story emerging from the City of Bell (which is one square mile), has less to do with being a charter city than it does when you have 60,000 residents and only 2,200 registered voters minding the store. I think that we have only seen the tip of the ice berg for the problems of Bell.
If anyone makes a move to make Mission Viejo a charter city, that is neither a good thing nor a bad thing – it would be entirely dependent on the provisions of the charter and how well it is written. It would be a huge turning point for Mission Viejo and not one that should be considered only with the utmost care.
Geoff.
A) Frank did suggest changing to a charter city without discussing the pro’s and con’s.
B) In reading the powers of charter cities I am under the impression that they have more latitude and freedom which might explain how their council members can earn such huge sums for simply attending meetings. Read the following related to Bell council compensation. Compare that to our council getting around 50 cents per mile and a few hundred dollars for attending mayor appointed committee meetings. i.e. toll roads, vector control, OCFA, etc.
Councilman Lorenzo Velez, who was appointed to the Bell City Council last year, says he didn’t know his fellow councilmembers were paid such high wages because he is paid about $8,000 a year.
“You’re either with us or against us — and if you’ve been earning a $100,000 a year, you’re against us,” said Cristina Garcia of the community group Bell Assn. to Stop the Abuse, according to the Times.
The council’s action last night was to request a salary report to verify the Times’ findings. It will be discussed at the next meeting on July 26th. The Los Angeles District Attorney’s office has begun an investigation into the high council salaries.
Traditionally, council and staff salaries are set and voted on by the City Council.
http://laist.com/2010/07/20/no_action_taken_on_extremely_high_w.php
Readers. General law city council member compensation and expense reimbursement is as follows: “Salary-ceiling is set by city population and salary increases set by state law except for compensation established by city electors. See Cal Gov’t Code 36515..”
Charter City “May establish council members’ salaries. See Cal. Const. art X1 5(b)…”
Bottom line. Let’s all pull down $100,000 per year as we are important public servants.
Larry, I have actually read the Charter for the City of Bell and you are right that those running the City did pull a fast one by including language in the Charter that allowed the ridiculous salaries. Unfortunately, the voters were alseep at the switch and the charter passed with only 350 affirmative votes in a City with 40,000 people.
This does not change my opinion that adoption of a charter is a neutral event entirely dependent upon the language included in the charter. There are a number of cities operating with charters that actually strengthen local governance and provide a better governmental environment for their citizens. Obviously, Bell is an extreme example of the opposite. case.
Geoff.
Many years ago one of my political mentors provided words of wisdom that I have never forgotten.
Voters in our city focus on two major issues. No crime and no potholes.
Forget Bell. Sadly, except for our local watchdogs, I do not trust our neighbors will take the time to read, critique or bother to challenge any potential effort by a future council drafting a proposed City Charter
$100,000 a year for a part time job would pay a lot of private school tuition !!
This isn’t the first time Ury has talked about a charter. Does he have another motive than to become the permanent mayor? The newcomers (Ury’s current water carriers) have no idea who he is, and they are in for the shock of their lives.
Privately, Ury says he cannot stand anyone else on the council. When he got a turn as mayor, he ran over everyone else and directed the city employees without any consensus. Nothing is more dangerous than having Ury as mayor, even for a year.
Matthew J. Cunningham is a big Ury cheerleader. That alone makes me wonder.
Well now in the Mission Viejo council race we have Knothead, a POThead, and now with the addition of MacLean a HOThead. With Ury we have a foursome–The Knucklehead.
Vector One or is it Vector Control.
Are you the same organization whose role is to rid the county of fly’s and rats?
If not please keep your comments on topic. Thank you!
You must be physic Larry. The charter is only being discussed and there isn’t a draft correct? So what we have here is reckless supposition based on another city that isn’t exactly representative of anything other than itself.
By the way “from the internet” is not citing a source. The internet contains information that is highly questionable. How about telling us which web site so we can judge it’s value? That is how one writes.
What is clear to me is that you have a grudge against Mr. Ury. I doubt very much that the man could rush into a burning building to save a child without you finding fault with him somehow.
LBM. When you share your real identity I will add my source.
To LBM and Blind Willie.
Some of you have cameras focused on me as I walk our dog every day to make sure I don’t jay walk.
Although I spend hours finding back up data for my writings, and, whereas I have no obligation to share that source data with you, I will add the link where they provide a matrix of “Characteristics” of “General Law City” vs. “Charter City.” It contains six pages which I printed prior to adding the data on “Council Member Compensation.”
Thanks for challenging me to continue striving to be perfect in that you will accept nothing less from your free subcription and access to the Juice blog.
http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=General+Law+City+v.+Charter+City&btnG=Google+Search&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=General+Law+City+v.+Charter+City&gs_rfai=C6YUIwVFKTKXYEo7IigOr_NWbAQAAAKoEBU_QwFjT&fp=a0e2566896ed0ba7
Select the first Google choice which should be Elk Grove
Mr Gilbert, I thought aliases were welcome here. At least that’s what Mr. Pedroza said in one of his posts when someone else confronted Little Big Man about his identity. What does it matter who he is? I mean really? If you look at his response objectively, there is nothing wrong with it and he asked you a legitimate question. Your refusal to answer I find interesting and it tells me he was probably correct in you having a grudge against Frank Ury.
I’ve been reading this blog for about a year now and it seems to me you’re the least most defensive of all the writers here when someone honestly questions you.
I’ll fade back into the woodwork now. You should realize, however, there are many readers who remain silent and draw similar conclusions to mine.
Blind Willie,
Of course aliases are welcome here, but what is not welcome here is attempts to force us to give up our sources. That is the point Larry was making. Just as we respect the anon nature of many of our commenters so too should they respect the anonymity of our sources.
Art.
I guess it’s OK for the MSM to reference “unnamed sources” in their coverage of the White House but you and I must reveal ours.
Update from USA Today:
Jul 23, 2010
3 city officials to resign in scandal over huge salaries
10:08 special meeting of the Bell City Council, Thursday.
“Three city officials in Bell, Calif., have agreed to resign after a public uproar over reports that make a combined annual salary of more than $1.6 million, the Los Angeles Times reports.
The resignations were announced to an angry crowd after midnight following a city council meeting that was closed to the public because it involved personnel matters.
The three officials, city manager Robert Rizzo, who earns $787,000 a year, police chief Randy Adams, who makes $456,000 (more than the police chief of L.A.), and assistant city manager Angela Spaccia, who earns $376,000, will not receive severance packages.
CNN reports that the average salary in the blue-collar town of around 37,000 people near Los Angeles is $30,000 and the unemployment rate is about 16%.
The crowd also demanded a recall move against city council members, the newspaper says.
The Times, which first reported the huge salaries last week, notes that that four of the five council members make close to $100,000 each per year. The fifth makes only $8,000.
Times reporter Jeff Gottlieb, in a separate story, writes that the council was able to skirt state salary limits by authorizing a little-noticed special election in 2005 that changed the legal description of Bell from a “general law city” to a “charter city.”
Only around 400 voters turned out for the election, in which the change was the only item on the ballot.
The election was called after adoption the same year of a state law that placed limits on the pay of council members in “general law”cities.
That law, in turn, had been passed in response to high salaries that leaders in the town of South Gate,Calif., had given themselves.
The author of that law, Assemblyman Hector De La Torre, estimates that if Bell were not a charter city, the council members would earn between $10,000 and $12,000 a year, the Times says, not $100,000.
City leaders at the times argued that the change was needed to give the council more flexibility to govern.”
Blind Willie.
Help me understand one of your comments.
“you’re the least most defensive of all the writers here ”
Am I the most defensive or the least defensive writer on the Juice?
Let me also point out that as volunteers we take a great deal of abuse from anonymous individuals. Speaking for myself I devote a great deal of time reasearching and fact checking the vast majority of my 1000 plus Juice posts.
Grudge? Having helped Frank get elected in 2004 and, whereas I actively supporting two of his three candidates to replace incumbents in the 2006 election, I am well within my rights to point out his flaws. In this post I quoted Dan Joseph our former city manager.
Ury had full intentions to use the Bell city model and line his pockets. After all sending his kids to PRIVATE schools cost a bundle.
Fortunately there are Watchdogs in Mission Viejo like you Larry that keep an eye on Ury, and the Slick Willies, (Geoff Willis ) and his fellow travelers.
Vector Control could never round up all the rats in Mission Viejo Dan Avery himself would take up a full truckload. The next over sized Waste Management would be to load in Bob Bruchmann, and all his Malapropisms.
Wow Vector, that is such a supported, unbiased, well-written post – I’m convinced. Thank you for the valuable addition to the discussion. The real fact is that Frank Ury proposed the charter idea well before the Bell scandal ever saw the light of day, so your attempt to link whatever his motives are to the Bell issue are demonstrably false. Try again with more of your spot on opinions.
Newbie.
While I have intention to respond for Vector, I had a flashback to a group meeting on a MORR/CURE trip to Sacramento where a city employee in LA county mentioned their council members getting $100,000 per year in their Charter City. Brad Morton reminded me of that fact again today.
The minute Frank Ury made that suggestion in a city council meeting I expressed my concern with other watchdogs that his suggestion could open Pandora’s box as a group of us discussed in Jan 1998. I would argue that this Assembly Committee on Housing and Community development hearing date surely preceeds the recent city of Bell and Mission Viejo discussions.
Vector, my opinions always appear under MY REAL NAME. I don’t need to hide behind a cutesy name, and think one of the weaknesses of blogs is that anonymity is allowed. While I don’t always agree with him, I respect that Mr. Gilbert always posts under his own name. I take it from your scattered unfocused post that you really don’t understand the situation in Bell and how unlikely it would be to occur in Mission Viejo. Bell is a city of 40,000-60,000 people but with only 2,200 (approximately) registered voters. The charter was passed with only 350 votes and included provisions that allowed the creation of multiple and sometimes overlapping boards. The Charter allowed City Council members to participate in many of these “boards” some of which met for only a minute a month. The Charter further allowed Council Members to be compensated for each board of which they were a member. First, I have seen NO evidence OF ANY KIND that there has been an actual move to create a charter, that Mr. Ury or anyone else has studied adoption of a charter for Mission Viejo, and there IS NO evidence that Mr. Ury ever intended to create a charter for self benefit. I have only seen wild unsupported conjecture on this point.
Charters are not evil at all in and of themselves. Many charter cities are extremely well run and organized. If any charter was proposed for Mission Viejo, I would be the first one to scour its contents to ensure that it was in the best interests of the citizens. From what I know about Mr. Gilbert, his review and reporting on ANY problem with a proposed charter would be thorough, complete and relentless. I think Mission Viejo is well protected by both its electeds and its citizens that have the City’s best interests at heart.
Interesting posts by all.
I for one am glad Mr Gilbert has been able to educate some of the newer observers of Mission Viejo. Fortunately Mission Viejo has had Watchdogs since the cities inception that have kept in check as best as they could some of the outrageous actions like we have seen in the city of Bell, California. Perhaps when Mr. Willis gets a little more dwell time in our city he will appreciate all the things Mr Gilbert has done for our city.
However, even with Mr Gilbert’s activism; this has not stopped misguided expenditures on picture easels, rock and dirt dumping and moving in Lower Curtis Park, Rose Parade Float’s, landscaping of Orange County owned fire stations by the city, executive desks ( Over $5,000.00 for a city manager ), ridiculous suits against The Lake Mission Viejo Association for the use of Oleanders, a lake promenade that was 155 percent over budget and schedule, unneeded way finder signs on the Oso Trail, poor street repairs on Olympiad Road between Alicia and Jeranimo, and many more. So vigilance by all must be maintained.
The facts are that in many instances–and I can site them, Mr Ury has not been trustworthy. Mr Ury is no novice to political games and actions. I am sure he is well aware of the ability of Charter Cities to commit the frauds we have seen in Bell, California.
Day after day, we read something in the paper about the electeds in Bell using and abusing the system and lining their pockets and those who help keep them in office. Mr. Willis may be correct that a charter in and of itself may not be bad, it is the how it is written. He of all people should know that one misplaced word can give something a whole different meaning. Or, one well placed word can lead people where you want them to go.
Cities have staffs, attorneys and even PR companies to help them draft precisely what they want people to think. (I am reminded of the airport votes where my NO vote meant YES). Most citizens and voters do not understand that politicians once elected to office are there for only one reason. To advance, empower and make more money for themselves. Their are few former electeds who do eight years and go back to private life the way they said they would when they initially ran. They come to like the money, power and attention. I love term limits, I wish ours (in MV) were 8 years instead of 12.
MacLean only shows how much this job got to him by running again. He can’t let go. He can’t go back to being anonymous. He is addicted to the power. That was made evident when he assaulted the employee at UCI. The poor guy who did not salute when LM yelled at him.
The number of people who have ignored the fact that he yelled and swore at me is unbelievable. LM was the person who demanded that the CS tape be released which proved him to be a beligerent bully. What I never released was the registered letter that I sent to all four council members and the CA and CM.
I know I should have been used to being ignored by that time, but having requested their help with my safety at council meetings, one would think someone would have replied. If staff e-mails were revealed as much as Frank wants mine opened up, I am sure the electorate would be shocked and horrified at their electeds.
Like the one that was circulated by the former CM to all employees telling them not to coorperate.
I say again and again, council is merely the training ground for those in the congress and senate. Very few emerge with the integrity they had when they ran. It takes time and perspective to remember who you were before you were elected, and a whole lot of humility to admit that you can get very attached to the power, attention and money…
Mr Willis, Newbie, you and I have all made the same point that all of the charges against Mr. Ury in this post are conjecture.
Notice how claim is dismissed with something along the lines of “when you’ve lived here long enough”? On its face, the dismissal is comically surface-level, but the more I think about it, perhaps we haven’t been specific enough. Let’s set aside the immature notion of understanding someone’s motives, which, in fact, is impossible. And by “immature” I mean a level of simplistic reading and not reading for complexity, rather than the usual definition of relating to emotional development.
As I read this article the entire premise of it is based on the first sentence “A few council meetings ago Mission Viejo councilman Frank Ury suggested changing from a General Law to a Charter form of city government.” It’s a simple declarative sentence, but it doesn’t declare anything ultimately because of the phrase “A few council meetings ago.” That would be when? Careful readers concerned about their city would want to review the tapes for themselves. And without the actual council date there is no way to do that. And, of course, without the actual council date, there is no way to verify that Mr. Ury actually suggested anything. You and Newbie seem to be logical, as am I, so what follows is not fact but conjecture aimed at tarnishing Ury’s reputation.
This notion that living anywhere gives anyone superior knowledge is absurd. As is the notion that we should just trust someone because they’ve lived here a long time, or done a certain number of things. These comments don’t address the concerns that you and Newbie have raised about this article in a reasoned way. In fact, one would assume that they are given in an attempt to make you shut up. But, as I say, you can’t know another’s motives so that is conjecture on my part.
What we can say about these comments is that they appear to be off topic and Mr. Gilbert should warn them about what happens to people who are off topic. Unless, of course, blind acceptance of whatever Mr. Gilbert says is actually not off topic and then I suppose I should be warned or censored of whatever have you.
My only question is how long it will be before you and Newbie are bored by the intellectualism here and move on. 🙂
LBM,
No, the real question is when will YOU move on?
LBM. I understand that you have pulled papers for city council. Congratulations. You can now have a big stage to perform on.
As to my reference to Frank Ury and Charter form of city government I do not see him refuting what I wrote. Therefore I am not obligated to take you to the exact date time and location of his remarks.
Is this for real? Does LBM really not wish to be an anonymous commenter any more, or are you flirting with revealing a commenter’s identity, which is against OJ policy?
If LBM doesn’t want or need to be anonymous any more, and is really running for office, I WOULD like to know who he/she is! Otherwise we shouldn’t be giving out hints, Larry. LBM?
Brother Vern.
After blogging on the Juice for almost four years I do know our policy of protecting unnamed sources.
I have no intention of revealing LBM’s contact information. He is surely welcome to come out of his closet.
LBM–you either naive–or a total fool. Conjecture–please Frank Ury knows exactly what he was pushing for. However–LBM you are very amusing–keep up your dribble !!!
Drivel, Joe. Drivel. Carry on.
I am not running for city council. I don’t know who you think I am. But I am not running for office in any city, suburb or hamlet. What a waste of time. There is far more money to be made in the public sector. Trust me. Even today. And one doesn’t even need to be all that talented or bright to make it.
But I did notice that no one has addressed my points. Art, Larry and Joe have taken shots at my character, but no one has actually addressed the points I raised which were on target. And on topic. Of course the attacks on my character were not on topic. Hey Vern, reign these guys in will ya. We’re having a discussion here.
And by the way Vern he wasn’t flirting with revealing me, even though he doens’t have a clue to who I am. He was forcing the issue by pretending to know who I am. First he thought I was guy named Bruckmen or something. Now he apparently thinks I am Rick Sandismyter or that Mark DaVilliageBitch or someone along those lines. Just know that flirting was far too subtle. It was more like date-rape.
And Gilbert if you’re going to claim to be a “reporter” then you are obligated to provide facts, times, and dates regardless of who dignifies your musings. It’s part of the job. Or do you deny that also?
LBM. I’m not obligated to give you anything including this response.
I’m done with wasting my time jumping every time you demand my attention and action.
Do both of us a favor and cancel your free subscription to the Juice,.
In fact, let me send you a refund. Simply confirm your invoice payment & provide your PO Box No.
So then you are not to be here responsible for using minimum journalistic standards, Mr. Gilbert? That is all I asked for in this instance. Some dates and evidence citation. Pretty basic.
Since this is an open and free blog you requesting I leave is certainly odd.
It appears that LBM is lazy as well as being off base.
OLe Man River. I have located the council meeting where this topic was discussed.
i’ll save the rest of the story when I hear from Paul Harvey.
No Vern–in LBM’s case it is DRIBBLE—from the left corner of his mouth.
What is a truly overlooked issue in our local city politics is this:
I seriously considered running for the City Council this term, as a citizen who has always said, “If you don’t like it, do something about it.”
OK, granted, it’s not a run for Governor, Congress, or even the State Assembly. It’s just the Mission Viejo City Council. I am articulate, educated, possess strong conservative ideals, and believe I would be a pretty good fit to represent my neighbors in this fair city.
Boy was I wrong about the process.
I consulted with a few friends who have worked on campaigns in Orange County before, who referred me to a consultant who gave me some pointers. While the consultant liked me — my resume, my message, my look, my personality — basically the whole package, the consultant told me that to be competetive in this local election, I would need to raise or spend at least $60,000.00. For a solid shot at winning, the cost would be $100,000.00 with, of course, no guarantees of success.
So the cost to truly compete to become a City Council Member in Mission Viejo is $60,000.00 to $100,000.00!!!
So to raise $100,000.00, that’s $50.00 from 2,000 homes or residents. Does anyone really think that’s possible? Of course not!
The big donations pour in to the ususal suspects — Trish Kelley, Lance MacLean and Dave Leckness. Dave is a relative newcomer, he’s a known quantity. Developers, large commercial property owners, city contractors, city employee organizations, and the like, will pour tens of thousands of dollars onto these people to maintain the status quo…they don’t want to take a chance on myself or one of the other dozen or so newcomers.
So 60 to 100 grand to be on the Mission Viejo City Council. All I want to do is serve my commumity and do what’s right by my neighbors. No backroom political nonsense or palm greasing — if it’s right for our City, then yes., If it’s wrong for our city, then I would vote no. End of story.
But the “donors” will be back around to collect on their “generosity” to maintain the status quo, sooner rather than later…and Trish, Dave, and Lance…they’ll have a lot harder time saying no than I would.
It’s a shame what our “democracy” has become.
Justice Scalia.
Very well stated. As a newcomber to our political scene it will require a sizeable investment above and beyond committments of support from your spouse (if you have one), your employer (if you are still employed), and a long laundry list of other considerations that I review with candidates. Let me state tha t your $60,000 to $100,000 projected cost is high.
On August 2nd we will have access to the 460 reports that every council member must submit to their respective City Clerks. The same campaign reporting requirement applies to all political races. At that time we will be able to scrutinize the “special interest” investment to assure council access