Last night I attended the Saddleback Republican Assembly, SRA, endorsement convention. SRA, representing the California Republican Assembly in local races, conducted a three hour endorsement convention at Atria Del Sol in Mission Viejo.
Known as the “conscience of the Republican Party,” the CRA’s first statewide organizational meeting was held in San Jose on February 11, 1934.”
“Earlier this year, the CRA officially commemorated its 75th Anniversary.”
In attendance at the meeting were city council candidates from Aliso Viejo, Laguna Hills, Lake Forest and Mission Viejo. Having served as SRA president for four years, and drafting questionnaires for prior elections, I commend the current Board for their in depth questionnaires which were sent to every Republican candidate in each of these cities.
Categories of the approximately 50 questions included: government services, revenue & spending, transportation & traffic, land use & property rights, public safety, education, legal issues, Nov. Ballot Measures, and a few questions relating solely to Mission Viejo.
After SRA president Corrigan’s opening greeting, a prayer and pledge to our flag, he turned the meeting over to CRA Vice President Karl Heft. Karl conducted the voting based upon official CRA By-laws. To participate in the election you must be a paid up member for at least 30 days to avoid allegations of stuffing the ballot box. Any endorsement requires a 2/3rds vote of approval of the members in good standing who must be present. The By-laws do not permit any proxy voting.
Each candidate was given three minutes for an opening statement followed by Q&A from the members.
In Aliso Viejo the CRA endorsed challenger Bill Perkins. For the city of Laguna Hills the members endorsed challenger Ali Djowharzadeh and incumbent Melody Carruth.
Next under consideration were four candidates from the city of Lake Forest. CRA Vice President Scott Voigts, who previously served as SRA president, was the only candidate in that city to receive the endorsement.
Last under consideration were candidates from the city of Mission Viejo. The voting members had the choice to cast votes for up to three of the 10 Republicans on the ballot. Prior to the voting, Mark Dobrilovic informed the members that he has suspended his campaign asking them not to cast any votes for him.
In attendance were challengers Rhonda Reardon, Ken Golemo, Bill Barker, Neil Lonsinger and Brian Skalsky. Although he responded to the questionnaire, Sam Mamolo did not attend. After the Q&A the members voted by paper ballot.
To make sure that no one challenged the validity of the election I witnessed the ballot counting by former SRA presidents Phil Steinhauer and Michael Ferrall. After completing the tabuation, Michael Ferrall reported that Rhonda Reardon was the sole candidate to surpass the 2/3rds requirement and was endorsed on the first ballot.
After a second round with no candidate getting a 2/3rds vote, Ken Golemo and Bill Barker were removed from the ballot in conformance with the CRA By-laws.
After the third and final round results were tabulated, neither Neil Lonsinger or Brian Skalsky were able to meet the endorsement criteria.
Having interfaced with the members before and after the meeting I can report that they are all in agreement that, based on incumbent abuse of taxpayer funds and self dealing, they need to be removed.
http://www.ca-ra.org/content/cra-endorsements
Papa Lorenzo,
You really need to help us poor lazy people……we can’t make it …strictly on teasers!
We wanted to know who the CRA was going to endorse statewide and on the measures.
People can now just copy and paste the above address to find out.
======================*The apparent absence of Meg Whiteman is interesting:
Following are specific endorsements and recommendations:
U.S. Senate … Carly Fiorina
Proposition 19: NO (Marijuana legalization.)
Proposition 20: YES (This would allow the independent State Commission on Redistricting to re-draw the Congressional Districts in the same manner as they are already authorized by Proposition 11 to re-draw the Legislative District boundaries.)
Proposition 21: NO (This would increase the Vehicle License Fee by $18, but in return taxpayers would allegedly receive free parking at state parks, at least until the Democrats find some other way to tax people who seek to use public parks.)
Proposition 22: NEUTRAL (This initiative would prevent the Legislature from raiding local government funds, as defined. Among many other things, it would explicitly protect redevelopment funding, which has historically been used for corporate welfare, crony capitalism, and eminent domain abuse.)
Proposition 23: YES (This is the California Jobs Initiative to suspend AB 32.)
Proposition 24: NO (This is a $2 billion tax increase aimed at businesses, which are already struggling to stay in business without leaving California.)
Proposition 25: NO (This initiative would eliminate the two-thirds vote requirement for passage of the state budget and it would cause legislators to forfeit their salaries and travel allowances if the budget is not adopted by June 15 each year. Although the ballot summary claims that it would leave the current two-thirds requirement for tax increases unchanged, the text of the amendment itself makes it certain that the Democrats could increase taxes by majority vote, too.)
Proposition 26: YES (Requires a two-thirds vote for certain fee increases. This initiative fixes the damage done by the California Supreme Court in the infamous Sinclair Paint case.)
Proposition 27: NO (Eliminates the independent State Commission on Redistricting.)
=================================*Prop. 21 is really dumb….the State Parks are
already closing and undermanned (underpeopled then!)….and opening them up to everyone
is ridiculous!
R&A
Ron & Anna.
As you know I crank out a list of recommendations every election cycle. Stay tuned.
This post addressed a local CRA chapter endorsing convention in which I know most of the candidates and attendees.
In my soon to be released post(s) I will probably split the ballot Measures from the other races as it will be lengthy. In preparation I do my own vetting as well as looking to see how others size up the players and measures.
For Juice readers we will not make a secret of the fact that the Winships and the Gilberts all support Bruce Whitaker for the two year seat on the Fullerton City Council
*Yes, that is quite correct and we also approve of Don Mattingly taking over the Dodgers for
Joe Torre….who we also support….no matter what he does!
Inside baseball aside, let me see if I get this straight: the guy who can’t manage his own money quit, the guy who is registered as homeless didn’t make the cut, the three guys no one has heard of were a no show, the kid who sponges off of mommy and daddy was found lacking so you went with the woman who cut a one-sided deal between the Y and the city, which benefitted the Y and you expect her to stop the abuse of tax payer funds and self-dealing. Hmmmmmmm.
LBM. Perhaps we should call you the wizard. You hide behind the curtain, hiding your identity, and attack everyone you can. It must feel good.
As to your snide comment on the “one-sided deal with the YMCA” to use a city facility. A prior city council signed a 30 year Contract with the local Y, for one dollar per year, that will possibly outlive you and I. I think your friends Susan and Sherri voted to approve that Agreement before we threw them out in 2002. With our Term Limits none of the current field of candidates will be involved in that agreement should it expire and come back for renewal.
Homeless? Are you looking in a mirror? This is your home. You park here after almost every one of my posts. For security reasons and to avoid solicitations by unwanted salesmen there are many people who use a PO box. Our city clerk Karen Hamman knows where that person lives. Without sharing any personal data that candidate was my neighbor for over 20 years and, according to his comment on Thurs., has spent around $90,000 in his prior council campaigns.
You are truly an ugly person. Yes, that’s a personal attack. You can dish it out so its appropriate for me to respond. The endorsment bar was set very high. With 50 questions it is not easy to prove yourself. Having failed in vetting candidates in the past, I can appreciate the caution being used today.
wow an ugly person. I’m crushed. Actually Larry, since you brought it up, I’m going to look into exactly where Neil was living when he registered as homeless and was on the planning commission. I’m betting I’ll find that he lived in Ladera Ranch with his son. If so, he broke the law. And I’ll bet I find he lives with his son now.
So we got Skalsky living with Mommy. Schlicht Living with Mommy. Neil lives with Junior and Mark D’s home is in foreclosure. And these are there people you suggest run a $50 Million Dollar city?
And there is nothing snide about the Truth. Yes it was a different council, but it was Reardon who helped the Y close a completely one-sided deal. Suddenly that’s fine and dandy with you. Seems like old Rhonda isn’t the only hypocrite in town.
And I won’t be able to park here much longer because Art already offered this blog up to the Liberal OC and tossed you and everyone else under the bus. He’s in deep and he’ll do anything to get out.
clueless is spelled C L U E L E S S
*Inside baseball aside? Please….no more Jonathan Broxton jokes! Oh, he is a joke…
that they pay $5 and half million dollars a year; to load the bases and then put up a pumpkin
to hit for the person batting ninth! No wonder Joe Torre quit…..he couldn’t stand watching
that kind of non-sense any longer!
Maybe Broxton ….can stay at the “Y”…?
You call yourself a reporter/journalist yet you keep referring to yourself with; “I” was there when he submitted his paperwork, I was in the court room when, I was at this or that meeting, I was there when…, I attended (you should say I was there with my clones/clowns who all (sorry most is the correct word) have run for the Mission Viejo City Council and lost and this is the only way we can do what we want to do since we can’t win real elections) Please refer me to another blog or web site where I can get fair and honest information please. Don’t recommend that other rag in MV that editorializes every comment he does not agree with. Wait a minute, he ran for city council as well and lost. I seem to see a pattern here………………………………
I,I,I .
You bet I WAS THERE. Therefore my reporting of these events is not hearsay. This report is about the CRA endorsing convention in which around 40-50 people were in attendance, any of whom could confirm what I reported.
As I know almost every attendee I can safely say that you Mr Agitator were not one of them.
Go find something else to complain about. Your ongoing personal attacks are approaching my limit. While others may clear them I have no obligation to respond.